Zundel Videos

Ingrid's Veterans Today Articles


File Index

Ingrid's Veterans Today Articles

Originally published on www.veteranstoday.com

Table of Contents

The Munchousen Syndrome

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on May 15, 2011

Years before I met and married Ernst Zundel and, thus, became a Holocaust Denier - because this malady, Denial-of-the-Holocaust, can be infectious, in case you didn’t know! - I made my living as a kiddie shrink: in academic parlance, an Educational Psychologist.

In that capacity, I learned about a malady, malingering, that was quite prevalent with kids who tried to get out of producing respectable work. Their energy went into fibbing - and were they ever good at it! I was amazed at how deep-rooted and resistant to reason their skillful fibbing was.

Therefore, I decided to study how I could cure this malady, and found it had a name. It’s called the Munchousen Syndrome.

Once Ernst and I became a team, he asked me to do a monograph on “The Impact of Words on the Mind,”by which he hoped to neutralize the virulent character assassination of an entire people, the Germans who fought World War II, unleashed on them sans mercy by another set of bipeds, the Victims of the Holocaust. The latter try to run down every last “War Criminal”on earth. The former seem without defenses.

Since we are allowed to say “Germans”- are we allowed to say “Jewsî? Or do we need to genuflect and say “Some of my best friendsÖ”etcetera.

Up-front, I need to point out that hardly ever do you find “war criminals”in other people’s races - we know none can be found in Israel. Therefore, we must have come upon an otherwise abhorred phenomenon - a “gene-specific”trait adhering to the Germans. Goldhagen said as much.

Once we allow that gene-specific traits are possible, we follow a logical thread. Let’s describe a trait attached to the Professional Victim.

Here goes:

I propose the Munchousen Syndrome as possibly, just possibly, gene-specific for the Jews, based on a well-known psychiatric disorder you find in abundance in the Tribe. This diagnostic label morphed from a German nobleman’s name who lived two hundred years ago - Baron Karl Friedrich Hieronymous Freiherr von M¸nchhausen - a cavalry officer who kept a century engrossed with his amazing tales. Here’s what this raconteur par excellence claimed to have happened - because he said it did: **He could jump on a cannon call, spy on the enemy, jump back on yet another cannon ball, and tell the troops what he discovered. * **He had a dog that ran his feet to stumps and then flipped over, using a spare set attached to its back. * **In a snowstorm, he tied his horse to what he thought was a convenient post. When he woke up the next morning, the snow had melted overnight and his poor horse was hanging from a steeple. * **Once he laid bait with small pieces of bacon tied to a string. Hiding himself behind shrubs, he watched how a flock of geese snapped up the slippery bait from each other after it passed through their intestines, only to fly in formation, having strung themselves up in a row.

You get the drift. Munchousen sufferers exist right in your neighborhood. This form of mental aberration - the need to tell revolting tales and watch how others swallow them and then “fly in formationî- belongs to the “factitious”classification, a reference book explains.

Factitious means “not real, genuine, or natural.”It is a chronic woe that means both yes and no. It’s held to be volitional in that the patient is fully in control; he knows what he is doing. It is involuntary in that the patient cannot stop.

Some people are important for what they do; a Munchousen defines his “worth”by what was done to him.

Munchousens are in need of sympathy. All of their actions have a compulsive quality. They know how to annoy and pester. The stories of their maladies won’t quit.

The aim is to become a lifelong charity. The world owes them a living because they have suffered no end.

A genuine malingerer has good reasons to want to appear to be sick. He may try to avoid the draft or jury duty, or maybe he just feels he needs an extra holiday. A Munchousen needs to be coddled. His “illness”may be a total fabrication or partial fabrication, or an aggrandizement of a legitimate but relatively minor pain.

Munchousens are very smart people. Physicians know such “patients”make intelligent decisions as to timing and disguise. Munchousens have a working vocabulary of their illnesses and are well-stocked with “facts,”limited only by the person’s information, sophistication and imagination.

Therefore, Munchousens are not above helping their “symptoms”along in such a way as not to be likely discovered. Some patients will spit in their urine so as to distort the lab findings. Others may prick their finger to show there is blood in their stools. Not infrequently, there is fairly serious self-mutilation.

Munchousen yarns are intriguing to the listener; besides, they bring amazing dividends. They grow more elaborate with each presentation. Imagination runs at a fever pitch.

A Munchousen knows how to suffer. He does so with gusto and flair.

Paradoxically, Munchousen symptoms become aggravated when a Munchousen thinks he is being observed. He can’t refrain from simulating yet another illness with even wilder symptoms than the one he just “survived”ó even if the danger of discovery is known.

Most Munchousens are highly suggestible. Once they have checked into Emergency, they grab hold of additional symptoms the examiner may mention in passing. Almost all of them suffer from memory loss, hallucinations, dissociate and conversion problems if the occasion calls for a display. A Munchousen presents with great dramatic genius, but will become vague and inconsistent when questioned on detail.

One diagnostic cue is a specific Munchousen habit called “vorbeiredenî-meaning they are skilled in “talking past the point.”They will give approximate answers, engage in “near misses,”or flood the listener with rapid and disjointed speech. As one physician explained this strange phenomenon:

“Asked when Santa comes, they’ll tell you, Halloween’s.”They tell you that six minus three is still six, and you are a revolting anti-Semite if you don’t agree it is true.

Sometimes, this can be self-defeating. Because of their compulsive need to beseech sympathy, Munchousens have great difficulty forming lasting relationships. They don’t have many friends. Not many people visit.

This only proves the patient’s claim he is rejected without cause by callous neighborhoods.

Hospitalization soon becomes a way of life and a magnificent obsession. Munchousens claim their particular suffering gives them the required emotional insights into others’ psychiatric disorders, and they will challenge a professional who tells them otherwise.

Negativistic and uncooperative, a Munchousen will often cause havoc on a ward by non-compliance with hospital rules. When the hospital staff becomes suspicious, the patient turns strident and often abusive.

Genuine Munchousen patients have fall-back positions. One such defense is that the person who discovered a deception must be sick.

When confronted with undeniable evidence, the patient threatens litigation, starts arguing excessively and loudly that his ailment is real and suspicions of fakery unfounded.

When all his options have run out, a Munchousen will discharge himself in haste, heading for yet another hospital, repeating his charade. He knows that what he does is dangerous at worst and laughable at best, but he will keep recycling the same story of his enormous suffering and hope that it still sticks.

This search for attention takes Munchousens from city to city in search of yet another hospital and yet another sympathetic ear, sometimes to foreign countries and even continents.

Some professionals feel the disorder is common but rarely recognized. Others feel the disorder is over-reported because the same patients appear at different hospitals, using different names and sometimes fake IDs, thus artificially boosting statistics.

Tellingly, the Munchousen Syndrome is a disorder that can only be inferred by a skilled outside observer but cannot be diagnosed by conventional means. Diagnosis is arrived at by exclusion of all other factors.

Sadly, the literature claims, Munchousens are incurable. Much has been tried, but nothing seems to work. Said one frustrated doctor, as documented in a classic reference book:

“Perhaps the only defense the system has against a Munchousen is to tattoo his belly. “

The Forgotten WWII Battle of Halbe 1945

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on May 24, 2011


In the early 1980s, I was working in the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C., doing research for my trilogy called “Lebensraum”, narrating my family’s flight from the Ukraine in 1943 under the protection of the retreating German forces. There, I came upon an article describing the last major World War II battle between the German Wehrmacht and the Russians that took place, as I remembered it in fragments, in the vicinity of Berlin.  I was caught in its midst as an eight-year-old child when it happened.

In my memory, I see the various events pertaining to that battle much like a slide show - there is no continuity. I was too young to have understood that what I experienced, and escaped, were the death throes of what mainstream media now distorts as the well-deserved outcome of a despicable dictatorship right in the heart of Europe.

Here is what I remember.

There were four of us still of my once-extended family. In years past, long before I was born, there had been hundreds of relatives - aunts and uncles, grandparents, cousins, neighbors distantly related to us -

...all of them gone, exiled to Siberia, executed, starved to death in two Soviet famines, left frozen by road in a desperate scramble to escape Stalin’s Red Terror that had menaced my people for decades.

Now there was only my grandmother left, whom we called Oma, (translated, Granny) my sister Wally, four, my pretty mother, then in her very early thirties, and I.

And, no, to set the record straight up-front, I am not a yammering Jew. I am proudly German by background, born in the Ukraine, now a naturalized American. My people were called “Volksdeutsche” by the Reich for centuries - ethnic Germans who had left their homeland five or six generations ago, who were now retreating back into the Fatherland with the Wehrmacht as Germany was losing the war.

In the article I found at the Library of Congress, the slaughter I am about to describe was called the “Battle of Halbe”. I don’t remember the City of Halbe itself - I remember two towns in the vicinity, villages actually, called “Kausche” and “Greifenhain”. I remember both places quite vividly, albeit with gaps in-between.

Kausche first. We had landed there after a harrowing escape from Poland, right before Warschau fell to the Soviets in 1944. We were desperately trying to reach the gates of Berlin, but we got stuck in this village called Kausche.

In those desperate last weeks of the war, refugees were flooding everything and often sleeping in the churches, schools, or even outside by the road, but we had lucked out - the mayor of Kausche had assigned us to a single room at the end of a barn which might have been the servants living quarters in days past. One small, smoky room - but at the very least, we had shelter.

The main house was opposite us, and to the side was a third building that I remember only because a young German soldier, for some reason never explained to his hysterical mother who tried to save his life, was willy-nilly executed on its steps a few weeks later by some Russian. He was left lying on those steps for days, for no one was permitted to touch him.

But I am getting ahead of my tale. It may seem strange today, but in those chilly April days of 1945, we all still believed that the war could be won by the Germans - and would be won in no time! That’s what Dr. Goebbels still promised in a widely broadcast radio message, most likely his last - and doubt would have been heresy.

Frau Weber’s husband was at the Eastern front and believed missing. He had come home on furlough, and now she was expecting and waiting to give birth. Erika and I had formed a somewhat guarded friendship, because Erika - a big girl for her age - shamelessly bossed me around.

I was skinny and scrawny, no match for Erika. I both admired and loathed Erika, for she was quite pretty in an aggressively flaunting way, which made me ill at ease. She once pulled up her sweater and showed off what was happening already to her chest - two tiny buds the size of small cherries. Nothing like that could be found on my chest, which was clearly a serious shortcoming.

The next memory I have is that the horizon in the distance turned suddenly a very fiery red. I am not talking about some puny little sunset - it was wall-to-wall red, the most spectacular sunset on earth! Somebody surmised with a frown that perhaps Berlin might have been set on fire by yet another bombing raid.

In retrospect I do not know if what we saw burning was Berlin or if it was another city nearby that was being bombed to shreds by the Allies. We saw this horizon, set aflame by the enemies of what we called our Vaterland, night after night after night - for weeks, as I remember it!

Then a distant rumbling started, and we could see huge clouds of black smoke bulging in the East. It sounded and it looked as though a thunderstorm was heading toward us.

At that point Frau Weber announced in her blustery way that she was about to give birth. She left Erika in Oma’s care and walked on foot to wherever she needed to go, and on foot she came back after another few days, carrying a little mewling something that Erika announced was her new baby sister, whose name I have forgotten. Maybe it never had a name? At any rate, Erika was preening herself, which made me even more jealous of her.

Very shortly afterwards, Erika and I were “playing marbles”, as we called our little game - flipping little glass beads in the dirt - when we noticed a small troop of civilians come racing down the road. A woman with two teenage boys and several small girls, each on a bicycle, stopped near us, out of breath, and shrieked at us that we should run:

“The Russians are coming! The Russians are just about here!” The Russians were already at the outskirts of Kausche, they told us, knees flying and lips trembling, and they were pillaging, burning, raping, murdering whatever happened to be in their path!

Erika and I just stood there, staring. They jumped back on their bicycles and took off like some people possessed.

Run we did - but not very far. I don’t remember if I ran with my family or if it was just Erika and me - but what I do remember, clearly, is that we made it to the outskirts of a forest, and there, with his back against a tree, sat a dead German soldier, nicely uniformed, doubled over, still cradling in his lap the head an equally dead comrade who lay sideways in the grass, legs sprawling awkwardly.

After that, there is a blank. Maybe a day? Maybe only hours?

In my next memory I find myself again in our little room at the end of that old barn in Kausche. The room was filled with maybe a dozen other people, mostly young women and girls in their teens - and my Oma was wrestling with Frau Weber who was stabbing the air with a knife, announcing - shrieking like a banschee - that she would slaughter her baby.

Oma later told me that Frau Weber’s mind had snapped in two from the horror of it all - and horror it was, unimaginable horror, that now kept pouring into our room, non-stop, for more than a day and a night. The door had been kicked open, and hordes of “Russians”, slit-eyed, grinning, kept pushing in, grabbing the girls, grabbing the women, even grabbing the still bleeding Frau Weber and wrestling them all to the floor.

I am talking about several dozen “Russian” soldiers - Mongolians, actually, in Soviet uniforms - who had been recruited by Stalin at gun point to take revenge on Germany, as Ilya Ehrenburg, the Jewish-Soviet propaganda minister, had urged them in many a broadcast: “Kill! Kill! And kill! Nobody is innocent. Nobody! Nobody! Neither the living nor the yet unborn!”

I am talking mass rape. Serial raping. Non-stop!

I did not see any of this. I was told about it later, after I was old enough to understand. My Oma had me in an iron grip, pressing my head against her sweater, thus covering my eyes. She rocked and rocked and rocked. I don’t remember that she cried or even sobbed. I remember her as being silent, but she was trembling.

Violently. Rocking. With my nose against her breasts, I did not see a thing, but she saw it all, and she survived it all - and never again did she talk about what she saw and experienced that night - or in the many nights to come.

I know today she saw her daughter, my pretty young mother, violated on the floor right at her feet, with Soviet soldiers taking turn with her, holding other girls and other women, raping them non-stop - with ever new swarms of Soviets pouring in and taking over where the previous ones left off. In the madness of it all, our building was hit by a shell, killing two goats, I believe. In the room itself, there were some punches thrown and some teeth lost, but no killings. Only rape. Non-stop rape. Assembly line rape of young German girls, young German women by some Asians in Soviet uniforms.

The next memory I have is that all of a sudden, out of nowhere, our yard was flooded with some German troops who had briefly broken through the front and were fighting to make it to what they still believed was safety in Berlin. I remember this day as the 20th of April - Hitler’s birthday. I am not sure about this date, but I do know with certainty that it was around the time of April 20th. I can still hear Goebbels’ reassuring voice from the radio.

Our saviors! As happened countless times before, ever since we had left the Ukraine in the fall of 1941, those German boys and German men had bravely fought their way to us - at their expense, at their inconvenience, at great costs to life and limb, to save us! That’s what we then believed, and what I still believe.

My Oma, that stoic, collected, deeply religious women, grabbed one of those sent by her German Lord in German uniform and clung to him and cried and cried and cried. He awkwardly patted her back and said, “Omalein, don’t cry! Don’t cry! Please just don’t cry - we’re here!”

In that Library of Congress in Washington, D.C,., decades later, I read that that troop of young boys who had broken through the Russian front and very briefly occupied the village of Kausche, were murdered almost to a man. They never had a chance. In what was next to come, they were just pulverized!

Then, suddenly, don’t ask me how, we found ourselves atop a German vehicle, part of a long, long convoy of fleeing troops mixed with civilians whom they were picking up along the road in a mad scramble of escape. In retrospect, that vehicle now seems to me a cross between a jeep and truck; I don’t know what it was called - an LKW? Lastkraftwagen? We were huddling in the back, covered by a canvass, maybe a dozen of us, civilians mostly, but including a man with a very bloodied turban on his head. The four of us - Oma, Mama, Wally, and I - were still together, crouching in that vehicle, heading into the Greifenhain Forest.

It was slow going, because we were being shot at from every direction, constantly - several times the shelling ripped right through the canvass, and all of us expertly ducked. It was still chilly; my Oma had wrapped herself in a blanket, which later was found to have several shell or bullet holes. Miraculously, she was not struck, nor were we. How the four of us escaped that Greifenhain Forest, unscathed, is beyond me!

Our first driver was struck and instantly killed. We had to jump down. We were almost immediately swept up by the next vehicle and taken a bit deeper into that forest - until that driver, too, was killed. In my memory, this happened three or four times because either the driver was hit, or the vehicle became immobilized by the shelling.

In no time at all, the entire road was rammed with abandoned vans and trucks, dead soldiers and a few civilians left and right, bullets and shells flying every which way, a few of us still staggering along in military vehicles at snail’s pace. Intermittently, the call went out from front to back, from vehicle to vehicle: “Panzer nach vorn! Panzer nach vorn!” Panzer to the fore! There finally appeared one of those monsters on chains, pushing ahead past stalled vehicles, grinding the dead on the road right into the dust - that was the last, still-moving German Panzer that we saw.

What happened next was wholesale slaughter lasting a day and a night - at least that’s what the article in Washington, D.C. explained. The remnant Wehrmacht was surrounded totally, still with a handful of civilians in their midst. In the 1980s in Washington, D.C., I read about that slaughter at a time when the city was getting ready to inaugurate Ronald Reagan. That was the first time that I really understood what happened in that Greifenhain Forest.

Somehow I was separated from my family that day, or maybe later in the night, in a mad, mad scramble for survival - I have no memory of the details. None! There is a blank spot in my brain where memory should be. I have completely wiped it out! It’s gone!

I was later told that, after having been lost in that Greifenhain Forest for an entire day and night, I found my way into an abandoned farm house at the outskirts of the Greifenheim Forest where my family had run. How I got there, I don’t know. Oma told me that, for an entire week, I could not speak a word. I would just sit on the steps of that farm house and rock. I can still describe it to you.

This farm house was abandoned by its owners - we never found out what happened to them. Now it provided some shelter of sorts not only to the four of us but to what seems to me in retrospect to have been fifty, sixty wounded German soldiers who had either crawled inside with their last strength or had been dragged there on their legs by Mama and Oma once the shelling had died down.

One of them was so badly wounded that he only made it into the hall, where he begged to leave him be, to let him die. Throughout that horror-filed night, with my mother repeatedly being pulled out by the Soviets to have their way with her, my grandmother would check on that dying boy in the hall. At one point he begged for a container so he could urinate. She found an empty fruit jar to assist him. It filled to the brim almost twice. In all his pain, this dying boy had held his urine for the longest time so as not to embarrass himself.

For a few weeks, that dwelling housed not only maimed and wounded German soldiers but a group of chattering Russians who had set up some kind of Headquarters’ Command. By then, the war had ended, but nobody ever told us. There were dead soldiers lying simply everywhere - in the farm house itself, in the front yard, on the steps, in the garden, outside the stone arch gate that was stuffed to the very top with the bodies of dead German soldiers to keep us inside and to keep the outside out. I remember their arms and heads hanging down - dozens of arms, overlapping, heads dangling.

The bodies that were lying around did not scare me - there were simply too many of them, and we got used to them. The story in my family is that one day my little sister was found sitting on the legs of a dead soldier, serenely playing with a little porcelain doll she had found. “My little dollie says Heil Hitler,” the four-year-old said to a Russian who happened to pass by, and Oma held her breath, but he just laughed uproariously and patted Wally’s head.

There were so many dead, with no one left to bury them, that they were around far into the summer. I remember one, behind a hedge, who had been flattened completely by a panzer. The bloody outline of that victim was still there for weeks after all the shooting stopped, and whenever we passed, a huge swarm of flies would lift up. By then, the days were warm and getting hot, and the stench of so many bodies was just about unbearable.

So here we were, sharing somebody’s farmhouse with about a dozen Russians and many, many wounded soldiers. My mother was repeatedly pulled out by some lout to be raped, again and again, hundreds of times in the weeks and months to come. My grandmother, meanwhile, cooked for the wounded Germans as well as for the Russians. She had found some oatmeal and some canned stuff in the cellar and every day managed a watery soup.

I remember one German trooper, particularly - a young boy whose chin had been sheared off. He would dip his whole grotesquely wounded face into the oatmeal and try to lap some of it up like a dog. Blood and pus would drip from the hole, where once his chin had been, right into his bowl of oatmeal. He was merely one of many, horribly hurt.

The farm house was full with the maimed and the dying; the hall was full; the shed across the yard was full of them, hurting and bleeding but eerily quiet - except at night when some back in the shed, within the straw, still sang some haunting melodies. It seems unreal, absurd - but that is exactly what happened!

If you were in that war, you know that Germans always sang. Now you will hardly ever hear the Germans sing because their souls are dead - but then they still sang, very softly, at least a few of them. “Lily Marlene” drifted right into the room where I slept by an open window so I could strain to listen to them sing.

One day, the Russians decided that whoever was still able to walk should line up and be marched off to somewhere. Some did - others, too wounded, refused. Not long after that, we heard shots, one after the other. I don’t remember if anybody checked what was going on not far from my window in a ravine. I have no idea what happened to the rest of the men in the straw.

I should also tell you about what happened to Frau Weber. My Oma discovered her in the days to come in her search for wounded soldiers - and later on for food. Frau Weber was dead, Oma said. Only half-buried. Her lower body was covered with earth, but her upper body and her head were still recognizable.

Then someone steered Erika to us who told us that, after her mother was hit by a shell, she had grabbed the baby out of her arms and ran. She said she did not know what to do with the child, and she could not clearly remember what happened to it - she thought that she had lost it somewhere. Erika was only ten years old but, as I said, quite chubby and looking mature - and she had been raped, many times. In later years, I would sometimes be reminded by my mother how lucky I was - I was scroungy and skinny, and nobody ever touched me. At least not to my knowledge!

Somebody told my mother later that Erika was last seen last in a transport of Russian-German refugees who were sent back to Russia. This post-war operation is known to history as Keelhaul, whereby the Allies turned the ethnic Germans from the Black Sea, who had been briefly saved by Germans, right back to Stalin - to do with as he pleased. Not many did survive Siberia.

Our family escaped Keelhaul by a hair’s width - by fleeing one cold night across the border at the Harzgebirge into the British sector. That is another story for another time. I have described it, briefly, in my first novel called The Wanderers.

Why did I tell this story now? It seems that, every year, there is a group of German patriots who organize a quiet Memorial Walk in honor of the last ones who fought and died on German soil in the massacre called Battle of Halbe. This simple gesture of respect of honoring one’s dead is not as easy as it sounds in Zionist-besotted Germany, for it is far from certain that they will get a permit.

Germany: Still Under Control of Foreign Powers

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on June 5, 2011
"Whatever You Say Darling"

I remember clearly the first time I learned that the Third Reich, at least on paper that is scrupulously kept from eyes beneath raised eyebrows, still exists. You didnít know that “ did you? I didnít “ until fairly recently.

The legendary German attorney, Horst Mahler, now serving a lifetime sentence for having rushed in bravely where angels fear to tread, called me one merry morning right after my husband was kidnapped by agents of my government to please the Noisy Lobby, and gave me the low-down on this.

In Horst's own words, since tauntingly repeated to much judicial and editorial squirming in several recent thought-crime trials in Germany, including the ghastly show trial that cost Ernst Zundel five years:

“The German Reich, including its people, never surrendered! Only the Wehrmacht did.” Ernst and Ingrid Zundle

At the time, I shrugged this off as obscure legalese that had no relevance to what I was desperately trying to do “ to explain to the authorities that my husband had been swept up under the guise of a fig leaf of a “visa overstay” so as to silence him for his politically incorrect sins. Since then, I have learned differently.

Now it makes sense to me that what is happening in Europe, especially in Germany, where in the last ten years more than 100,000 upright citizens have found themselves in conflict with the law for having misspoken themselves to the displeasure of the Ruling Mandarins. This could only have happened thanks to a Shadow Government “ an Occupation Government since 1945! “ that passes itself off as legit!

More shall be said about the shameful record of the so-called “Bundesrepublik” of Germany that jails its dissidents in the tried-and-true Stalinist Mode “ without allowing the slightest defense. Not only that “ even defense attorneys are now being jailed who dare to speak Truth to Power!

YouTube - Veterans Today - “ Ernst “ Israeli interview

The letter below was sent to me by a South African friend who happens to be “ get this! “ a banker whose email is abolishusury@telkomsa.net You see why I am always optimistic that patriots can still be found in weird and wonderful places? His name is Stephen Goodson “ and I am sure he doesnít mind my giving away his moniker because he is running for office. His letter below features a man who calls a spade a spade. It gives me great please to pass it on to you for your elucidation:

Stephen Goodson Letter

It is not often that one has an opportunity to confront oneís adversaries and ask penetrating questions without fear of arrest or retribution, as may well have been the case if the following encounter had taken place in the allegedly “freest” Germany of all time.

On the evening of Monday, 24 January 2011, I attended a symposium entitled “21 and 15 years on: To what Extent Can Germans and South Africans Enjoy their Respective ëLivingí Constitutions?”, sponsored by the German Consulate General in Cape Town.

The South African panelists were advertised as Pius Langa, former president of the South African Constitutional Court, and Roelf Meyer, former Minister of Constitutional Affairs, who was chief negotiator at Kempton park, Johannesburg (1992-1996) and who played a leading role in selling South Africa out to the international banking cartel behind the smokescreen of majority rule. After his election, President Thabo Mbeki personally thanked David Rockefeller for his invaluable support in this regard.

The German panelists were represented by emeritus Professor Hans-Peter Schneider, a former member of a number of provincial (Laender) Constitutional Courts, and Professor Herta Daeubler-Gmelin, a former Minister of Justice (1998-2002) and member of the Bundestag.

During her term of office Frau Gmelin was responsible for introducing same sex “marriages” or civil unions, and for fining and jailing hundreds of “thought criminals”. But she was fired from her post in 2002 after comparing the methodology of President George W Bush in Iraq to that of Adolf Hitler. Her leader, SPD chief Gerhard Schroeder, who apologized profusely to Bush, said at the time that he could not sit at the same Cabinet table with someone who had connected Bush to a “criminal”.

In the event, of the four invited panelists, only Professor Schneider was present. The South Africans were indisposed and Frau Gmelinís flight was delayed.

Three Points

In the spirit of clarification, I directed the following three points to Professor Schneider:

(i) Two days prior to the enactment of the German constitution on 23 May 1949, a Secret Treaty (Geheimer Staatsvertrag) was signed, which gave complete Allied control over electronic and print media, film, culture and education until the year 2099.

As a result thereof, there are still 100,000 occupation troops in Germany; after 66 years there still has been no peace treaty concluded between Germany and the Victorious Allied Powers; and all of Germanyís gold reserves are held in the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank of New York, in which the Rothschilds have a 57% shareholding.

This treaty has been confirmed by Major-General Gerd-Helmut Komossa, former head of German Military Intelligence in his book “Die Deutsche Karte” (The German Card).

(ii) There appear to be two constitutions. According to a resolution of the Constitutional Court (Verfassungsgericht) of 17 August 1956, “It is upheld that the German Reich has outlasted the collapse of 1945 and has never gone under or fallen, either through capitulation or through the exertion of foreign state authority in Germany by the Allies, or in the later course of time; it is still an entity with legal capacity, even though it is not fully operable as a government due to a lack of organization. The Federal Republic of Germany is NOT the successor of the German Reich”.

It needs to be noted that the Constitution of the Third Reich dates back to the North German Constitution of 1866. The principal reason why it still exists is because only the German High Command surrendered on 8-9 May 1945, and not the German Government.

Furthermore, the 1949 Constitution is termed the Basic Law, because it is a provisional constitution, pending unification of the lost territories. So far, only central Germany has been reunified “ 3 October 1990. The eastern territories, as defined by the 1937 borders, still remain under Polish and Russian control.

(iii) Freedom of expression is guaranteed by Section 5 of the Basic Law (Grundgesetz), but it is clearly contradicted by Section 130 of the Criminal Code (Strafsgesetzbuch) under the heading ëAgitation of the Peopleí. Any alternative view of the Establishmentís version of history is punishable by up to 5 years in prison (12 years in the case of Horst Mahler), and thousands of innocent people have been jailed or fined.

Germar Rudolf - Thought Criminal?
I will give two brief examples. Dr Wilhelm Staeglich from Hamburg was forced to resign as a judge and lost 20% of his pension for five years for publishing a book about World War II, “Der Auschwitz Mythos”. In a letter to me dated 21 October 1990, he wrote:.”ÖIn Germany the book has been banned forever.”

My second example concerns Germar Rudolf, who graduated in Chemistry at Bonn University and was a researcher at the Max Planck Institute. In 1992 he wrote a scientific report about the so-called concentration camps in the east, which was peer-reviewed by over 300 professors of Inorganic Chemistry. Not one of them could find a single mistake. He was sentenced to 2 1/2 years in prison for writing this Report.

Finally, I wish to quote a sentence from Professor Dr Ernst Nolte, who was a witness at the recent Kevin Kaether trial in Berlin: “Such questioning must be allowed, or else scientific truth in this area of history is ruled out “ this is simply not a possibility.”

The Result

Halfway through the third question, the moderator of the symposium requested a “termination”, in other words, he wished to stop the questioning. Professor Schneider only replied to this, the third question, saying flatly that freedom of speech is protected by the Constitution and that the Criminal Code is there to protect it from “hate” speech.

After the symposium ended for the public, I expanded on the rest of my question to him as well as mentioning that the famous German historian, Professor Helmut Diwald, had had his book, “Geschichte der Deutsche” pulped in the late 1970ís, after he had written (p.165) that whatever happened to the Jews who were evacuated to the east after 1940 is “still unexplained with regard to the central questions, in spite of all that has been written.” Professor Schneider seemed to agree that such questions needed to be treated more seriously.

Regarding the secret Treaty discussed in point (i) above, Schneider said that he was unable to say whether it was true or false. There has been much debate about its authenticity, but the fact is that the provisions contained in it have all been applied.

Concerning the constitution of the Third Reich never having been abrogated, as discussed in point (ii) above, he admitted that it still exists, but apparently only so that those who worked during that period could still receive their pensions!

The Crux

Human Rights Council

The crux of any constitution is the unfettered right to freedom of expression. This has recently (3 June 2010) been formulated by the Human Rights Council, a subsidiary of UNESCO, as follows:

“The exercise of the right to freedom of opinion and expression is one of the essential foundations of a democratic society, and is instrumental to the development and strengthening of effective democratic systems.” Until this righthas been restored in Europe, injustice and repression will persist, notwithstanding Germanyís false claim of being a Constitutional state (“Rechtsstaat”).

During the discussions, it was revealed that there had been a steady decline in the participation of the German people in the party political system. Furthermore, large-scale violent riots had erupted because of the dumping of nuclear waste in Lower Saxony and the construction of a new underground railway station in Stuttgart, indicative of general dissatisfaction and possibly a new direction.

Another indication was the finding by a recent opinion poll that 89% of Germans do not believe the official version of 9/11, a hopeful development, no doubt spurred on by the Internet.

The response to my questions and points from the audience of about 60 people was muted, and was epitomized by the glum look on the face of the Consul General. However, afterwards a former Jewish student of political philosophy and a black film maker both said that they found it an intriguing revelation that Germany was still under the control of foreign powers.

Hopefully, the Germans will one day have the opportunity to write their own constitution, free of foreign interference, and one which would fully reflect their own culture and traditions.

(Stephen Goodson, the writer of this article, graduated in Roman-Dutch Law at the University of Stellenbosch.)

Editors NoteÖJim W. Dean: I am going to close with a video of Sylvia Stolz, Ernest Zundleís attorney, who was sentenced to 3.5 years for challenging Germanyís Kangaroo Court thought crime prosecutions. They rival any show trials that the Stalinist Soviets or the Chinese Red Guard communists put on. It is a disgrace to all of those who died in WWII that the such legal repression would conducted over this blood stained ground.

Ernest Zundle was renditioned out of the U.S. during the early abuses of the Patriot Act where they were making up the rules as the went along. I remember the sad day when I went with Ingrid down to the German Consulateís office in Atlanta where it was like talking to a brick wall. The only rise we got out of him was when he asked why I was there, and I told him:

....”national security reasonsÖthat this rendition operation represented a penetration of our security forces just so Germany could settle a thought crime score with Ernst Zundle.”

Sylvia speaks here in German with English subtitles, but you all need to watch this as a certain Lobby is working 24/7 to bring such trials here, to be used against people with incorrect thoughts.

YouTube - Veterans Today -  ” Sylvia Stolz

A View of the World through the Prism of Europe

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on June 12, 2011

If a German had said in 1945 that within 60 years large numbers of his countrymen would be celebrating the Wehrmachtís unconditional surrender as “liberation,” his mental state of mind would have been highly suspect. Today, however, Germanyís national mental health has deteriorated to the point that such insanity is seen by many not only as “normal” but as politically and morally desirable.

What has happened to Germans during the past six decades? In what sense were Germans “liberated” following World War II?

Asks Dr. Hennig, a renown German psychiatrist known for his various writings on brainwashing: Were Germans “liberated” from their sanity?

Below I quote and summarize from Dr. Hennigís recent essay, Das Deutsche Reich in Vergangenheit, Gegenwart und Zukunft, translated by James M. Damon:

Were they “liberated” from the 14 to 15 million dead in a war that was forced on the Third Reich, as per the latest writings by the eminent Russian historian, Viktor Suworow, who documented conclusively that Hitlerís War was a preventive strike against the massive military build-up on the Western borders by Stalin?

Were they “liberated” from the three million women, children and elderly who died while attempting to flee rampaging Russians, Poles and Czechs at the end of the war - or who were later expelled from their ancestral lands in the East?

Were they “liberated” from the additional millions of noncombatants killed by Allied terrorist bombings of the densely populated residential areas of Germanyís cities?

Were they “liberated” from the deaths of a million German prisoners of war in the notorious Rheinwiesen Camps run by Eisenhower through starvation and exposure, after all armed forces had capitulated and all the guns had fallen silent?

Were they “liberated” from the loss of a third of their ancestral territory, their Eastern provinces? “Liberated” from the burden of millions of cripples and orphans in the aftermath of the War?

World War II was, in fact, according to Dr Hennig, designed to complete the permanent mental crippling of the Reich, which was the stated aim of both World Wars. Dr. Hennig makes the following points:

Mental crippling is what has been inflicted on the Germans in the last six decades. The victorious Allies, assisted by collaborators from Germanyís own ranks, succeeded in robbing Germany of its history, laws, culture and, above all, of the capacity to investigate and understand what, precisely, has happened to them.

Germanyís political enemies have succeeded in inducing guilt complexes in an entire unsuspecting population that have produced the classic symptoms of national psychosis that we see today.

The basic techniques of what is now called “brainwashing” have been familiar to history since ancient times. A more closely defined concept of “Induced Insanity” was introduced by Emil Kraepelin over 100 years ago. What is new, writes Dr. Hennig, is the extent to which an entire nation with a highly evolved culture can be driven into an abnormal mental state to the point of collective incapacitation through mental and intellectual manipulation.

The fields of psychology and psychiatry have long been familiar with three forms of insanity: innate, acquired, and induced. The layman needs no further explanation of innate (hereditary) insanity, or of insanity that is acquired by such things as disease, injury, or poisoning.

Induced insanity is something else entirely. Induced insanity has little to do with intelligence but a great deal to do with suspension of logical thought brought about by targeted indoctrination. The younger and less mature the psyche, the more devastating are the effects of indoctrination. Through early targeting and indoctrination all logical thinking, including the inherent reflexes of self-preservation, can be neutralized.

When this happens, the subject can be conditioned to act against his own vital interests.

It was reserved for the modern techniques of Western “re-education” with their sophisticated and gradual brainwashing to turn an entire major nation against its own well-being. It has accomplished this through the combined use of all communication, entertainment and education media. Modern re-education begins in early childhood and is backed by the combined resources of the legislative, executive and the judicial branches of government. The most tragic example of this is present-day Germany in all its anti-national manifestations. =====

After Germany lost the Second World War, along with its intellectual elite and leading culture carriers, its enemies introduced a sharply focused and skillfully applied program of re-education. This program radically rejected everything that constituted the national German character and transformed it into its opposite. Allied re-education destroyed the characteristic German behavior patterns that maintain national identity as well as cultural and intellectual heritage. These inherited behavior patterns and strategies had emerged over generations of selection as a survival strategy in the struggle for existence. Robbed of these patterns and strategies, Germany is doomed to destruction.

The German nation has already fallen a great distance backwards, assaulted by its envious competitors far beyond the own limits of law and morality, sacrificing spirituality and vitality. Why did the treacherous representatives of the “Bundesrepublik” recently welcome their own defeat on the occasion of enemy victory celebrations in Normandy? This was, after all, an assault on Europe by non-European powers!

Or what reasons could Chancellor Schroeder possibly have for apologizing to the Poles in Warsaw? Schroeder might have been called “Chancellor,” but he was obviously not a rational leader of a sovereign nation. These treacherous “re-educated” collaborators are misusing the commemorations of Germanyís disastrous defeat to confuse cause and effect. Their object is to imprison all Germans in a paranoid ghetto of “Crime and Punishment,” incessantly repeating the fiction of Germanyís sole responsibility for the War.

Germanyís enemies and “re-educated” collaborators constantly ignore the fact that not Germany but England and France declared war in 1939 - as well as the fact that the United States had already initiated hostilities without declaring war. Germany attacked Poland only after Poland, incited by British-French guarantees, had murdered thousands of Germans in the provinces stolen at Versailles, while driving additional tens of thousands from their homes and interning them in concentration camps. The United States attacked Yugoslavia in 1991 for much weaker reasons!

Of all of Germanyís enemies, the ones who have done the most harm are not its Allied “liberators” but rather their German helpers, mentally crippled and “re-educated” flunkies who are determined to be “more Catholic than the Pope.” The victors of World War II benefited greatly from a tragic German character trait that the Allies factored into their postwar calculations. Bismarck described this proclivity very well:

“The compulsion to serve foreign interests, even when this is possible only through abandonment of our own national interests, is a disease whose geographic distribution is limited to Germany.”

Napoleon had made a similar observation forty years before, when he wrote:

“There is no nation that is more congenial than the Germans, but no nation that is more credulous. It was never necessary for me to sow discord among them, all I had to do was spread my nets and they would run into them like skittish animals, grabbing each other by the throat in the belief they were doing their ëduty.í No nation on Earth is more foolish. No lie is so crude that the Germans will not believe it! On account of some fanciful slogan they would attack their fellow countrymen with greater fury than they attacked their real enemies.”

Does the absurd Holocaust Myth come to mind?

Consider this: There are only two countries on earth where the “Holocaust” has morphed into an absolute religion - Israel and Germany! In the words of former Chancellor Helmut Schmidt, “We have falsified our own history into a criminal record!”

This induced insanity is no longer restricted to limited groups within Germany proper. Amazing numbers of citizens of Western nations are now behaving like Pavlovian dogs. Pavlov, the famous St. Petersburg behaviorist, conditioned his laboratory animals so that they would begin salivating and releasing gastric juices at the sound of a bell. He did this by feeding them only when the bell rang, and so succeeded in “re-educating” them by resetting their nervous and digestive systems to a false stimulus.

The same thing has happened to re-educated Germans - they have been conditioned to the extent that when they hear words such as “Heimat,” “Vaterland,” “Nation,” and “Volk,” their nervous systems release adrenalin with the result that they react aggressively, even hysterically.

To recognize and confront a superior enemy operating from cover is without doubt one of the most difficult tasks imaginable - and yet this is precisely what Germany is beginning to do to survive. To recognize and see through her enemyís methods is to win half the victory. Complete victory will be achieved only when Germany regains its sovereign capacity to act in its legitimate state, which is the German Reich.


Despite its thousand year existence and the fact that “The Reich” is a neutral term connoting an authentic and legitimate state under international law, the concept of the “German Reich” has little credibility among Germans today. Many are terrified by its mere mention. However, it is reassuring to know, writes Dr. Hennig, that re-education can proceed in both directions, and many Germans are optimistic enough to believe that the side that tells the truth will ultimately win.

New hopes are rising and new avenues of civic activism are opening up - even in Germany. It is indisputable that within the System a number of intrepid dissenters are making their presence known - the well-known TV anchor Eva Hermann, the politician Thilo Sarrazin and professors Hampel and Schachtschneider along with their supporters are some of the better-known critics of the current leadership of Germany. “The System” itself is showing terminal symptoms of disease and decay. It is now in retreat, which makes it even more dangerous and unpredictable.

Let us say a word or two about “The System.”

“The System” is another word for Globalism, also known as Zionism, which has its headquarters in New York, London, and Tel Aviv. The Globalist-Zionist System derives its power from the oceans of dollars printed by the Federal Reserve Bank or “FED” (the privately owned central bank of the USA) as well as the Council on Foreign Relations or “CFR.” The latter, controlled by Henry Kissinger, is seen in Europe as the secretive de facto government of the USA.

The Globalist-Zionist System is supported by numerous other secretive groupings that are dependent on the FED and CFR, such as the Bilderberger Group, Trilateral Commission and other subsidiary organizations - including the United Nations, North Atlantic Treaty Organization, European Union and Federal Republic of Germany.

The raison díetre of the German occupation regime, the so-called “Federal Republic of Germany” is to obstruct restoration of the authentic German nation state, the German Reich. Two irreconcilable worlds are confronting each other here. On one side is the world of the Zionist-Globalist System and on the other side is the world of free nations, the world of competent and natural international relations, especially the Reich, even though it continues to be devastated and desecrated.

In order to understand the present situation of the Reich, Dr. Hennig takes us back in history.

As the Heiliges Rˆmisches Reich Deutscher Nation (German Nation of the Holy Roman Empire) the Reich provided centuries of relative peace because it saw itself as a protector rather than an expansionist empire. At the time of the religious wars, which were actually civil wars, the Reich lost its religious as well as secular power, and its neighbors were able to fortify their positions at the Reichís expense. Still, the idea of a German Reich as a political benchmark was absent from the world stage for only 65 years, from 1806 until 1871, and it never ceased to exist in the hearts and minds of the people.

By the time the Kingdom of Prussia succeeded in reuniting the German lands and King Wilhelm IV was elected Kaiser Wilhelm I in January 1871 thanks to Bismarckís political acumen, Germanyís detractors had smugly become accustomed to political impotence on the parts of Germany and the Reich. That was the era of geopolitical expansion that was successfully pursued in North America and Eurasian Russia. It might have been high time for a similar consolidation in Europe, with the Reich as Europeís nucleus and protector. Alas, this never happened.

Bismarck missed the most auspicious moment for the Reich and the entire Western world. Bismarckís military genius, Fieldmarshall Moltke, argued in vain for either abandoning the concept of KAISERREICH or else reducing France to its basic components and incorporating Poland. Fieldmarshall Moltke perceived that the German Reich could keep the individual European countries in bounds, but Germanyís enemies would have an advantage if they combined their forces in an anti-German alliance. Moltke had the larger vision over Bismarck, who was happy with a small but self-satisfied, complacent Reich that did not even include German-speaking Austria in a confederate-like arrangement, which would have been a plausible geopolitical move even then and would have strengthened Germany.

The catastrophes that Moltke had foreseen occurred in the First World War and were redoubled in the Second World War, followed by the sociopolitical collapse that has devastated all Europe since 1945.

These catastrophes had more complicated and profound causes than meet the eye. The First World War had already been a fraternal European conflict in which Germanyís neighbors served as useful idiots for the moneyed powers that were lurking in the wings. Today we identify those moneyed powers, known in those days as Groflkapital, as Zionist Globalists. They strive for nothing less than total and undivided world power, and they would be greatly hindered by a vigorous, functioning Reich in a dominant geopolitical position in Europe.

Their plan was quite simple: if they were successful in speculating on the shortsightedness of Germanyís neighbors and reviving their envy, they could sit back and watch the European nations maul each other in another fratricidal war.

And when the German Reich fell, all the other nation states would fall as well, in a domino effect.

Their evil plan was successful. Germanyís elite perished in the “Great War” with its total of twenty million dead and, following the dictates of ClemÈnceau at Versailles, Germany was stripped of more than a third of its ancestral lands. Germanyís defeat in both world wars was followed by a generalized stupefication, impoverishment, alienation and a collapsed birthrate.

This sociopolitical calamity was by no means restricted to Germany. The crisis has now affected every country in Europe, and the most devastated of all have been the seemingly victorious colonialist powers England and France. They are no less slaves of the Zionist Globalists than are the Germans.


As part of Germanyís enslavement, the Zionists directed the present “Federal Republic” to destroy their venerable legal system. After the defeat of WWII, they imprisoned Germanyís surviving elite for years, carried out the greatest book-burning of all time and forbade an immense number of teachers and specialists from practicing their professions. They also released an uncouth and untrained mob on Germanyís educational system, re-importing the so-called “Frankfurt School” for the purpose of “re-education” that continues to act as a plague on German intellectual life.

Surprisingly, writes Hennig,

“Ö it was not until the 1960s that symptoms of our induced insanity began to appear. Sometimes it seems we might have to start all over again in our efforts to re-establish the Reich. Let us take a closer look at the overall situation with all its problems - and possibilities.

In Germany today, legitimacy is diametrically opposed to governmental force. Legally, the Federal Republic is not the legitimate successor to the Reich. It cannot be the legitimate successor because, under international law, the Reich is still the legitimate state and two states cannot legally govern the same area at the same time.

The so-called Federal Republic is not an authentic state. The architect of its basic law, Prof. Carlo Schmidt, described it as Ordnungsform einer Modalit‰t der Fremdherrschaft (Organizational Form of a Modality of Foreign Rule) when it was created in 1948. The Federal Republic of Germany has never been legitimized by the will of the German people meeting in a constitutional convention of popularly elected representatives empowered to create an authentic Constitution.

The State is the form of governance assumed by the will of the people. Since the Reich represents the will of the people, it logically follows that the so-called Federal Republic is its adversary. The Federal Republic is not a state. It is a state-like institution of foreign domination under Zionist custodianship. The Americans, as enforcers of this custodianship, are playing the role of useful idiot on behalf of the Zionists.

The “Two Plus Four Treaty” of 1990 was designed to insure that the Federal Republic can take no steps toward self-governance even if it should want to, since Allied dominance still holds sway. This so-called “Treaty” is not really a treaty at all, it is a legalistic deception. Under the laws of international law, treaties can be concluded only between bona fide subjects of international law, and the Federal Republic is not a bona fide subject of international law. It is a custodian for a foreign subject of international law.

Under international law, the 1920 Constitution of the Weimar Reich is still valid, in the same form in which it existed until 23 May 1945. All laws that were in effect on this date are still in effect, since the legitimate Constitution remains unchanged. None of the laws, acts, or treaties passed or enacted by the “Federal Republic of Germany” are backed by legitimate authority. When the Reich regains its sovereignty, the national debt of the “Federal Republic” will be null and void, since the government that amassed it was not legitimate.

All of this sounds good, but for the time being it is nothing but legal doctrine. An awakening of German self-assertion is long overdue.


Adapted and excerpted from the writings of Rigolf Hennig, MD, a prominent European psychiatrist best known for his essays on “Political Correctness” as a psychiatric symptom of deliberate government-induced insanity. Dr. Hennigís writings reflect the post-WWII European situation, particularly Germany, but parallels can easily be drawn to brainwashing campaigns on the American Continent, courtesy of our Friendly Ghosts.

Nuremberg: The Crime That Will Not Die

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on June 14, 2011 by Ernst Zundel

On the eve of the 50th Anniversary of the Nuremberg Trials, it is appropriate that I share with my English-speaking readerships a few reflections pertaining to those trials.

I’d like to start with a revealing and thought-provoking quote coming from none other than Nahum Goldman, long-time president of the World Jewish Congress, in a book entitled The Jewish Paradox.

Apart from my encounter with the survivors of the concentration camps after the liberation, I only returned officially to Germany in order to meet Chancellor Adenauer and open negotiations about reparations. These reparations constitute an extraordinary innovation in terms of international law.

Until then, when a country lost a war, it paid damages to the victor, but it was a matter between states, between governments. Now for the first time a nation was to give reparations either to ordinary individuals or to Israel, which did not legally exist at the time of Hitler’s crimes. All the same, I must admit that the idea did not come from me.

During the war the [World Jewish Congress] had created an Institute of Jewish Affairs in New York (its headquarters are now in London). The directors were two great Lithuanian Jewish jurists, Jacob and Nehemiah Robinson. Thanks to them, the Institute worked out two completely revolutionary ideas: the Nuremberg Tribunal and German reparations.” (The Jewish Paradox, Grosset & Dunlap, 1978, p. 122)

 In the United States, the new specialty channel, Court TV, is treating the whole of the North American continent to a Special about Nuremberg - a television hatefest lasting about 15 hours in total length. Likewise, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Radio Division, recently aired a sequel using static-distorted, crackling old short-wave newscasts from the proceedings in Nuremberg in 1946.

Nuremberg Trial Site

Once again, newsreel commentators regurgitate ad nauseam all the disgusting, lying testimony of perjurers and con artists, along with the sad “testimony” frequently tortured out of Germany’s military and political leaders.

I can only call these broadcasts “spreading of hate,” a crime in Canada under its hate laws against an identifiable ethnic group, namely the Germans.

The current German vassal state established by the Allies in post-war Germany - a state whose roots and foundations stem out of these disgusting proceedings of Allied vengeance against a vanquished German people - will not defend its own people against this avalanche of hate and lies, so I will try to do it. Be prepared for some food for thought.

It speaks to the tenor of our times that this may be the first time some of my readers may be exposed to a different historical slant on the Nuremberg Trials. We are so habituated to slander and libel that often we don’t even notice it or recognize it as such. We are so used to seeing Germany as the convenient and deserving whipping boy for all its “Nazi crimes”, we hardly ever give a thought to its creation - or its Godfathers.

Nahum Goldman writes in The Jewish Paradox, page 123:

During a meeting of the World Jewish Congress in London, a Russian Jew called Noah Baron, a wonderful man and great idealist (Ö) talked me into taking an active part by first of all meeting Adenauer. I was very hesitant at heart, because it was no easy matter for me to talk to the Germans again.

And in fact it was eventually my head, and not my heart, which decided me to negotiate. But I laid down a precondition before I would meet the Chancellor to open negotiations: Adenauer had to make a solemn statement to the Bundestag; he must say that although the Germany of those days was certainly not the Germany which had produced Auschwitz (Ö) it nevertheless inherited the Nazis’ responsibilities, and reparations were its duty; he must add that material reparations could not erase the evil done to the Jews by the Germans.”

Let’s see now how it all began - and evolved - this matter of the “Nuremberg Trials” resulting in such guilt and such enormous sums of reparations squeezed out of a defeated country, Germany, over the last 50 years.

Typhus Ravaged Inmates - No Medical Supplies

When we think of the Nuremberg Trials, we think of Auschwitz, Bergen Belsen, Dachau - places that the Allies “liberated” and where they “found those skeletons” - yielding useful photographic backdrops to justify what was to follow ever since.

Guilt, expertly used, is a terrible weapon, a powerful tool and also a handsome cash cow. There was, in fact, a policy and program locked in place to punish Germany for alleged war time crimes, planned and implemented long before the “crimes” of Nazi Germany were “revealed” to a stunned, shuddering, horrified world via news reels and sensationalized headlines.

There exist millions of words, and tens of thousands of books, written about the Nuremberg proceedings in response to these alleged crimes - publications in all kinds of languages, all borrowing its footnotes from each other and parroting the post-war Allied propaganda.

<A lie repeated six million times, however, does not become the truth by mere repetition. This essay will inspect the pre-conditions and the reasons for the lie.
Palace of Justice

The generations who have grown into adulthood since the end of the Second World War have been allowed little chance to look at the Nuremberg Trials critically.

They have not been allowed access, for instance, the information showing what some important people and personalities at the time thought about the whole disgusting process of using ex post facto laws against a virtually defenseless, militarily defeated and still militarily occupied former enemy.

According to Nahum Goldman, former president of the World Jewish Congress, even during the war, plans were being mapped out with great care and cunning - and the foundation for the lie was being laid.

Long before America agreed to feed its young men into a fratricidal war fought not for American national interests but for the interests of an alien people and a State that did not even then exist, there came into being this Institute of Jewish Affairs in New York that cooked up a devilish brew.

Writes Goldman in The Jewish Paradox, pages 122-123, addressing this question:

The Institute’s (Ö) idea was that Nazi Germany ought to pay after its defeat. That still required belief in the defeat, at the time when it seemed likely that the war in Europe was lost for the Allies, but like Churchill and de Gaulle, I kept my faith. I never doubted for a moment, because I knew that Hitler would never manage to moderate himself and that his excesses would draw the Allies into the conflict.

According to the Institute’s conclusions, the German reparations would first have to be paid to people who had lost their belongings through the Nazis. Further, if, as we hoped, the Jewish state was created, the Germans would pay compensation to enable the survivors to settle there. The first time this idea was expressed was during the war, in the course of a conference in Baltimore.

As we all know and are never allowed to forget, in due time Hitler lost the war. Now it was time to conduct Stalinist type show trials against the defeated German leadership. Was this merely about “punishment”? Think again!

Continues Goldman:

The importance of the tribunal which sat at Nuremberg has not been reckoned at its true worth. According to international law, it was in fact impossible to punish soldiers who had been obeying orders. It was Jacob Robinson who had this extravagant, sensational idea. When he began to canvass it among the jurists of the American Supreme Court, they took him for a fool. “What did these Nazi officers do that was so unprecedented?” they asked.

“You can imagine Hitler standing trial, or maybe even Goering, but these are simple soldiers who carried out their orders and behaved as loyal soldiers.” We therefore had the utmost trouble in persuading the Allies; the British were fairly opposed, the French barely interested, and although they took part later they did not play any great part. The success came from Robinson managing to convince the Supreme Court judge, Robert Jackson. (The Jewish Paradox, p. 122)

What followed next?  Total communications control and news manipulation through censorship!

Nahum Goldman at Mid Age

The Allied powers, by virtue of having established a military government - one might as well call it a military dictatorship, in many ways more restrictive than Adolf Hitler’s state had been - had a tight grip on all channels of communications.

This fact cannot be overstated. From control and supervision of the mail service to the telegraph and telephone systems to radio stations to book, newspaper and magazine publishing houses, the Allies were fully in charge through a clever “licensing system.”

Anyone who did not toe the Allied propaganda line lost his license or had his license suspended as punishment. Journalists lost their accreditations.

Newspapers lost their already very scarce paper or printer’s ink allocations or reduced-rate postal shipping privileges. Additionally, Germany was divided into military occupation zones, which were like mini-states, issuing their own passports, food and fuel coupons as well as clothing and stationary ration cards.

If you wanted to travel in occupied Germany from one zone to another in the immediate postwar years, you had to explain to the local military authorities in a written request why you wanted to travel to another zone, whom you wanted to see, and where you intended to stay. You had to request ration coupons for the period of your absence.

There were other bureaucratic, for the Nuremberg defense team extremely inconvenient restrictions as well - some by design, some by default. Many trains didn’t run on schedule or not at all for lack of coal. Most buildings were unheated. The populace starved. The country was largely without men. There were ruins wherever you looked, misery everywhere - more misery than there had ever been during the bitterly fought war!

Judges and Prosecutors Confer or Conspire

I find in my conversations and interviews and even during my court cases that judges, prosecutors and even defense lawyers have not the foggiest idea what life was really like for the defense teams in Nuremberg in 1946-1949.

Today’s generation, brainwashed by the high-tech razzle-dazzle of the O.J. Simpson media-feeding frenzy and image glut-out, has not a clue under what circumstances the German defense lawyers worked. Not a clue!

Furthermore, I suspect that the cynical generation of money-grubbing, self-promoting attorneys, prosecutors and judges of today don’t give a damn about what was the horrible truth and the reality then. Nonetheless, some of these things must be recorded for history’s sake.

Imagine if you told the occupation powers you wanted to go to Nuremberg to testify in defense of Rudolf Hess, Joachim von Ribbentrop, Kaltenbrunner, Gˆring, Streicher or military leaders like Keitel, Jodl, Dˆnitz, Raeder or others! If the military man to whom you applied for permission was a Jew in the uniform of Russia, France, America or England, imagine the response! Would he not think the German applicant was still a “Nazi lover” intent on additional “mischief”?

German Cities - Complete Devastation

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out why many people would shy away from getting politically involved as defense witnesses or experts after having just survived a brutal war, horrendous bombing raids and the raping and plundering hordes of the self-appointed “liberators.”

Who would choose voluntarily to expose himself to arrest, beatings, torture etc. - considering the circumstances? It is remarkable that there were defense witnesses at all who came forward and tried to help those hapless prisoners in Nuremberg.

There are instances of the defense lawyers having located and convinced crucial defense witnesses to testify who were being held as prisoners in Allied prison camps, only to find them - convenient for the prosecution! - getting “lost” in transfers, “lost” long enough until the proceedings had passed the point where their testimony could have been of use to the defense.

These defense lawyers themselves worked against almost insurmountable odds. They sat in cold, wet, bombed-out basements of half-ruined houses with boarded-up windows, working in overcoats, writing with stiffened fingers, wearing hats, scarves and gloves to guard themselves against the cold and creeping dampness.

They were trying to write some text and formulate some argument so that a client, who was daily vilified in the press and on radio, in the news reels and on Armed Forces radio as a despicable monster and a criminal with no human traits, might get a semblance of a defense in those nightmarish, Kafkaesque proceedings called the Nuremberg Trials.

A New Way of Filing Exculpatory Evidence?

Those were truly desperate times for the Germans. The defense was hampered by lack of staff, space, typewriters and ribbons and even carbon paper as well as photocopying facilities and paper supplies. Remember that, in 1945, a photocopy meant exactly what it said.

A photograph had to be taken using special line-film. A negative had to be developed and dried. This negative had to be projected by means of an enlarger onto light-sensitive photographic paper in a darkroom. 

It had then to be developed using chemicals not easily available and electric drum dryers using up precious electricity to dry the prints. Electricity was rationed severely to approximately two hours every day, with only so many kilowatt allowed per person.

Try to put yourself in the German defense teams’ place, when two dozen lawyers, defending a great number of different clients, were handed a 30, 50, 100 or 200 page document by the prosecution - often this was the only set of a document for all the lawyers - and you had a limited time until court day to study, analyze, weigh the charges, look for potentially exonerating witnesses, in a bombed-out country where tens of millions were homeless, freezing, and starving.

The old, still existing phone books and city directories were virtually useless, because telephone service was not yet restored in many places and private people hardly ever got a phone approved by the occupation authorities unless you were “essential” - let’s say, like a medical doctor.

Who Would Risk Being Defense Counsel ?

Now let’s look at the defendants’ rights to get the lawyer of their choice - a sacred right in most civilized countries. What do you think that meant in those hysterical, lawless days in post-war Germany? Which lawyer could afford to side with a “Nazi monster”?

Many years later, my own lawyer was sometimes accused during my own trials in peaceful, democratic Canada for “being too closely associated” with me, the accused, by media commentators, other lawyers and even, occasionally, a judge who showed the intolerance rampant against a vilified accused by those in contemporary society who have the fate of accused people in their hands.

Imagine what courage it must have taken for those Nuremberg defense lawyers - who also were fathers of children, husbands to wives - all glad to have survived the war, all of them trying to build new careers out of the rubble of defeated, devastated Germany in 1946. It took much more than guts. It took real dedication to a principle and a love of justice few in today’s society could claim to have or hold.

Who Would Defend Doomed Men?

Let’s say you were a lawyer of such heroic traits. The Allies, more often than not, could declare you a “Nazi” as well, putting you in the class of “criminals,” since the Nazi party was declared a “criminal organization” by the conquerors. Most of the mental elite of Germany had been members of the National Socialist Party, and almost all had gone to war and, chances were, had been severely wounded or even killed.

Those who survived, were really persona non grata. They came back from a devastating war and found themselves not only criminalized but deprived of their civic and human rights by cruel conquerors who all the while kept on prattling incessantly in their propaganda about the wonderful Allied New Order.

Chief Justice Harlan Stone - a Jackson Critic

If, against tremendous odds, you finally found yourself screened, interrogated, and accredited as a lawyer at the Nuremberg Trials - what did you face, in fact? Let’s take a cold, hard look at this so-called International Military Tribunal. How righteous and noble that sounds! A label like that can hide many a sore. That Nuremberg sore is still running.

Here is what Nuremberg was:

It was not an “international military tribunal” at all. It was not even international in composition. The victors, instead, sat in judgment over the vanquished.

Justice Harlan Fiske Stone, who was then the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court and Justice Jackson’s [the Chief American Prosecutor at Nuremberg] boss in that role, had this to say while speaking to a reporter for Fortune Magazine, as quoted in Harlan Fiske Stone: Pillar of the Law, Alpheus Thomas Mason, The Viking Press, p. 715:

“For your information, but not for publication as coming from me, I would like to advise you that the Supreme Court had nothing to do, either directly or indirectly, with the Nuremberg Trials, or the governmental action which authorized them. I was not advised of Justice Jackson’s participation until his appointment by the Executive was announced in the newspapers.

“So far as the Nuremberg trial is an attempt to justify the application of the power of the victor to the vanquished because the vanquished made aggressive war,” (Stone) explained, “I dislike extremely to see it dressed up with a false facade of legality. The best that can be said for it is that it is a political act of the victorious States, which may be morally right, as was the sequestration of Napoleon about 1815.

But the allies in that day did not feel it necessary to justify it by an appeal to nonexistent legal principles. As a practical matter, it seems to me that the difficulties and uncertainties of saying who is the aggressor under the conditions which produce modern war should make us hesitate to lay down for the future a principle which would always require that question to be answered by the victor.

“All wars are in fact aggressive. The real source of authority is the powers of the victors over the vanquished.

“It would not disturb me greatly (Ö) if that power were openly and frankly used to punish the German leaders for being a bad lot, but it disturbs me some to have it dressed up in the habiliments of the Common Law and the constitutional safeguards to those charged with crime. It looks as though we were committing ourselves to the proposition that the outcome of every war must be that the leaders of the vanquished must be executed by the victors.”
Did Justice Jackson Shame the U.S. Supreme Court by Judicial Lynchings ?

That was the reality. Judge Jackson, handling the prosecution of Nuremberg’s most important trials, was a man with presidential ambitions who needed a high profile carved out of a self-serving stage. The Nuremberg Trials were to be the launching pad for his presidential race.

Nuremberg: The Crime That Will Not Die - Part II

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on June 14, 2011

By Ernst Zundel

The Nuremberg Court was not selected from, or composed of, judges of the neutral Swiss, or the neutral Swedes, or some more distant African, Asian or Latin American countries. American civilian judges to a large extent made up the core of the Allied judges - not military career officers, who might have had some understanding and compassion for what the military leaders and the civilian government under extreme war-time conditions lived through.

They could have undoubtedly had a greater appreciation of why some of the wartime measures were undertaken by Germany in the desperate days of the war. The “liberal country club”-experienced set of small town American judges could not.

Furthermore, the Allied victors blatantly carried on their war against the Germans by other means long after the shooting had stopped - not by bombs and bullets but this time by falsely “diagnosing” psychologists or, worse, by giving torturers a free hand: cynical and brutal investigators who could, and frequently did, mistreat, beat, whip, starve, suffocate, and mutilate their prisoners into giving confessions and statements which were as cruelly extracted as were the confessions from witches during the disgusting witchcraft trials of the Dark Ages.

The injustice of the Nuremberg Trials was testified to not only by Harlan Fiske Stone, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, but also by Iowa Supreme Court Justice Charles F. Wennerstrum, a man of the Midwest, who sat on one of the tribunals trying lesser alleged Nazi war criminals after the war.

Wennerstrum pointed out in a celebrated and controversial interview given to a reporter of the Chicago Daily Tribune that frequently the interrogators and some of the prosecutors were Jews who had fled Nazi Germany and came back in Allied uniforms to torment and seek revenge on the National Socialists who had wanted to expel the Jews from European living space because they considered them harmful to the war effort and to Western European civilization.

Here is how the article described the rabble that came to post-war Germany to settle private scores, as seen through Justice Wennerstrumís eyes, after he quit in disgust:

“If I had known seven months ago what I know today,” [Wennerstrum] told friends as he packed to leave for America, “I would never have come here. The initial war crimes trial here was judged and prosecuted by Americans, Russians, British and French with much of the time, effort and expenses devoted to whitewashing the Allies and placing the sole blame for World War II upon Germany.

“What I have said of the nationalist character of the tribunals,” the judge continued, “applies to the prosecution. The high ideals announced as the motives for creating these tribunals has not been evident.

“The prosecution has failed to maintain objectivity aloof from vindictiveness, aloof from personal ambitions for convictions. It has failed to strive to lay down precedents which might help the world to avoid future wars.

“The entire atmosphere here is unwholesome. Linguists were needed. The Americans are notably poor linguists. Lawyers, clerks, interpreters and researchers were employed who became Americans only in recent years, whose backgrounds were embedded in Europeís hatreds and prejudices. . . (Chicago Daily Tribune, 23 February 1948)

In other words, the Allies supplied the interrogators, most of them Jews - as some of the victims, who had had a lifetime of experience in dealing with Jews and thus recognized them, have stated. Those of us who are German and can speak German can easily discern the ethnicity of some of the accusers by their mere accents and patterns of speech, even in radio broadcasts and news reels.

Most of the “evidence” in the trials was “documentary,” selected by the Allies from the large tonnage of captured records. The document selection was made by the prosecution. The defense had access only to those documents which the prosecution considered material to the case and were made available to the defense. The Allies could choose to release, hide, or destroy any documents which did not fit their post-war strategy or plans at Nuremberg.

Furthermore, the Allies admitted elsewhere that their Propaganda Ministries and Intelligence Services had previously forged Nazi stamps, Nazi passes, Nazi passports, orders, ID cards etc. which fooled the Nazis many times because they were so perfect and over which the Allied propagandists gloat to this day. It does not take a great leap of the imagination to surmise what these same Allied Government agencies, their personnel and forgers of documents could do now with all the captured genuine German document-producing facilities, the captured type writers, rubber stamps and tons of letter heads of all sizes and description and of any National Socialist organization you care to mention.

Even setting aside questionable “documentary” evidence, letís look at some of the accusedís “testimony” - how it was extracted, and what it really means.

Like vile exclamation marks, at the heart of the Nuremberg Tribunal stand certain words: “Genocide” “Gas chamber” “Six million.” These words, and the embedded moral judgment, were derived largely from the admissions and affidavit of one man, Rudolf Hoess, [not to be confused with Rudolf Hess!] the one-time war-time Kommandant at Auschwitz.

Rudolf Hoess was the Alliesí most important witness. His affidavit and his testimony were quoted extensively both by the prosecution and in the judgment of the IMT at Nuremberg, as well as by the press. It was his testimony which laid the foundation and validated the claim of the “extermination of millions of people by gas at Auschwitz.” Hoessís “confession” is heavily relied upon by historians like Raul Hilberg and others as a primary documentary source to this day.

It is true that Hoess witnessed at Nuremberg to horrendous “atrocities,” and he also confirmed the “truth” under oath of an affidavit which he agreed to sign for the prosecution. In it, he confessed to having given orders for the gassing of millions of victims.

This affidavit was in English, a language he did not speak or understand, according to family members.

We now know from the book Legions of Death that Rudolf Hoess was beaten almost to death by Jewish members of the British Field Police Force upon capture and badly mistreated thereafter, until he gave this very devastating “testimony” and “affidavit” used by the Allies propagandists ever since.

You be the judge. Here is an excerpt from this book by Rupert Butler, published by Hamlyn Paperbacks, page 235:

At 5 PM on 11 March 1946, Frau Hoess opened her front door to six intelligence specialists in British uniform, most of them tall and menacing and all of them practiced in the more sophisticated techniques of sustained and merciless investigation.

No physical violence was used on the family: it was scarcely necessary. Wife and children were separated and guarded. Clarkeís tone was deliberately low-key and conversational.

He began mildly: “I understand your husband came to see you as recently as last night.”

Frau Hoess merely replied: “I havenít seen him since he absconded months ago.”

Clarke tried once more, saying gently but with a tone of reproach: “You know that isnít true.” Then all at once his manner changed and he was shouting: “If you donít tell us, weíll turn you over to the Russians and theyíll put you before a firing squad. Your son will go to Siberia.”

It proved more than enough. Eventually, a broken Frau Hoess betrayed the whereabouts of the former Auschwitz Kommandant, the man who now called himself Franz Lang. Suitable intimidation of the son and daughter produced precisely identical information.

Here is how the capture played out. Clarke, one of the participants, recalls it vividly:

[Hoess] was lying on top of a three-tier bunker wearing a new pair of silk pyjamas. We discovered later that he had lost the cyanide pill most of them carried. Not that he would have had much chance to use it because we had rammed a torch [flashlight] into his mouth.

Hoess screamed in terror at the mere sight of the British uniforms.

Clarke yelled: “What is your name?”

With each answer of “Franz Lang”, Clarkeís hand crashed into the face of the prisoner. The fourth time that happened, Hoess broke and admitted who he was. (Ö)

The prisoner was torn from the top bunk, the pyjama ripped from his body. He was then dragged naked to one of the slaughter tables, where it seemed to Clarke the blows and screams were endless.

Eventually, the Medical Officer urged the Captain: “Call them off, unless you want to take back a corpse.”

A blanket was thrown over Hoess and he was dragged to Clarkeís car, where the sergeant poured a substantial slug of whiskey down his throat. Then Hoess tried to sleep.

Clarke thrust his service stick under the manís eyelids and ordered in German: “Keep your pig eyes open, you swine” (Ö)

The party arrived back at Heide around three in the morning. The snow was swirling still, but the blanket was torn from Hoess and he was made to walk completely nude through the prison yard to his cell. It took three days to get a coherent statement out of him.

This statement, tortured and terrorized out of the man, was the one we are all familiar with - the “proof” for the so-called “gassing of the Jews.”

Historians today are finally admitting that Hoess was a totally unreliable witness - and is it any wonder? He spoke of a concentration camp “Wolzek” which does not even exist. He swore that 2,500,000 people were gassed and burned at Auschwitz and a further half million died of disease, for a total dead of three million.

The Toronto Sun of July 18, 1990 claimed 1.5 million. The Washington Post, on the same date, also mentioned 1.5 million. Quoted from an article by Krzyszlov Leski, we have the following:

Poland has cut its estimate of the number of people killed by the Nazis in the Auschwitz death camp from 4 million to just over 1 million.

The vast majority of the dead are now accepted to have been Jews, despite claims by the former Polish communist government that as many Poles perished in Hitlerís largest concentration camp (Ö)

The new study could rekindle the controversy over the scale of Hitlerís final solution.

Shevach Weiss, a death camp survivor and Labor Party member of the Israeli Parliament, expressed disbelief at the revised estimates, saying: “It sounds shocking and strange.” (Ö)

Shmuel Krakowsky, head of research at Israelís Yad Vashem memorial for Jewish victims of the Holocaust, said the new Polish figures were correct.

“The 4 million figure was let slip by Capt. Rudolf Hoess, the death campís Nazi commander. Some have bought it, but it was exaggerated.” (. . .)

The Polish authorities said accurate estimates of the number killed could only be made by studying German documents seized by the Soviet Union. But Moscow has refused to return the archives.”

A most convenient excuse!

In 1989, I organized a write-in campaign to persuade the then-Soviet Leader Gorbachev to release the Auschwitz Death Registers captured in 1945 when the Red Army took over the Auschwitz complex. A few months afterwards this actually happened. Gorbachev released these all-important documents to the Red Cross, which showed in minute detail the cause and time of death, their birth, address etc.

The following was found:

74,000 names of people who had died were listed, of which only approximately 30,000 were Jews, along with an almost equal number of Poles and members of other nationalities.

The incredibly shrinking Holocaust!

The “millions” that we have heard about for half a century and that we still hear and read about today all started with the “testimony” beaten out of Hoess on that horrible night in defeated Germany.

Historian Christopher Browning finally had to admit in a recent Vanity Fair article that Hoess was an unreliable witness. Browning stated that

“Ö Hoess was always a very weak and confused witness. The revisionists use him all the time for this reason, in order to try and discredit the memory of Auschwitz as a whole.” (Holocaust Revisionism Source Book, 1994, p. 1)

Hoessís testimony was used as the skeleton on which the entire Holocaust myth about mass gassings was constructed. Revisionists have concentrated on Hoess precisely because he is probably the most important source for Holocaust historiansí conclusions and exaggerations about the Holocaust. Raul Hilberg, who wrote the “Bible” of the Holocaust, The Destruction of the European Jews, (Holmes & Meier, Revised Edition, 1985) relies on Hoessís testimony heavily - and Hoess was the primary witness relied upon by the Nuremberg Tribunal in their judgment regarding the “extermination of the Jews,” even though he told the court of having been savagely tortured.

Whatís more, Hoessís treatment by the Allies and the total unreliability of his “evidence” are not unusual. We donít know how many of the accused at the Nuremberg trials were badly mistreated, since references in the trial transcripts to their mistreatment was expunged from the record. An example is Julius Streicherís testimony. Streicher was reported in the London Times as having testified that he was tortured, whipped, spat on, and forced to drink from a latrine. (Streicher Opens His Case, The Times, April 27, 1946). His testimony was later expunged from the record of the trial with the active participation of the prosecution, the president of the Tribunal, and even his own defense lawyer.

Other traces of the brutal treatment of the Nuremberg prisoners, however, have survived. One of these witnesses was Gauleiter Sauckelís reference to threats to his family, which did remain in the transcript. During his testimony in May of 1946, Sauckel testified that he signed a document, even though he did not know what was in that document, after his family of 10 children was threatened with deportation to Russia.

And finally, it must not be forgotten that this is the only judicial proceeding conducted in the name of civilized nations where there was no appeal mechanism to a parallel or higher authority for a review of the proceedings - or any verdicts arrived at by this so-called International Military Tribunal. Their judgments over the leadership of Europeís most populous state, against whom they had just fought a murderous, near genocidal war, were final and deadly.

Keep all that in mind as you read, watch and listen to all the emotional hype in the mass media on television and radio of these days. And for what? The Jewish leader Nahum Goldman spells it out for you in his astounding book, The Jewish Paradox, Pages 123-125, admitting to the mother of all frauds. In his own words, at the conclusion of the agreement Goldman obtained from Dr. Adenauer, the German vassal stateís first Allied-appointed chancellor:

“Ö the Germans will have paid out a total of 80 billion (Ö) Without the German reparations that started coming through during its first ten years as a state, Israel would not have half of its present infrastructure. All the trains in Israel are German, the ships are German, and the same goes for electrical installations and a great deal of Israelís industry - and that is setting aside the individual pensions paid to survivors. Israel today receives hundreds of millions of dollars in German currency each year. In some years the sums of money received by Israel from Germany has been as much as double or treble the contribution made by collections from international Jewry. Nowadays, there is no longer any opposition to the principle.”

Not anywhere you look!

After the Nuremberg Trials and Proceedings are stripped of the hyperbole and smoke screens which surround them, it can be put quite bluntly:

The Allies fought a war on foreign shores - in part to establish the State of Israel. The Allies lent a willing hand to political ambitions that grew out of the Zionist camp. By means of the Nuremberg Trials, the Allies helped the establishment and financing of Israel.

So as to secure Israel, the Allies and their personnel became accusers, researchers, interrogators, prosecutors, judges and executioners - all in one! The Allies supplied the “experts” who sifted through the German documents, which were all totally in Allied control, highlighting incriminating documents, discarding exonerating evidence. These investigators were told only to “find” incriminating documents against the accused, as I was told by the American scholar Charles Weber, Ph.D., who had been one of these Allied researchers, and who testified at my own trials. These researchers were told to ignore the documents that might have spared the lives of the accused German leaders. When all was said and done, there was not even an appeal.

U.S. Chief Justice Harlan Fiske Stone, speaking of the American Chief Prosecutor, Jackson, finally had this to say, as mentioned in the Viking Press hard cover, cited before, p. 746:

“Jackson is away conducting his high grade lynching party in Nuremberg,” [Stone] remarked. “I donít mind what he does to the Nazis, but I hate to see the pretense that he is running a court and proceeding according to common law.

“This is a little too sanctimonious a fraud to meet my old-fashioned ideas.”

Some sanctimonious fraud, indeed! Thatís how America and the “free world” have showed their gratitude to the defenders of Europe and Western Civilization: by hanging brave and honest men who tried so valiantly for so long to stop the decadence and the hypocrisy of what we now call, shuddering, the coming “New World Order.”

I bow my head in reverence to those who were judicially murdered at Nuremberg. They were the worldís martyrs, not villains. Not one of them would have been condemned to death in a fair trial - not one! They sacrificed an entire nation, and in the end themselves, to save Western civilization. They were defeated by thugs in robes and gangsters in uniform - and by the conspiracies hatched by shysters from the ghettos of Eastern Europe.

1996  Copyright - Ernst Zundel (Toronto. Written in 1996 and archived by Ingrid Rimland Zundel

Speaking Truth to Power: An Introduction

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on June 19, 2011

These past two years, I have been quiet but far from idle - Iíve been busily casting about for a new venue to move our struggle into a more pro-active mode. Smeared widely as a “Holocaust Denier”, I decided to make lemonade from lemons and craft the slurs heaved at myself and my compatriots into a boomerang - in other words, make it prestigious to be a “Holocaust Denier.”

And why not, pray? We are the modern “Christians of the Catacombs” of yore, thrown by the Chosenites for our belief in Truth in History to the proverbial lions with shrieks and howls of derision. And who can claim today that, in the end, when all was said and done, Christianity did not cut a decisive swath across the Western world?

The sky is the limit, I say.

This missive, though, is not about the merits or demerits of Christianity but simply meant as illustration that you canít censor an idea whose time has come if there is hunger for salvation, be it of this earth or the next.

I happen to believe there is a huge, huge hunger out there for Truth in History - and genuine Truth in History mandates uncompromising intellectual candor about the much-maligned and misjudged era of 1933-1945.

No cheap banality. No platitudes. No carton cut-outs a la Hoganís Heroes out of the smoking mills of Hollywood. And not the vile poison that the likes of Abe Foxman spew forth!

I was searching for a mental picture, a metaphor of sorts that would explain what I am after - and driving along some back roads on a magnificent Tennessee spring day, I think I may have found it. I smelled the wonderful scent of freshly cut lawns gently draping an awakening earth. Thatís what I want. A wholesome, orderly world that makes us feel young and unsullied about our surroundings.

With that in mind, I was casting about for some troops who would help me clean up some of the historical refuse. I chanced upon a website that impressed me for its candor and courage. It is the website of a cyber outfit called Veterans Today.

Now I am not a veteran, unless you count my cyber battles with the likes of Bínai Brith and their ilk - all of which, so far, Iíve won by giving it my all. How long I will last is written in the stars, but while I am still at it, I am cutting my lawn in broad daylight and enjoying the scent of the earth.

And thus it happened that I “met” the Senior Editor of Veterans Today, a fellow by the name of Gordon Duff. I started reading him and was duly impressed. But there was a small fly in the ointment, a shibboleth I didnít like at all - and I said to myself: “Aha! Here is my chance!”

I donít have the original email I sent, but I remember its essence. I complimented Gordon about his military savvy and personal integrity, but I finished what I had to say by adding: “Ö but you still kick my favorite dictator in the shin!”

To my quiet joy and happy satisfaction, Gordon didnít shriek some salty names and back away from me as though he had encountered Lucifer instead of a Lady of Decorum. He did not send me to the darkest recesses of Hades. He wrote me back politely and asked me what I meant.

What did I really think about the F¸hrer and his era?

I told him I looked upon the period of 1933-1945 the way I look upon, nostalgically, the brief years of my youth - a sweet, mysterious time, too brief, too fleeting, bewitching while it lasted and magical beyond all words - and never again to return. I lived through it as a small child. Why could I not, three generations later, describe exactly what I saw?

Thus came about a cautious cyber friendship that culminated in an invitation to write for Veterans Today.

So far, I have posted six essays within the last few weeks. They have been generally well received by a sophisticated readership, and one of those essays went viral. Itís title is “Germany: Still under the Control of Foreign Powers.” I donít even consider it my best essay, but Rense and others picked it up, and as of this writing, it is Number 2 on the “Weekly Top Ten” on VT.

Please visit my own authorís page and take a look yourself:


And if the Spirit moves you, as I fervently hope it will, please link to Veterans Today at www.veteranstoday.com where I have now established squatters rights and have hoisted my revisionist tent.


Ingrid Rimland has worn many hats in her life. Her latest hobby is re-mastering historic Zundel tapes so as to bring them to new audiences. For a preview of her latest, “Off Your Knees, Germany!” please go to www.soaringeaglesgallery.com

For an order blank of additional revisionist DVDs - in English and German ! - please send your snail mail address to ingridrimland@hughes.net.

Japan in WWII: A Casualty of Usury?

Was WWII Fought to make the World Safe for the Bankers?

by  Dr. Ingrid Rimland Zundel

Thanks to best-selling author, David Irving, the establishment view that the United States of America became embroiled in World War II as a result of a surprise attack on Pearl Harbour on December 7, 1941 is no longer accepted by major historians.The origins of this conflict, says South African politician and noted banker, Stephen Goodson, have far deeper roots.

Goodson explains the background as follows:

During the 1930s Japan rapidly expanded her industrial production, while the rest of the world, with the exception of National Socialist Germany, stagnated. By 1941 Japan had become the leading economic power in East Asia. Her exports were steadily replacing those of America and England.

Writes Goodson:

Japan has very few natural resources, so what was the secret of her success? In order to answer this question, it is necessary to return to the year 1929, when one of the twentieth century”s foremost monetary reformers, Major Clifford Hugh Douglas, went on a lecture tour of Japan.

Douglas”s economic theory advocated the transfer of the money creation process from private banks, which create money out of nothing as an interest-bearing debt, to the state. This government created money he termed social credit. He also favored the payment of a basic income or national dividend to each citizen. This dividend would provide consumers with the additional buying power necessary to absorb all the current production of goods in a non-inflationary manner2.

Major Clifford Hugh Douglas

*Douglas”s financial proposals for an honest money system, based on government creating the nation”s money and credit on an interest-free basis, were enthusiastically received by Japanese industry and government.3

All Douglas”s books and pamphlets were translated into Japanese, and more copies were sold in that country than in all the rest of the world put together.4

Since its inception in 1882 the largest shareholder of the Bank of Japan (Nippon Ginko) had been the Japanese Imperial Household. Its reorganization into a state bank, which was administered exclusively for the accomplishment of national interests, was implemented in 1932.

The reform of the central bank was completed in February 1942 when the Bank of Japan Law was remodelled on the Reichsbank Act of Germany of 1939.

Goodson continues:

“The Bank of Japan Law declared that the bank was a special corporation of a strongly national nature. The Bank was ëto assume the task of controlling currency and finance and supporting and promoting the credit system in conformity with policies of the state to ensure the full use of the nation”s potential”. Further, it was ëto be managed with the accomplishment of national aims as its sole guiding principle” (Article 2).

As for the functions of the Bank, the law abolished the old principle of priority for commercial finance, empowering it to supervise facilities for industrial finance. The law also authorized the Bank to make unlimited advances to the government without security, and to subscribe for and to absorb government bonds.

W2 Historian, David Irving

In respect of note-issues the law made permanent the system of the maximum issues limit; thus, the Bank could make unlimited issues to meet the requirements of munitions industries and of the government.

On the other hand, government supervision of the Bank was markedly strengthened. The government could nominate, superintend and give orders to the president and the directors; there was also a clause giving the government more comprehensive powers to give so-called ëfunctional orders” to the Bank, to direct it to perform any function it deemed necessary for the attainment of the Bank”s purpose.

Moreover, the law made a wide range of the Bank”s business subject to governmental approval, including such matters as the alteration of Bank rate, note-issues and accounts”.5

The results of these reforms can be seen in the sustained improvement which took place in the Japanese economy, once the shackles of usury had been removed. During the 1931-41 period, manufacturing output and industrial production increased by 140% and 136% respectively, while national income and Gross National Product (GNP) were up by 241% and 259% respectively.  These remarkable increases exceeded by a wide margin the economic growth of the rest of the industrialized world.

In the labour market unemployment declined from 5.3% in 1930 to 3.0% in 1938. Industrial disputes decreased with the number of stoppages down from 998 in 1931 to 159 in 1941.

In contrast to Japan, America had a private, mostly foreign owned central bank, the United States Federal Reserve Bank. Since its establishment on December 23, 1913 under highly suspicious circumstances, this bank had been undermining the US Constitution and destroying the freedom and prosperity of the American people.

A contemporary indictment of the US Federal Reserve may be found in a quotation from the opening paragraphs of a speech given by the Honorable Louis T. McFadden, Chairman of the House Committee on Banking and Currency (1920-31). It was delivered to Congress on June 10, 1932 to the general acclaim of the members present.

“Mr. McFadden. Mr Chairman, we have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever know. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve banks. The Federal Reserve Board, a Government board, has cheated the Government of the United States and the people of the United States out of enough money to pay the national debt.

The depredations and the iniquities of the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve banks acting together have cost this country enough money to pay the national debt several times over.

This evil institution has impoverished and ruined the people of the United States; has bankrupted itself, and has practically bankrupted our Government. It has done this through the defects of the law under which it operates, through the maladministration of that law by the Federal Reserve Board, and through the corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control it.

Some people think the Federal Reserve Banks are United States Government institutions. They are not Government institutions. They are private credit monopolies which prey upon the people of the United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers; foreign and domestic speculators and swindlers; and rich and predatory money lenders.”

Mr. McFadden then went on to expose how the Federal Reserve Bank buys votes in the States in order to control the state legislatures; and how they use their vast financial resources in maintaining “an international propaganda” for covering up their previous misdeeds and setting in motion new opportunities for their “gigantic train of crime”.

According to McFadden, these 12 private credit monopolies were “deceitfully and disloyally” foisted on an unsuspecting public by foreign bankers, who in 1904 bankrolled Japan in her war with Russia. In 1917 they financed Trotsky”s political programme in America and paid for his passage to Russia. With the assistance of their branch banks in Sweden, these international bankers “fomented and instigated the Russian Revolution”, which resulted in the “destruction of the Russian Empire”.

Goodson points out something astounding to many of the uninitiated:

It can thus be seen that the US Federal Reserve Bank was intimately involved in plotting and financing the overthrow of the Russian Empire7. With its stranglehold on the media and its placemen occupying most of the key positions in government in 1941, the Bank was in a favourable position from which to manipulate and provoke war with Japan.

Both the Bank of Japan and the German Reichsbank8 with their systems of state creation of the money supply at zero interest - and the inevitability that those systems of finance would be replicated by other countries, in particular those of the proposed Greater East Asian Co-prosperity Sphere - posed such a serious threat to the private investors of the US Federal Reserve Bank, that a world war was deemed to be the only means of countering it.

In July 1939 the United States unilaterally abrogated the Treaty of Commerce of 1911, thereby restricting Japan”s ability to import essential raw materials. These measures were imposed avowedly because of the war in China and were followed in June 1940 by an aviation fuel embargo and a ban on the export of iron and steel in November 19409.

General Hideki Tojo

In July 1941 all Japanese assets in England, Holland and America were frozen after Japan had peacefully occupied Indochina, with the permission of Vichy France, in order to block off China”s southern supply routes. At the same time an oil embargo was enforced. Without oil Japan could not survive.

General Hideki Tojo, Prime Minister (October 1941 - July 1944) explains in his diary how the United States continually thwarted Japanese efforts at maintaining the peace. Japan”s peaceful commercial relations were being persistently undermined by the USA and posed a grave threat to her future existence. By means of the economic blockade a noose was being placed around Japan”s neck.

Not only were the United States, England, China and Holland encircling Japan through economic pressures, but naval forces throughout the region in the Philippines, Singapore and Malaya were being redeployed and strengthened.

An American admiral claimed that the Japanese fleet could be sunk in a couple of weeks, while Prime Minister Churchill declared that England would join America”s side within 24 hours.

“Japan attempted to circumvent these dangerous circumstances by diplomatic negotiation, and though Japan heaped concession upon concession, in the hope of finding a solution through mutual compromise, there was no progress because the United States would not retreat from its original position.

In the end, the United States repeated demands that, under the circumstances, Japan could not accept : complete withdrawal of troops from China, repudiation of the Nanking government, withdrawal from the Tripartite Pact.

At this point, Japan lost all hope of reaching a resolution through diplomatic negotiation. Since events had progressed as they had, it became clear to continue in this manner was to lead the nation to disaster. With options thus foreclosed, in order to protect and defend the nation and clear the obstacles that stood in its path, a decisive appeal to arms was made.

War was decided upon at the Imperial Conference on December 1, 1941, and the shift to real operations was made at this point. However, even during the preparations for action, plans were laid in such a manner that should there be progress through diplomatic negotiation, we would be well prepared to cancel operations at the latest moment that communication technology would have permitted.” 10

A further incentive for the unprincipled leaders of the US government to instigate a war with Japan was the Tripartite Pact of September 21, 1940. This was a defensive military alliance under the terms of which, if one of the Axis powers was attacked, the others would come to its defence. By these means Germany was induced to declare war on the USA.11

After numerous diplomatic initiatives including the offer of a summit on August 8, 1941 had failed, Japan was forced into attacking America in order to maintain her prosperity and secure her existence as a sovereign state.

In the ensuing slaughter 2.3 million Americans and Japanese lost their lives. Tens of thousands of allied soldier were subjected to the indignities and sufferings of prisoner of war camp life12.

In a consummate act of hypocrisy the Japanese High Command was placed on trial for “war crimes”. These tribunals were based on ex post facto laws, which resulted in the subversion of 2500 years of Western jurisprudence. The rule of tu quoque (thou also) was cynically ignored, notwithstanding the brutal nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, where an estimated 239 000 died.13

One of the first acts of the United States occupation forces in Japan in September 1945 was to restructure the Japanese banking system, so as to make it compliant with the norms of the international bankers i.e. usury. The unrestricted financing of the state by the Bank of Japan was abolished and the large industrial combines, the Zaibatsu, were dismantled. This policy was carried out by Joseph Dodge, a Detroit banker, who was financial adviser to the Supreme Allied Commander, General Douglas MacArthur.

On both the 50th and 60th anniversaries commemorating the end of World War II, Japanese officials, including Japan”s prime minister Junichiro Koizumi14 on the latter occasion, have apologized. Clearly such apologies are misplaced and it is perhaps America who should be apologizing to the Japanese for having provoked them into a senseless and useless war, which according to Allied propaganda was fought to make the world safe for democracy.

The reality is that World War II was fought to make the world safe for usury - to ensure the permanent enslavement of mankind through debt and interest.


1 Thomas Kimmel (grandson of Admiral Husband Kimmel), “12 New Pearl Harbor Facts”, The Barnes Review, November/December 2004, pp. 37-41. Critical intelligence was withheld from the local commanders to ensure that the “surprise” attack was as spectacular as possible. See also Roger A Stolley, ëPearl Harbor Attack No Surprise”, The Journal for Historical Review, Vol. 12, No. 1, Spring 1992, pp. 119-21 who quotes LTC Clifford M. Andrew, a former U.S. Army intelligence officer, who temporarily was assistant chief of staff, military intelligence, general staff, United States Army as follows:

ëFive men were directly responsible for what happened at Pearl Harbor. I am one of those five men Ö.. We knew well in advance that the Japanese were going to attack. At least nine months before the Japanese attack upon Pearl Harbor, I was assigned to prepare for it. I was operating under the direct orders of the President of the United States and was ordered not to give vital intelligence information relating to the whereabouts of the Japanese fleet to our commanders in the field.

We had broken the Japanese code Ö We”d been monitoring all their communications for months prior to the attack Ö. It was a lie that we didn”t have direct communication with Washington, D.C.”

Stolley concludes by saying the “For the people of the United States both then and now I feel sorrow, for a people to have been so misled, to have been lied to so much and to have so thoroughly believed the lie given to them.”

2.. This forms part of Douglas”s A + B theorem, viz that prices are always being generated at a faster rate than incomes are produced, so that the total prices of all goods in the economy at any particular stage exceed the total buying power of consumers. The national dividend was intended to make up for this deficit of purchasing power, and as a consequence would assist in abolishing the business cycle and the syndrome of poverty amidst plenty.

3. This enthusiasm may be contrasted with the alarm with which Douglas”s ideas were received by the City of London or Square Mile (677 acres). During the 1930s £5 million (a prodigious sum in to-day”s values) was raised by the international bankers in order to neutralize Douglas”s proposals.

4. ëNew Economics”, January 19,1934, p. 8 as quoted in D J Amos, ëThe Story of the Commonwealth Bank”, Veritas Publishing Company, Bullsbrook, Western Australia, 1986, p. 44.

5. Money and Banking in Japan, The Bank of Japan Economic Research Department, translated by S Nishimura, edited by L S Pressnell, Macmillan, London, 1973, p.38.

6. “Collective Speeches of Congressman Louis T. McFadden” Omni Publications, Hawthorne, California, 1970, Chap XVI, The Treacherous and Disloyal Conduct of the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks, pp.298-9.

7. In 1914 Russia was the most prosperous nation in the world. She had a small and declining foreign debt and no central bank. See George Knupffer, “The Struggle for World Power”, London, 1971, Chap. 15, Some Details about Russia, pp. 138-46.

8. Stephen M. Goodson, “Bonaparte & Hitler Versus the International Bankers”, The Barnes Review, November / December 2004, pp. 23 -9.

9. Alleged human rights violations were the outward motivation for the imposition of sanctions. However , this may also have been a manoeuvre to protect US oil investments in China.

10. The Journal for Historical Review, Vol. 12, No.1, Spring 1992, Hideki Tojo”s Prison Diary , pp. 41-2.

11. Besides the obligations of the alliance, other factors which influenced the German declaration of war were the persistent provocations of the US Navy in the north Atlantic, and the anticipation that the Japanese would open up a Russian front in the Far East and provide relief for the beleaguered German forces outside Moscow.

12. In view of Japan”s non-ratification of the Geneva Convention in 1929, the Allied Chiefs of Staff have to bear some of the responsibility for the hardship, which they knew their soldiers would have to endure if captured. A recent study by Professor Richard Aldrich of Nottingham University, England ëThe Faraway War, Personal Diaries of the Second World War in Asia and the Pacific”, 2005, Doubleday has revealed that the stereotyping of the Japanese as being cruel and robotic is inaccurate, and that most of them were tough and fair in their treatment of enemy prisoners. In contrast American and Australia soldiers frequently did not take prisoners, but massacred them as “machine-gun practice”. (1943 diary of Eddie Stanton, Australian posted to Goodenough Island off Papua New Guinea). According to a spokesman of the Imperial War Museum, London in a programme broadcast on British Sky television on August 15, 2005, Japanese treatment of Russian prisoners of the Russo-Japanese War (1904-5) and German prisoners of World War I (1914-18) was exemplary.

13. The justification for these bombings was that the conquest of the Japanese mainland would have cost an estimated 500 000 allied lives. Yet these disasters could have been avoided if Japanese peace overtures for a conditional surrender had been accepted in January 1945.

14. According to the September 2005 issue of the monthly journal Right Now, 78 Marylebone High Street, London WIU 5AP on p. 15, ëPrime Minister Junichiro Koizumi is attacked time and again for continuing to visit a Tokyo shrine (the Yasukini) where Japan”s war dead are deified. The International Herald Tribune and the New York Times refer to these Japanese dead as ëwar criminals.”

Stephen Goodson is the director of a central bank in South Africa. (With credits to Mr. Goodson for his meticulous research.)

Guantanamo North

By Ernst Zundel on June 30, 2011

An Eerily Accurate Prediction

A Georgetown University law professor, Dr. Van Dinh, who helped craft the scandalous Patriot Act, recently extended for another four years, was asked by a reporter:

“An estimated 5,000 people have been subjected to detention since 9/11. Of those, only five, three non-citizens and two citizens were charged with terrorism-related crimes, and one was convicted.

How do we justify such broad-sweeping legislation that has resulted in very few terrorist-related convictions?”

( Viet Dinh, as reported in Wired Magazine, 2-2004) :

“It may well be that a number of citizens were not charged with terrorism-related crimes, but they need not be. (Ö)

Where the Department has suspected people of terrorism, it will prosecute those persons for other violations of the law rather than wait for a terrorist conspiracy to fully develop and risk the potential that that conspiracy will be missed.”

So that’s how it was done!

In sanitized Washington, D.C. lingo, such an arrest is called an “extrajudicial rendition.”

My husband, Ernst Zundel, was one of those 5,000 - arrested on a bright Tennessee spring day in 2003, without an arrest warrant - just like that! On American soil. By agents of my government. At the behest of the Holocaust Lobby. Allegedly Ernst missed an immigration interview and, thus, gave up his chance for a Green Card thanks to his marriage to me.

Now picture the setting - the Toronto West Detention Centre, October 3, 2004. A bitterly cold Canadian winter is looming. Ernst is accused of “Öbeing a security threat to the State of Canada,” but he is not allowed to face his accuser(s), know what they said, or argue against what they said.

He is the only White thus accused; with him in the same isolation ward sit 6 young Arabs, one in the cell right next to him, a young man by the name of Almrei, a Jordanian in his early thirties - a man who several times already tried to go on hunger strikes and once attempted suicide.

For it is bad, and getting worse.

Starvation rations, verbal abuse and physical humiliation are the order of the day. Strip searches - hundreds of them, for no discernible reason! Several emails informed me that guards are spitting in his food. We are still lucky, though - we can talk on the telephone, ______ Once, Ernst told me, he was returned to his cell after a consultation with his attorney, and a huge black guard stood inside, sadistically grinning, stripping on a plastic glove. According to the malicious Canadian media, Ernst is supposed to be this fire-breathing White Supremacist - and never mind that he has given employment to various minorities for decades!

A principled activist on behalf of his maligned German people accused of having practiced industrial-type genocide - a man already in his early sixties, with not a speck of criminal conduct ever to his name- Ernst is brutally kept caged much like a murderer or child abuser in an isolation cell. He is forbidden to speak a single word to other prisoners. The light in his cell is never turned off. Privacy is non-existent; every 20 minutes somebody peers into his cell through a peep hole and and notes his observations on a paper pad. His toothbrush is kept on the dirty floor outside his cell, along with a comb, a plastic spoon and fork next to a roll of toilet paper. He has to ask for such items as needed, and his requests may or may not be granted, depending on the mood and temper of the guards.

He has lost a crown from one of his teeth, and it will take more than a year until he is taken to a dentist.

Ernst is only lightly dressed. Shoes are not allowed - he stands barefoot on the ice-cold cement. The other day, a kind guard gave him an extra T-shirt; a second one snatched it away.

The cell holds neither desk nor chair. He is not allowed a ball point pen or even a regular pencil, only two-inch sawed-off pencil stumps. Ernst sits on a stack of court transcrips, wrapped in his bedsheet against the bitter cold, and here is what he writes to a friend of his in France, a fellow activist:

At 2.25 a.m., I woke up last night, bright awake, my mind going at full tilt! It was something Ingrid had said in response to what’s going on in the Middle East involving the death of a high-ranking “Pope-like” religious leader. I said that it was caused by our Traditional Enemies. She, in her usual without-guile innocence said: “Why would they want to do that? Kill a Pope? A religious leader? What’s that going to gain them?” So let me explain why I said what I said:

The problem in Iraq stems from the duality of the “heads” grafted onto the American body politic - the “Lobby” power and the “Money” power. Thus we see two diametrically opposed policy goals at loggerheads with one another. It is horrible for a state to be in this position.

There is its own national self-interest of the oil and resource sector of the American-military-industrial complex, as personified by Bush, Cheney, Halliburton, Bechtel Corp. and the Council on Foreign Relations crowd. These largely Gentile-dominated outfits wanted to steal the oil and precious metals not only of Iraq, but of that whole region, including Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrein - all these oil-producing areas, as well as Afghanistan, the gate-way to the ocean of oil, in the Caspian sea basin! That was the loot Bush and Gentile U.S. capitalist circles as well as the military arms manufacturers have had their eyes on for two decades, since Reagan’s presidency. Why? Because China, India, Pakistan and South East Asia are motorizing so fast that in another short 10 years, those three countries will gobble up all the oil in the world now produced - in one entire year! Thus America, England and all of industrial Europe would be grinding to a standstill with an economic impact unequalled in human history.

The Americans know about this state of affairs in the upper echelons of the ruling circles - like the Bush family and their friends. The Israelis and Jewish circles know it too! The Americans want the oil of the region. In order to pump it, they need to conquer, pacify, and reconstruct the area.

That’s their policy goal: No stability - no oil!

The Israelis, on the other hand, need a chaotic, destabilized, at-war-with-one-another fractured Middle East. Divide and conquer! Play one faction against another!

This has been their policy since the state was founded and has been the Jewish modus operandi since Biblical times! That’s how “minorities” rule. Let majorities fight each other!

Enter the Israeli Fifth Column, the neo-cons, who had wormed their way into positions of power. They decided and ruled at the most important levels of government, the media and, especially, the think tanks and the intelligence apparatus.

That’s why 9/11 was created offshore and allowed to take place by the “oil and resource lobby” - and the ruling oligarchy. Both needed a new Pearl Harbor!

The theft of the treasures of the Middle East had to be camouflaged under some fanciful name or slogan. The “ëweapons of mass destruction” was the fig leaf supplied - mainly by Israeli and Jewish agents and infiltrators, i.e. sources via the Likud-Sharon-Wolfowitz-Perle-Rumsfeld crowd!

The Israelis needed to destroy Saddam Hussein, the only guy in their neighborhood who was ruthless enough and had the cunning or survival instinct to beat down his fractious population of various tribes, such as the warlike Kurds, as well as his religious fanatics. He ruled with a brutal iron fist, because nothing else can guarantee a stable state in that place since time immemorial.

The Jews know that America is financially bankrupt, a powder keg of racial problems simmering below the surface, ready to blow like a volcano if ever there is going to be a depression or massive unemployment, which could be anytime. They had to act fast!

Thus Wolfowitz, Perle, Kristol and their cohorts exploited the opportunity and ugly anti-Muslim mood created by 9/11, as it was designed to produce, by those who planned and executed it. They knew that they had only a small window of opportunity where the Bush/Cheney Cartel’s policy would overlap with theirs. They had to do it in Bush’s first term, because Bush the Younger was going to do Saddam Hussein in, which the father did not get around to doing because he tripped up, got the Jews mad at him and was thereafter unelectable! The Jewish-dominated media and Alan Greenspan’s Federal Reserve policies saw to that after 1991.

That’s why we saw the frantic maneuvering and clamoring for war by the Neo-Cons, Israel’s Fifth Column in America. They wanted that war so bad you could taste it, because they knew Bush’s 9/11 popularity windfall was wearing off - and increasing numbers of Americans were getting wise to the neo-cons everywhere.

The Pentagon top brass wanted to wait, prepare better, get more troops etc. You remember the debate - they wanted at least 200,000-250,000 troops and U.N. participation via Powell. The Israelis saw these millions upon millions hit the streets around the world in anti-war demos and decided to hurry things along with fake intelligence assessments. They basically lied the U.S. and Britain into that war - with both light-weight leaders Bush and Blair going along for cheap glory and the subsequent spoils! They knew the 21 million Iraqis were, by then, a “Fourth World” country, decimated by the 1991 Gulf war and 13 years of deadly sanctions!

Iraq was one more time pounded into the dust. There was no contest ever - the results were a forgone solution! The Israelis got what they wanted - Israel wanted to smash Saddam Hussein via the U.S. military machine, because he had been a thorn in their side for 25 years already. But they also wanted to cow and intimidate all the other states around them by the example of the utter devastation of Iraq - much like my treatment is meant to serve as a scarecrow to frighten the patriotic groups.

Make no mistake about this “by-product”! This is almost as good as having a war, because the Israelis can point to Iraq and say: “Do you see the influence we have in Washington? We can get our “Golem”, our American pitbull, to tear you apart any time we want! So watch your step!”

The first one to see the light was Muamar Khaddafi, who previously refused to buckle under, even after Reagan bombed Libya and after the Lockerbie disaster in 1989, where 270 people were killed! For 14 years, Khaddafi had always refused responsibility for the Lockerbie explosion. After the smashing and invasion of Iraq, Libya paid $2.7 billion in compensation - a huge amount for those 270 victims - adding meekly that it “accepts responsibility for the actions of its officials”! (Newsweek, Page 4, Sept. 1, 2003). You can bet your life that the American behavior against Saddam Hussein and Iraq shook that money and apology loose! Terror speaks its own persuasive language. Especially Middle Easterners know that.

Those who planned and executed 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq knew it, and still know it. They are masters at employing terror!

The Israelis and Jewish lobby have achieved their primary policy goals already. Saddam is gone, his military finished. Iraq is a basket case. And Israel will now do what they did in Lebanon in 1982 and after - destabilize the region, keep everybody fighting everybody. If a strong religious or political leader, or group around him, arise - simply have him killed! They have had this policy for 4,000 years, as is evidenced by a book published by a New York State University Press a few years ago, “The Role of Assassinations in Jewish History” or something like that.

In living memory we have had the famous Lavon Affair, where the Israelis were going to burn and blow up American consulates, information agency libraries etc. in Egypt and then blame Nasser’s “Moslem hot- heads” for it! Mossad did that in 1953. The terrorists were caught, prosecuted, hanged - the very rare time where the Israelis goofed up!

Menahim Begin blew up the British headquarters in Palestine, the King David Hotel, with lots of casualties, civilian and military. Shamir and his assassin gang killed Lord Moyne, a U.N. official, without qualms or repercussion to them! Moshe Dayan killed people at Deir Yassin in terror-inspiring massacres, as did Sharon in Sabra and Chatila and in Jenin - again with total impunity, no sanctions, no war crimes trials, nothing!

These people’s chief stock-in-trade is terror - on an individual and on a state level. They have always been and still are born terrorists. “Targeted killings” of Palestinian religious or political figures and security men have been and still are Israeli policy, as was and is the deliberate maiming and wounding of children and demonstrators, deliberately shattering their bones, “hooding” of prisoners - which the Americans have adopted in Afghanistan and in Iraq, as well as concentration camps, such as the Americans have in Guantanamo Bay now, denying of due process to prisoners or enemies, no habeas corpus, no freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of association. All these are instruments of Israeli occupation since 1948 in Palestine - and now in America!

That Americans and Canadians don’t want to see it - or if they see it, don’t understand what it is really designed to do - is simply because the media and educational system has dumbed them down to a level hitherto unknown in the civilized world. They are modern-day zombie populations, led around by the nose - mentally so manipulated that they cannot think straight, much less act in their own self-interest either as individuals or as societies and states. They have become the tax-paying cash cows and playthings of an alien oligarchy both in spirit and in reality.

What will that mean for Iraq and the U.S. role there?

Newsweek, with its 4 million readers, asked the front page question in its issue of 1 Sept. 03: “So what’s Plan B?”

Why should there be a plan B? This war was a proxy war, fought by Israel’s American pitbull, temporarily unleashed to destroy Israel’s most dangerous local/regional enemy. That was the war aim of the neo-cons. That task was accomplished. Israel is today safer than it was for years, and will be so for years to come!

The Israelis don’t care that “meshuggene goyim” - that is, Gentile boys and girls - are dying in terrorist attacks. They are not Israelis. They are someone else’s problem. The Israelis did not like that young Bush did not appoint a single Jew to his cabinet. They are still upset that Sharon was not received in the White House with open arms before 9/11 - and Powell’s fair peace plan did not help! Why should they care that Bush’s ratings are going down, that his presidency is in trouble? They are still carrying a grudge against Bush the Elder and his friend James Baker, that uppity Goyim, who did not sign the $10 billion carte blanche “loan guarantee” during the elder Bush’s presidency! They never forget a slight!

Was it not therefore fortunate, very fortunate, that the attacks on New York and Washington got the younger Bush’s attention, straightened out his thinking and made him change his tune and policies in favor of Israel? Overnight!

So what will happen in Iraq?

Israel has been vehemently opposed to an observer role for U.N. Human Rights monitors, much less U.N. Blue Helmet peace keepers, anywhere they had anything to say. As far as Jewry, Israelis, the neo-cons, the whole crowd has anything to say, the U.N. is dominated by an overwhelming number of unfriendly Third World nations - who regularly vote against Israeli and American/Jewish interests. What they cannot control, make use of or manipulate, they usually destroy - even their bankrupt, moribund Soviet system. They are single-minded in that policy of ego-ethnocentricity: “Destroy what does not serve Israel and Jewry!”

Since they do not have anything to gain from a stable, prosperous Iraq, they will sabotage anyone, any policy or initiative, overtly or covertly, which will lead to a normalization of life in Iraq. Chaos, civil war, riots, religious strive, poverty, unemployment, poor sanitation and even starvation serve their interests. It is their secret policy to ensure it stays that way - like in Gaza, the West Bank, etc.

Enter the U.N.’s top diplomat and expert in “Nation building”, Sergio Vieira de Mello, fresh from Geneva’s U.N. Human Rights body, hated by the Israelis and the U.S. top brass alike! The U.N. wanted control over rebuilding Iraq - the U.S. and the Israelis loathed that idea. The Americans wanted mainly American businesses friendly to the Bush crowd to get the most lucrative “re-building” contracts, freezing most other nations out of these multi-billion dollar, no-competitive-bids manna-from-heaven deals!

De Mello was appalled by what he saw in his nearly three months in Iraq and, according to Newsweek, Sept. 1, 2003, was fed up and angry enough to summon his chief U.N. spokesman, Salim Loue, and told him to “draft a public statement condemning U.S. military recklessness”! He planned to release it that evening!

That statement, which put the U.N. on a collision course with the U.S. in Iraq, was never issued!

Was it not an odd coincidence that a huge flat bed truck could blithely roll through all of Baghdad teeming with American roadblocks and military patrols, carrying enough military ordnance covered apparently by a tarpaulin, with 500 pound bombs, artillery shells, mortar rounds - over 1,000 pounds of Iraqi ordnance, says Newsweek! Uninspected and unsuspected, that flat bed truck could drive to U.N. headquarters, park right beside De Mello’s office - and kill him and another 24 people, injuring 86 more seriously, in a massive explosion! Vieira was blown apart, his body parts crushed under slabs of concrete, at 4.37 in the afternoon, while in a conference - no doubt fuming about his troubled relationship with America’s chief U.S. Administrator for all of Iraq, L. Paul Bremer. Bremer is for Iraq what General MacArthur was for occupied Japan after Japan’s surrender in 1945.

What are the chances of someone loading a 500 pound bomb, which would take a crane or forklift truck to heave up from one of Saddam’s ammunition bunkers, unto a truck unobserved? Ammo dumps in enemy territory are always guarded by high wire fences and troops, 24 hours a day, especially in war zones! Who on that day - before that critical U.N. statement, which could have changed the course of history in Iraq, went out to the world’s media - had most to gain by this man and his closest aides being dead? On that day? At that hour? Think about it!

What will the “Iraq” policy be now? Some newspapers explained it long before the war started: the same policy the Allies adopted towards the German state in 1945. It will be a brutal, all-stifling occupation, in fact a military dictatorship - a policy of dismemberment to weaken the conquered state into political and military impotence, slicing off and setting up a semi-autonomous Kurdish state - exactly as happened in Germany with the Eastern provinces East Prussia, West Prussia, Silesia, Sudetenland etc lost to Germany. In Iraq there will be Sunni, Shiite and other tribal areas, like the British had in India, which allowed them to control that whole populous subcontinent - 230 million people at the time - with only 30,000 British troops, because the Indians were forever at each other’s throats. Even ancient Rome did the same.

Israel has survived 55 years by the same technique against its neighbors. Destabilize. Terrorize. Incarcerate. Subjugate. Keep people unemployed, impoverished and, above all, spread hopelessness and despair! Exile troublemakers. Imprison or assassinate natural leaders by calling them “terrorists” - that way, absolutely no one cares in the current hysteria.

It’s a license to murder!

Will the Israeli policy work for the Americans in Iraq? Maybe. For the moment, Syria and Iran seem safe. Americans, unlike their Israeli tutors, do not have the fanatical racist superiority complex vis-a-vis their conquered population, because many of the GIs are themselves minorities - Latinos, Blacks from the ghettos of Harlem and Detroit. So far, only 77 Americans have been killed, only 500 wounded. The German Army lost almost 1 million soldiers killed at the hands of Allied guerillas - if the same “wounded ratio” is applied, another 6-7 million wounded by these “freedom fighters” armed by the Allies! The Soviets lost 50,000 killed in Afghanistan by the U.S.-equipped Bin Laden Mujahedin, before they pulled out and then imploded and collapsed, never to rise again.

When will America say in Iraq, “Enough is enough!”? Time will tell!

Hard to say - what with all that oil there still to loot!

Ingrid Rimland has worn many hats in her life. Her latest hobby is re-mastering historic Zundel tapes so as to bring them to new audiences. For a preview of her latest, “Off Your Knees, Germany!” please go to

For an order blank of additional revisionist DVDs - in English and German ! - please send your snail mail address.

YouTube - Veterans Today -

A Bishop, a Pope, and a Sheeple

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on July 9, 2011
Bishop Williamson

It gives me no pleasure to predict that the Federal Republic of Germany is about to soil itself again to please the Noisy Lobby.

The players in the coming spectacle are noteworthy. The story is worth pondering because it has all the earmarks of a wide-screen feature film I hope a savvy producer somewhere is going to pick up. It could be another Scopes Monkey Trial feature right in the heart of Europe.

Imagine an erudite man of the cloth embroiled in a spiritual war against a bullying minority ensconced in a “shÖty little country” with branches in New York, London, and Tel Aviv. These bullies are swinging the Auschwitz cudgel in a disgracefully cowed Vaterland in hopes that the current Pope on St. Peter’s Throne will remain in the thralls of a soul-deadening myth. The man of the cloth is a British Bishop of a renegade Catholic church called SPPX who has dug in his heels and stands firm.

I am sketching the backdrop for you as it was told to me. A couple of years ago, His Excellency did an interview for Swedish television in a German town called Zaitzhofen. The topic of that interview was to be a theological issue that needed elucidation. After the interview was done, the interviewer sprang a political rat: Just where, exactly, did His Excellency stand on the Hallowed Holocaust?

Bishop Richard Williamson spoke off the cuff into a tape that was still running. He spoke in privacy, behind closed doors. He knew that what he said was against political dogma as well as widespread social concensus in the Bundesrepublik. However, he was a subject of the Queen of England. The television crew was Swedish. In order not to offend against proscribed German law that stifles any discussions, much less allows investigation according to a legal construct called “Offenkundigkeit” - “The Holocaust is ‘obvious’!” - he asked that his answer not be broadcast in censor-ridden Germany. He knew there might be fallout - he didn’t know how much.

New angle. The Bishop’s church, more fully known as “The Society of Pope St. Pius X”, named after a late Pope, adheres to traditional Catholic dogma. Mean tongues have branded Pope Pius X as “Hitler’s Pope”, allegedly for his relaxed demeanor during the Second World War, scolding him for “not having done enough”, “not having spoken out enough” against the Holocaust.

I won’t go into what this splinter church believes and therefore practices, because I know nothing of Catholic ways. It is my understanding, though, that the SPPX does not take a stand on political-secular issues - their main grudge against the current Church of Rome is its enthusiastic adaptation to modernity, a trend believed to be proscribed and monitored behind the scenes by Zion.

In 1988, the year when Richard Williamson was ordained as Bishop of the SPPX, the Church of Rome took a firm stand and excommunicated him, along with several others, thus creating a spiritual Catholic out-elite. This splinter group follows the rituals, including Latin mass, that grew over millennia much like an oak with a life of its own, hard at the core, unyielding in substance. As SPPX faithful see it, traditional dogma is to be sternly observed.

The SPPX movement became very attractive to many. This defiantly renegade church has grown and solidified over the decades, whereas the Chair of St. Peter, watered down by way-too-much PC, as SPPX disciples claim, has lost its deified edge.

Please note the convergence of dates. In 1988, the very year when His Excellency was shown the door in Rome for following his conscience, Ernst Zundel’s Second Great Holocaust Trial in Toronto brought forth the weighty Leuchter Report - the first forensic investigation ever in more than 40 years that proves that science does not lie, not even for the “Nazis”. The so-called “Holocaust” is bunk.

The Leuchter Report findings have since been replicated several times and verified. What US execution equipment expert Leuchter found and documented to the horror of the Lobby destroyed the orthodox, widely believed claims about the gassings alleged to have happened at Auschwitz.

The Jews of Canada were plain beside themselves! In response, they did what Jews do - they start spewing fire and flame all over mainstream media to discredit the rebel who dares cause a crack to their clout.

Alan Borovoy, a lawyer of the Canadian Civil Liberties Union, a Jewish stronghold of the Left in Canada as elsewhere, informed the media minions that Zundel was a “peripheral non-entity” who couldn’t fill a phone booth with supporters of his views. In tandem, other spokesmen for the Jewish Lobby were joining the fray , as predictably happens when Zion blows into its trumpets so as to keep gentiles in line.

Remember the song of the Sixties: “Those were the days, my friend - we thought they’d never endÖ” The Holocaust, as peddled by media extravagances like “Shoah”, ran on some potent emotional fuel. No qualm was ever uttered. If you knew on which side your bread was buttered, you wouldn’t be caught dead doubting the claims of the Holocaust Remembrance Lobby, as Zundel had done. Few were the braves that strode into his court room where angels feared to tread.

His Excellency, then ministering in a US Midwest town just south of Canada, was one of those rare braves. Legend has it that the Bishop caught a whiff from mainstream media about a German rebel embroiled in a concerted four-months trial - and as one out-elitist to another, it stands to reason that His Excellency may have found some food for thought in what he saw and heard about the Auschwitz Saga. This accidental walk-in spectator caught Holocaust Denial, so they say, as though he were catching the measles.

These days, Revisionists sit back and rather smugly watch how Holocaust Denial has morphed onto so many major political stages that there is nothing more to be argued. The scientific battle has been won - that there is still fierce spiritual warfare is neither here nor there. Science will never mix with dogma. It should be food for thought in our Western world that the entire Arab world is wise to the fact that wherever the Holocaust Card is rammed down people’s throats, they are watching a Weapon of Mass Deception under the pretext of an unverified historical claim.

The Arab countries still think with their blood. The Arab countries aren’t Europe, subdued and docilized by Zion.

What happens in Europe, by contrast, especially in Germany, can only be called lunacy. As Judge Ulrich Meinerzhagen shrieked at the conclusion of a recent Stalinist show trial that cost Ernst Zundel five years, it doesn’t even matter if there was a Holocaust or not, Herr Zundel! The law says you can’t question it! And, furthermore, not only can’t you question it, you good-for-nothing rogue, your own defense team cannot, either! Off with their heads, the whole lot!

Words to that effect were actually spoken in Mannheim, believe it or not. That so-called German judge delivered himself of an Old-Testament curse in broad daylight. Even a bird will refuse to fly over your grave, Herr Zundel! In a courtroom in 2007. On behalf of Germany’s Zionist masters.

That’s Europe today, three generations after so-called “liberation.”

The German politologist, Udo Walendy, spent years in jail - not for what he said and wrote, mind you, but for what he should have said and written - and didn’t!

The one-time NPD party leader, G¸nter Deckert, was sentenced and incarcerated because, allegedly, he smirked while verbally translating the 1988 Leuchter Report to a mere handful of his friends.

Best-selling author, David Irving, likewise a British subject, was thrown into an Austrian jail on grounds that he misspoke himself on Auschwitz - not yesterday, not last week, month, or year - no! Seventeen years ago!

And yet, try all you want to legislate against a temporal religion - doubt has a way of spreading like crabgrass.

Who can forget the David Irving quote that “Ömore people died on the back seat of Senator Kennedy’s car than ever died in the gas chamber of AuschwitzÖ”?

Just recently, the French comedian DieudonnÈ complained to hearty applause that he is being dragged before a court and fined for making people laugh!

Back to the Church of Rome, believed to be hollowed out from within by clandestine political interests so as to ever more weaken the West - for decades, bland proclamations, tame sermons, lackluster financial support!

I can imagine that a beleaguered papal shepherd might well have cast a longing eye at the SPPX’s vigorous membership growth and decided the time had come to practice forgiveness for a bit of politically incorrect speech so as to lure more than a million errant sheep back home into the fold.

I don’t know if this was the reason. I’m guessing.

At any rate, a German-born Pope on the Throne of St. Peter stretched out his hand to four renegade Bishops, inviting them in from out of the cold. He did this in all innocence. He says he didn’t know about the Big-H heresy allegedly tainting the renegade church. At least that’s what he claims.

Many see that Swedish television taping as a deliberate move meant to entrap the Bishop so as to embarrass the Pope. You judge for yourself what His Excellency said, for the record:

In a sane world, this would not have triggered a crisis. Alas, we no longer live in a rational world. Like trained seals, the smear mongers sprang into action. The media tsunami was vicious.

Some people had long memories.

After all, who had been, once upon a wicked time, the leader of a pack of Hitler Youth? Pope Benedict the XVI - that’s who!

No doubt intent on training them on Hitler’s orders to become proverbial genocidal monsters!

It was ugly, and it didn’t stop. To this day, it is going full tilt. Big people jumped into the fray. It must have hurt the good Bishop a lot.

What must he have thought as he watched Chancellor Merkel demand that the Pope explain himself and clarify just what, precisely, he thought that he was doing? To welcome back into the fold an utterly disgraceful bunch of well-known haters, racists, antisemites, white supremacists and worse!? How dare a Pope snub scores and scores of Hitler’s concentration camp survivors and disregard that, therefore, Germany is obligated in perpetuity to embrace and endorse what Israel demands?

The Bishop was tried and found wanting. He was fined 10,000 hefty Euros for ten minutes’ worth of interview tape. This fine is now being appealed. A ruling is expected on Monday, 11 July 2011.

I am not holding my breath. The defense can’t be on the facts of the case - for scientific facts cannot be argued in a country where truth is no defense. His argument will be, if only inferencially, that it is not his fault the tape was broadcast in a country that prides itself on crawling on its belly based on a sordid fable.

Many, even those still close to him, have urged His Excellency to grit his teeth and just recant his heresy. Why not apologize? A small concession for the sake of churchly harmony. Why not?

The pressure on the Bishop must be huge.

So far, all indications are this Bishop, for one, won’t recant. He won’t apologize. In a prayerful mode, he has asked for good people all over the world to pray for a just outcome.

Some of us, not part of an official faith, might hope for even more. I know I hope that he will stick to his irreverence and, paraphrasing Oscar Wilde, tell Germany’s appalling censors:

“You have smeared me in absentia. You have charged me in absentia. You have sentenced me in absentia. You might as well shoot me in absentia.”

Germany’s Governments since 1945: Turncoats and Traitors, all!

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on July 18, 2011

Just as I predicted, “Holocaust-denying” Bishop Richard Williamson lost his appeal in court last week. The verdict did not please either side. The defense had asked for a dismissal. The prosecution had asked for an increase in the fine to rub in yet another salutary lesson to demonstrate that, in the vaunted but ever more restive Bundesrepublik, the Chosenites can still dance the Hora on a German judge’s nose.

Originally, the Bishop had been fined a hefty 10,000 Euros for a ten-minute interview filmed by a Swedish team, during which he referred to the Leuchter Report, the first forensic investigation ever of Auschwitz which proved that, though science does not lie, Holocaust survivors do - routinely.

The finer details of the story are amply documented on the Net - I don’t need to repeat them. Let’s just add, for the record, that yet one more politically beholden judge in Regensburg upheld the verdict, but reduced the fine to 6,500 Euros - on grounds, essentially, that Bishop Williamson is destitute (thanks to the shrieking multitudes that hounded him out of his job) and deserves to have a bone thrown his way.

If anybody had asked me, I would have ruled like Solomon. I would have fined the Bishop one itsy-bitsy, skinny Euro, to signal to the world that my eyes are wide open to the political realities that expect judges to curtsy to power and might, but that there’s still a small remnant of honor left in my bruised German heart. That would have been a compromise. That would have upheld the verdict, but it would have signaled that, at the very least, my nose is still my nose and not the place to put Zionist chutzpah on display.

Bishop Williamson

I feel obliged to set the record straight on my previous write-up, “A Bishop, a Pope, and a Sheeple”, where I tried to shed some light on this judicial travesty. I stand corrected. I made a mistake. As a non-Catholic, one Pope looks to me like another. Pope Pius X was not the “Hitler Pope.” That flippant designation of a Holy Father on St. Peter’s Throne belongs to Pope Pius XII who occupied the Vatican when Hitler started carting off the Jews to Auschwitz to put a stop to widespread sabotage against a beastly war the F¸hrer did not want and did not start ó International Jewry did, with their shenanigans.

It would take many reference books to describe the conditions in the judiciary of Germany today that permit such gross miscarriage of justice. I do not have the expertise to write such a treatise, and you don’t have the time and patience to read it. Let me, therefore, pull out of my own Zundel archives some of my favorite political dissident’s words, who is - this very moment, as I am publishing his musings without his knowledge or permission - still held hostage in the Vaterland until the year 2023, courtesy of America’s Patriot Act.


“The German State I hate is one born in a lie and deception - namely that it is free and democratic. It is and never was that! It was a creature of the Allied Occupation Powers - created out of German turncoats, traitors, former Communists and released inmates of concentration camps, Jews and Gentiles alike, many of whom had run afoul of perfectly legally promulgated and adopted German laws - which made them land there in the first place. By using these despicable people as “leaders”, the Dark Forces embodied in the Allied Occupation authorities created for themselves a pliable and useful instrument. Further, to make sure that they would keep control, they licensed all Occupation-approved newspapers, many of them to Jewish individuals or Marxists. Those who did not toe to the prevailing Allied Occupation authority party line of “political correctness” had no chance whatsoever to get or keep a livelihood through publishing.

This made for a uniform, unified voice and reflection of Allied wishes, goals and desires.

Additionally, judges in “de-nazification” courts were staffed largely by the same motley crew of Communists, crooks, chameleons and traitors to German interests. Especially right after the end of the war, these people established a medieval machinery of terror, torture and lawlessness in the name of law and order in their hunt for “war criminals” - as is once again revealed in the Priebke case. The hunt for “war time criminals” - of course, always only German ones, or those allied with Germany! - began and turned out to be a politically and financially lucrative business indeed. It took me a long time to realize that the goal was NOT to bring these “criminals” to justice and right a moral “wrong”. The goal was the repeat assault on Germans’ pride - to keep a nation and a people feeling guilty.

This guilt, imposed and reinforced at every opportunity, prevented Germans who survived the war from asserting themselves and acting in their own best interest. A person who feels guilty is willing to do penance. A country that is artificially programmed to keep on feeling guilty for having practiced “genocide” becomes the cash cow for those parties who benefit financially, politically and “morally” from the alleged “Holocaust”.

These toadies, in the pay and service of the Dark Forces nurturing this guilt, knowingly and falsely caved in to pressure and adopted a disgusting policy of “guilt payments” for largely imaginary crimes, thus saddling generations of Germans with this horrific mortgage - not only on their finances but, what is worse, on their honor and their national pride. These regimes, made up of alien interests, were not the initial creators of this blood libel on Germany, but quickly became the enforcers of the Allies’ diabolically clever campaign of total “re-education” of all Germans by all means of communication possible - snuffing out all dissent against this treason by vile and vicious means and draconian “hate” laws. These postwar politicians and media elites of three German states - West Germany, Central Germany and Austria - allowed themselves to be made into willing accusers, participants and prosecutors, judges and jailers of their own people on drummed-up bogus charges.

These “elites” have been continuing the merciless rule of the Allied Occupiers and the Dark Forces behind them for more than half a century - now that many of the hundreds of thousands of Occupation soldiers have left.

Thus, these creatures have spat on the memory of those heroic men who stormed to the gates of Stalingrad to stop what was called Communism once and has since been repackaged as “The New World Order”. These lackeys to the plutocrats have belittled - in fact, criminalized - these soldiers’ blood sacrifice, their loss of eyes, limbs, health and honor and even life on the altar of cheap foreign applause.

They have condoned the loss of property and homelands of 17 million Germans with an arrogant, ignorant, callous and criminal wave-of-a-hand and shrug-of-a-shoulder. While they are drumming into our ears and brains the stories of atrocities the Germans are alleged to have committed, they have deliberately played down, ignored and even willfully suppressed massive Allied war crimes - such as the rape and murder of millions of German women and even children at the end of the war by so-called “liberators”.

Do I hate that state and system? Yes. It has been said by Mohandas Gandhi that non-cooperation with evil is as much a duty as is cooperation with good.

The reason why I hate the system locked in place of the once all-German living space is simply because it is born in evil posing as good. The only good is knowledge, and the only evil is ignorance, and Germany’s people are ignorant of what has been done to them.

They have been robbed and continue to be robbed not only of their money for so-called “reparations” but mutilated at their very core, their ethnic pride and honor.

The German government boasts of being “democratic” when in effect it is despotic. It brags it is the legal successor to the last democratically and properly elected regime, namely the government of Adolf Hitler - when it is plain illegal, a device imposed by the victors on the defeated German nation. It keeps its people genuflecting before its tyrants and defrauders.

This list goes on and on.

When I was thrown in jail in Germany for my political beliefs and my outspoken nature, it was done by systematically created moral cripples resorting to their last maneuver - that of brute force and subsequent incarceration where arguments are wanting.

I walked out of that prison despising them.

When I was jailed and imprisoned in Canada for these same viewpoints and beliefs, my feelings were quite different. I did not come out of Canadian jails hating the Canadian system. I accept that this is what Canadians elected freely and evolved over a century.

To this day, I love Canada. I don’t like what it is becoming, but I loved what it was in 1958 when I came here to make a living and build an honest life while still a teenager.

Contrary to what you may read in the paper, Canada has not been the worse off for me. I have paid back in coin what it has given me, including a definition of its own Charter of Rights and Freedoms - my 1992 Supreme Court victory affirming the right to dissent in free speech - that was not properly understood before.

I paid for that privilege with every penny out of my private kitty.

When it comes to my native country, Germany, I feel at times that I am like some priest of old, exorcising the evil demon from Germany’s soul. A country has a right to choose its government. After the World War II defeat, and after more than 50 years of occupation, Germany has not yet been given that option by its conquerors. The government is and will always be an instrument of suppression and bondage for the German people. Liberation is yet to come.

The fact that I was thrown in prison in Germany was a reminder to me that Germans, whom I had given the means to free themselves, namely the findings of the Leuchter Investigations - scientific and verifiable proof that the Holocaust is one gigantic swindle, and that the “reparations” scheme is an extortion racket - was powerful verification to me, the bearer of good and truthful tidings, that I had handed mentally and spiritually mutilated men and women the sword of truth with which they could have slashed the Gordian knot of Jewish/Allied lies. With one bold stroke, they could have freed themselves from their tormentors and defrauders.

What did they do with it?

They had no hands with which to hold the truth. They had no eyes to even see the truth. The truth was there. Their faculties were gone. They had become grotesquely crippled - stupefied, numbed, spiritually altered - “re-educated” in a deliberate act of war by Allied psychological warfare experts.

That is the reason why I have dedicated my life to excise the virulent lie that is killing the soul of my kin and my race. I do not hate the German people inside the so-called “democratic state”. I hate the system that will blind and maul and mangle the descendants of the men who bled their life into the ice and snow of Stalingrad, into the sands of Africa, who lie in watery graves in the Atlantic Ocean.

That’s why I hate that system with a cold, sustaining passion.

Ernst Zundel (Written in 1996)

Video clips featured in this article are from a remastered DVD titled “An Israeli Journalist interviews Ernst Zundel.” $20.- plus postage. Write for an order blank. ingridrimland@hughes.net

A Modern Kidnapping on U.S. Soil

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on July 24, 2011 Ernst Zundel - politically targeted by the Holocaust Lobby

By the time the New Millennium rolled around, Ernst Zundel and I had been engaged for several years in a precarious but emotionally rewarding battle for Freedom of Speech, so poignantly described by Dr. Robert Faurisson, acknowledged “Dean of the Holocaust Deniers” world-wide, as “Ö. the great intellectual adventure at the end of the Twentieth Century.”

We saw ourselves as Europeans of the classical tradition - pure at heart, splendidly accurate in what science had discovered, engaged in a noble endeavor, determined to win at all costs. That our rivals shrieked like banshees about to be castrated whenever we challenged the hoary argument of the “six million” did not matter to us, in the beginning.

We were used to be shrieked at - to be called all kinds of nasty names. Name-calling came with the terrain where even the bravest tread gingerly, as you do in a minefield that a hitherto unopposed enemy has strewn with explosives. We told ourselves that sometimes freedom is expensive. That was the price to be paid so that the people of the Western nations could breathe freely again and not have to look over their shoulder.

Twelve years ago, Fred Leuchter, dispatched by Ernst in the middle of his Second Great Holocaust Trial in Toronto, had gone to Auschwitz, looking for holes in the ceiling through which the hapless Jews, so untold Holocaust Survivors claimed, had been murdered with Zyklon B, by the millions. Fred didn’t find what he had expected to find - and Dr. Faurisson, that master of exactitude, coined four immortal words:

“No holes, no Holocaust.”

Instead, Fred found enormous holes in the traditional account of what was alleged to have happened.

It was a buoyant time. T-Shirt appeared, bumper stickers, cartoons, posters, articles. More articles. And yet more articles. All claiming victory. Forensic science had made mincemeat of a nauseating tale -but there was still no end to arguments. And why? Because out of the woodwork came scores of Chosenites who shrieked, as they had always shrieked: “You no-good effing racists! Prove it!”

We thought we had. What were they - dense? Bloated like ticks with false information? We didn’t realize, at first, this was war of a different kind - NOT war like any other war that had so far been fought!

After the Leuchter Expedition, filmed every millimeter for posterity, Ernst certainly thought that the battle was over. I remember I asked him at the time what else there was to be done, and he said: “Mopping up!”

Holocaust revisionism had reached a plateau - maybe some mopping up was needed, some polishing of arguments, defining terms, buffing statistics? You could argue numbers, or footnotes, or splitting yet another hair five ways - but, as I used to say when I came aboard in 1994, “Do you need to swallow a camel to know what a cutlet tastes like Ö?”

Both Ernst and I agreed that the Auschwitz details were grindingly boring after the main dispute was settled by forensic science. When one discovers after prodigious detective work that one single murder alleged to have happened did not, in fact, happen as claimed - what do you do? You try to nail down the liar and call his story bluff.

And you expect the relatives to be delighted - not turn on you and call you names. Right? Wrong. Not if you are collecting insurance on a so-called crime that never was.

We found ourselves in a strange bind. It is a platitude to say you cannot “prove” a negative. No murders by gassing had happened. We knew that much. That those who had a stake in claiming what they did would argue otherwise is understandable because a great deal was at stake. Who wants to be defrocked and shown up as a liar and a fraud?

Ernst’s hard-fought-for scientific victory slipped through his fingers like drops of mercury. I don’t think many realized why.

We all agreed that a gigantic fraud had been committed, but then - why preen oneself on one’s political “neutrality”? Why share our dearly bought platform with fraudsters, inviting our deadly enemies to speak at our conventions to make sure every obscure argument could still be aired for them? Why always cover both sides of the issues? There were no two issues.  There were no two sides. Science had spoken. That should have been enough.

A book needs to be written, a song be composed, a film needs to happen to explain why gentiles start squirming like spinsters the moment some oaf starts to call us some names.

That’s our Achilles Heel. We cannot bear to have our spirit impugned - we’d rather smooch with our deadly foes and fawn over their falsehoods and deceptions. Let not our neighbor think we might be “antisemites”, ohmygod!

That’s why there was never a draw. In fact, the war heated up.

Ernst and I chafed under the appalling situation inside Germany. Sack cloth and ashes for our blood relations - a Nobel Prize for Elie Wiesel who, to this day, insists he has a tattoo on his forearm that nobody has ever inspected. “I don’t like to expose my body,” he says.

As we began to realize, the Leuchter findings were not the end result. The were merely a means to an end - meaning: Lifting the guilt from our pathologically guilt-ridden brothers and sisters who had NOT gassed six million Jews, who had not even dreamed of such a grotesque idea - but who meekly agreed that they had.

THAT was the task at hand - regardless of how often and how pathetically that trickster, Elie Wiesel, moaned about smoke coming out of postwar-reconstructed chimneys, as admitted by Auschwitz curator Dr. Franciszek Piper to one of Ernst’s young Jewish friends who put on his yarmulke and got Piper to admit it on tape. That chimney had been “reconstructed.” As David Irving put it: “I’d like to hav e some ëreconstructed’ moneyÖ”

I speak of disenchantment. I do not mean to minimize our Revisionist comrades’ research. They had done a magnificent job, putting nail after nail in the Holocaust coffin. That tiny handful of revisionists all over the world had demolished a gargantuan swindle - yet all that exacting labor for naught? If yet another Chosenite appeared and shrieked at them that they were Nazis, Racists, White Supremacists, the absolute scum of the earth - why, they would fall all over themselves to find additional data, more charts, more detailed footnotes, yet more and more obscure quotations -the better if it came straight from the horse’s mouth!

“All our mannerly pals need”, was my refrain to Ernst, impatient with the direction of Holocaust Revisionism, “is ear locks.”

Look, once upon a time I wrote a dissertation. I know where footnotes come from. I am with David Irving on that issue also - what is the point of quoting each other, or worse, quote yet another professional “survivor” who grins right in your face while lying through his teeth? How often do you have to dig up yet another archeological site and come up with yet another formless shard? What is the point of all that effort, all that sweat, all that money in bringing to the fore the evidence of criminal behavior - and keep on toadying up to the criminal?

Both Ernst and I felt that a course correction was called for.

I was still living in San Diego. Ernst ran his outreach operation from Toronto. That once pristine realm called Canada, asleep at the switch for too many years, by then was mired in a political cesspool, thanks to a bunch of Marxists of the reddest dye who palmed themselves off as Human Rights crusaders. They even had the gall, to my chagrin, to finger and attack my nascent website, baptized “The Zundelsite”.

One thing led to another. We knew we did not need to be at the receiving end of endless unjust slander. There was no point in arguing what had already been argued to exhaustion. All the crucial information on the Hoax was neatly parked in cyber space, and folks with eyes to see and ears to hear could find out what we said - and didn’t say - about Auschwitz.

What I am telling you is that both Ernst and I essentially withdrew from the original “denial” battlefield. We were looking for a different venue where we could be pro-active. We wanted to find Spartans of the Spirit who would roll up their sleeves and map out where we needed to go.

After Y2K came and went and the world did not come to an end, our world together began.

We hat no idea we were being stalked. My spouse is a romantic fellow, of a caressing warmth. He had made me a bench high up on our hill for my birthday, with a heart in the middle and a breathtaking view of the National Park called the Smokies. Up there, it was peaceful and heavenly quiet. No ARAs to plague us. No fire bugs to burn up Zundel’s house. We both are introspective souls, and we enjoyed our silences as much as we enjoyed our vigorous discussions. We wanted to regroup.

Yet every once in a while, Ernst would say quietly: “Every day is precious. Every day.” And one day, he added: “I know it will not last.”

I said that that was defeatist talk. He just took my hand, looking stubborn.

Onother day we drove to Maryville, a nearby town. There was a stoplight next to a prison. As we were waiting for the light to change, Ernst said while staring straight ahead: “That’s where I’ll end up. You’ll see.”

I hated that. I said: “Whatever do you mean? You haven’t done anything wrong. You are here legally. You are my husband. I am a US citizen. We have applied for a green card and have been tentatively approved. We are in the telephone book. It’s not as if you are some scruffy wetback from Mexico. They can just haul you into some dungeon, with nobody any the wiser!”

Once we came back from our morning walk, and there stood a girl by our driveway. With a camera. She turned her back to us as we passed by. There was no reason for her to be there, and to this day I scold myself that we did not confront her and ask what she thought she was doing.

We very seldom watched TV, so we missed the 9/11 morning drama until our meter man told us. Later, we were sitting in the kitchen, stuffing letters for our supporters. An iron fist got hold of my heart, and I could feel my face getting hot. After what seemed an eternity, Ernst said in a voice that was not his voice:

“That was a coup. Henceforth, this will no longer be a kinder, gentler nation.”

Ernst is a horse-and-buggy man. He has never, to this day, sent an email. He wouldn’t know what to do with a website. I used to run off articles for him that he would read at breakfast.

On the other hand, and this needs to be said and understood, Ernst has an infallible radar for things that are not of this world - that are, to use a fancy term, preternatural. I have often heard him say: “Why do I know these things? Where does this knowledge come from?”

About two weeks after the attack, Ernst started brooding on “the dust.” He used to ask three, four times a day: “Why so much dust? Somebody ought to analyze that dustÖ”

He talked about the dust, again and again, weeks and then months after the Twin Towers shattered.

He knew instinctively that there was something wrong with the official story - this long before there was a 9/11 Commission, before there were suspicious citizens groups, years before there was aggressive alternative media.

I printed out an article. It was written by “Anonymous” who blamed the Chosenites. Recall that, in the early days, all talk was of the Arabs. Today we know who wrote that lengthy, meticulously researched essay - a fellow by the name of Albert D. Pastore, Ph.D. But then, we didn’t know - and neither did the New World Order guys who somehow got wind of what Zundel had read.

Not written, mind you! Merely read! Not even officially published. Ernst merely ran off some 50 or so copies amid the clutter in our garage on our second-hand copier, gave it a blue cover, and sent it to some friends.

Ernst kept obsessing on “the dust.” It was at hand to think of Fred Leuchter, whom Ernst had sent to Auschwitz as a forensic sleuth, and who might be enticed, Ernst told me casually, to go and see if there was something he might find that would explain “the dust”.

Maybe our phone was bugged. Maybe Ernst sent that booklet to Fred - and maybe it was intercepted. He doesn’t remember he did, and I don’t recall details either.

Somebody must have clear freaked out. Remember the collapse of the official Holotale right in the court room in Toronto in 1988? Was Zundel unto something again? He had that reputation.

Several years later, after Ernst had already been taken into custody, a friend of ours who is a European diplomat with contacts within the UN, called me one merry morning and told me: “It was the blue booklet that did it!”

“They kept watching him,” explained our friend. “After you guys moved to the hills of Tennessee, they watched him. They were biding their time. When Ernst published that blue booklet, that was the last straw! That’s when it was decided to take him out for good.”

“Who decided?”

“Somebody at the State Department. At the highest level.”

“Who? At what ëhighest level’”?

“At the VERY highest level,” our friend told me, and that is all he ever said to me, though I pushed him and pushed him for details.

“Colin Powell? Dick Cheney? Maybe even Bush? Who?”

He wouldn’t say. He hasn’t told me to this day. He only added: “I have already said too much.”

You be the judge as to how it was done. Here are a few of the documents I have since secured and squirreled away. You judge for yourself what went on.

So now you know that the Powers-that-be were freaked out very early - by what Ernst Zundel’s radar had picked up brooding on “the dust” in the spring-scented hills of Tennessee.

All this to prevent the distribution of a little saddle-stitched booklet that pointed a finger at the Usual Suspects? I do believe that our enemies freaked out. They acted on their fear - and thus transported Zundel back into the Vaterland where he is now the best-known dissident, much like that famous Russin nonconformist, Solzhenitsyn.

I believe there is a lesson there for the 9/11 warriors. They might want to borrow a page from the Revisionist crowd and the opportunities lost chasing footnotes and splitting hairs five ways. The crucial question was not EVER for Revisionists - nor is it now for 9/11 Truthers - HOW it was done. There is Building 7. What more does one need? The crucial question is: WHO did it - and WHY. Ernst lost his freedom. In seven years of prison, he almost lost his life. I might lose mine. You might lose yours. Why lose America because somebody calls you a name?

Since 9/11, it’s been ten years. Much work has been done, and much time has been lost. Wherever you look, good people play ostrich from fear. So what if someone calls you a “conspiracist” - and worse?! Consider the source. Consider how much is at stake. Is it not prudent to put all those scholarly egos aside - and ferret out the culprits?

Remember: Sometimes freedom is expensive.


Video clips featured in this article are from a remastered DVD titled “Off Your Knees, Germany!” Available at cost - $ 5.- plus courtesy postage. Write for an order blank. ingridrimland@hughes.net

Crystal Night 1938 - Third Reich's 9/11?

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on July 28, 2011

Now that the “False Flag” topic is at the forefront of political discussions, it is timely to call attention to a well-known incident that happened inside Germany, best known to history as “Kristallnacht”. Orthodox history has it that under Hitlerís orders, goose-stepping Germans went on a gratuitous rampage - burning synagogues, smashing shop windows, killing Jews ñ behaving like hysterical brutes.

Today it is widely taken for granted that this attack on the Jews in Germany was a government-sanctioned blast-off of unrestrained antisemitism that led eventually to Auschwitz. A well-researched school of thought will tell you differently.

I heard it first some fifteen years ago ñ that, like so many other covert operations since exposed, “Kristallnacht” was a brilliantly timed attempt to mortally wound the image of the Third Reich as a legitimate alternative to the corruption rampant under the Weimar Republic.

Hitler was furious when he found out. He put a stop to it immediately. He said that action was “un-German”, adding that his Germany would never recover from the adverse publicity resulting world-wide. He was right. The image of “Kristallnacht” is a major stumbling block to an impartial assessment of what the Hitler era was really all about.

This alternative analysis is best presented by a German author, Ingrid Weckert. Her revisionist treatise is freely available on Amazon as “Feuerzeichen” (1981) in German and “Flashpoint” (1991). The article below, written by Weckert, is posted at the website of the Institute for Historical Review. It is a bit long, but well-worth a read:

Crystal Night 1938: The great Anti-German spectacle

“Crystal Night” is the name thatís been given to the night of 9-10 November 1938. In almost all large German cities and some smaller ones that night, store windows of Jewish shops were broken, Jewish houses and apartments were destroyed, and synagogues were demolished and set on fire. Many Jews were arrested, some were beaten, and some were even killed. The “Reich Crystal Night” (Reichskristallnacht) was one of the most shameful events of National Socialist Germany. Although the Jews suffered initially, the greatest harm was ultimately done to Germany and the German people.

Even people who are sympathetic to National Socialism cannot understand how this event could have happened. Julius Streicher, the so-called “number one Jew baiter” [note 1] for example, was shocked when he first learned about the demonstrations and destruction the next morning.

The all-important question is: Who was responsible for the incident? It is generally accepted, especially by contemporary historians, that the Nazi gang organized and carried out the pogrom, and that the chief instigator was Propaganda Minister Dr. Joseph Goebbels. The truth of the matter is that Adolf Hitler was so disgusted by the incident that he forbade anyone from discussing the matter in his presence. Dr. Goebbels complained that he would now have to explain this terrible affair to the German people and the world, and that he simply did not know what kind of credible explanation to give. If he had actually been responsible for the Crystal Night, he surely would have had a well-prepared explanation. The explanation he gave on the morning of the 10th was extremely unconvincing and was generally not believed by the German public. During my study of this subject, which resulted in my book on the Crystal Night, Feuerzeichen, I found many facts which do not agree with the generally accepted thesis. On the contrary, the evidence which I have found gives a completely different picture.

The Story We Are Given

The generally accepted sequence of events, according to most writers on the subject, is this:

In early October 1938 the Polish government announced that all Polish passports would become invalid at the end of the month unless they received a special stamp before then, obtainable only in Poland. This measure was meant to rid Poland effectively for all time of all Polish Jews living in foreign countries, most of whom were in Germany. Many of the approximately 70,000 Polish Jews living in the Reich at the time had arrived after the First World War. Of course, the German government now feared that it would have to permanently accept these 70,000 Jews. The German government tried to negotiate this issue with the Poles, but they flatly refused.

On 28 October, just two days before the deadline, German police rounded up between 15,000 and 17,000 Polish Jews, mostly adult males, from across the Reich and transported them to the German-Polish border. The deportees traveled in regular German passenger trains with more than adequate space. Contrary to some claims, they were not crammed into cattle cars. The deportees were well provided with food and medical care. Red Cross personnel and medical doctors accompanied them on the trains.[note 2]

The Polish border officials were surprised when the first trainloads arrived at the border, and they let the Jews enter Poland. At about the same time, the Polish government was deporting German Jews back to Germany. The next day, 29 October, the Polish and German governments suddenly agreed to stop the deportations of their respective Jewish populations to each otherís countries. The deportations were completely halted that night.

Among the Polish Jews deported was the family of Herschel Feibel Grynszpan (Gruenspan), a l7-year-old then living Paris. What followed next is generally reported either incorrectly or very one-sidedly. On 7 November Grynszpan went to the German Embassy in Paris and shot Embassy Secretary Ernst vom Rath. It is said that Grynszpan did this because he was furious over the deportation of his family. The truth about his motivation is very different. It is also claimed that the German population, upset by the news of vom Rathís death on the 8th, organized anti-Jewish demonstrations, destroyed Jewish stores, and demolished or set on fire all the synagogues in Germany. Demonstrations and destruction did take place, but the truth is that they were not organized by the German people and did not affect most of the synagogues in the Reich. Finally, it is claimed that the Crystal Night was the beginning of the extermination of the Jews in Germany. This is entirely false.

German-Jewish Relations Prior to the Crystal Night

Before explaining how the events surrounding the Crystal Night differ from what is generally believed, I must first give some background information about the peaceful years in Germany after Hitler came to power in 1933. Anyone who is aware of the true situation in Germany during the Third Reich era recognizes that the Crystal Night episode was quite extraordinary. It was a radical aberation from the normal pattern of daily life. The outburst was not in keeping with either the official National Socialist Jewish policy nor with the general German attitude towards the Jews. The Germans were no more anti-Semitic than any other people. In fact, Jews who had to leave other European countries preferred Germany as a place to live and work.

Within the National Socialist-Party itself there were two distinct anti-Semitic factions. One was scholarly and one was vulgar. The scholarly faction was centered around the Institute for the Study of the Jewish Question. It published several journals and gave lectures to civic and political groups. Its activities were consistent with the policy of peacefully removing the Jews from Germany and resettling them elsewhere. The SS was totally committed to this policy and rejected vulgar anti-Semitism. The vulgar anti-Semitic faction tried to influence popular feeling. The chief exponent of this approach was Julius Streicher, who published the unofficial monthly Der Stuermer. It used crude caricatures to portray Jews in the most horrible way in an effort to convince readers that the Jews were as evil as Satan. For years the motto “The Jews Are Our Misfortune” appeared on the front page of every issue. Der Stuermer often employed improper and undignified means to make its point.

German National Socialism basically regarded the Jews as non-German aliens who had proven themselves destructive to any nation that permitted them to dominate. Therefore, the only way to prevent further problems was to separate the Jews from the Germans. In other words, they had to emigrate. On this point the National Socialists and the Zionists were in full agreement. Although the Jews made up less than one percent of the total German population in 1933, they had power and influence in finance, business, cultural affairs and scientific life far out of proportion to their small numbers. Jewish influence was very widely regarded as harmful to German recovery after the First World War. No legal measures were taken against the Jews in Germany until after the international Jewish “Declaration of War” against Germany, as announced, for example, on the front page of the London Daily Express of 24 March 1933. This “declaration” took the form of a worldwide boycott of German goods.

A week later there was an officially sanctioned boycott of Jewish shops and stores throughout Germany. This action was in direct response to the international Jewish boycott of German goods already in effect. However, the German response was a rather absurd affair and it was therefore limited to a single day, the first of April 1933. Hitler and Goebbels privately recognized that the German counter-boycott was a failure and would only turn people against the new government. Furthermore, this one-day action came on a Saturday, the Jewish sabbath. Religious Jews took malicious pleasure at the discomfort of the Jews who normally kept their stores open on Saturdays and were now, in effect, forced by the government to obey the Jewish law against work on the sabbath. The National Socialist regime thereafter sought to diminish Jewish influence and power by strictly legal means. The first German law which could be considered anti-Jewish was dated 7 April 1933. Although the legal status of the Jews was restricted, each and every Jew knew what his legal rights were and to what he was still entitled. There were no secret or extra-legal measures against the Jews.

Ironically, it was precisely the official discrimination policy against the Jews which reduced the effectiveness of anti-Semitic propaganda to almost nothing. The Germans are a generally fair-minded people. When Germans saw their Jewish neighbors being treated unjustly, they considered that far worse than the dangers which the Jews supposedly represented simply because they were Jewish. Furthermore, the examples of Jewish criminality and perversion described in Der St¸rmer were widely regarded as exceptions to normal Jewish behavior. The average German was convinced that the Jews whom he knew personally were completely unlike the criminal types sometimes described in newspapers. In my home town of Berlin most of the doctors and lawyers were still Jewish. And even the public health officer for children in the district of Berlin where my family lived was a Jew who kept this job throughout the war. I still remember one day when my mother returned from her Jewish doctor. She told us that she hadnít been able to see him because he was no longer there. He had been taken away-hauled off the previous night. My mother was very upset. A crowd of people had gathered outside his house. They were all shocked, and they discussed the injustice of this measure quite openly. My parents later talked about what had happened, and they both agreed that the doctor had never really done anything wrong. Their reaction was typical. A few days later our family pediatrician, who was also Jewish, was likewise taken away.

At the time I did not know what it meant to be taken away. It was only many years after the war, when I started reading the Holocaust literature, that I learned that I was supposed to believe that to be taken away meant deportation to a concentration camp and probable death. But like so many thousands of others, these two doctor families were not exterminated. One summer day in 1973, as I was walking through the streets of the German quarter in Tel Aviv, I came upon the name plates of both doctors on the doors of two houses. I immediately tried to visit them and found out that both families had migrated to Palestine in 1939. Although one of them had died in the meantime in Israel, I was able to speak to the other. He remembered my father very well and explained that when he and his family were arrested, they were taken to a camp and given the choice of either signing a document declaring their intention of emigrating from Germany or being taken to a labor camp. He and his family chose to emigrate. In fact, most German Jews survived the anti-Semitic measures quite well. That does not mean that those measures were not unfair to individual Jews, but they could usually manage to live with them.

The Haavara Agreement

As already mentioned, the main goal of Germanyís Jewish policy was to encourage the Jews to emigrate. After the beginning of the international Jewish boycott against German goods in March 1933, the Jewish community in Palestine contacted the German government and offered a break in the boycott as far as Palestine was concerned provided it was combined with Jewish emigration from Germany. As a result, the “Haavara” or “Transfer” agreement was signed by the Germans and Jews in May 1933. [note 3] The Jewish community thus concluded an extremely beneficial agreement with the National Socialist government only a few months after its formation. This agreement was a crucial phase in the creation of the State of Israel. When I made this claim in my book Feuerzeichen, which appeared in 1981, some readers considered it outrageous. [note 4] But then this same claim was made in The Transfer Agreement, a book by Edwin Black published in 1984. The final paragraph of his book concludes with the statement that the continuing economic relationship between the Jewish community of Palestine and National Socialist Germany was “an indispendable factor in the creation of the State ofí Israel.” [note 5]

The Haavara agreement made it possible for any Jew to emigrate from Germany with practically all of his possessions and personal fortune provided that Jews could deposit all of their assets in one of two Jewish-owned banks in Germany which had branch offices in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. Upon arrival in Palestine they could withdraw their assets according to the terms of the agreement. The German capital of these two Jewish banking firms was guaranteed by the German government. Even after the war these assets were fully available to the Jewish owners or their representatives If a Jew did not wish to emigrate immediately he could transfer all of his personal assets to Palestine where they would be safeguarded by a trustee while he remained in Germany for an indefinite period with emigration as his eventual goal. In the meantime his personal fortune was safe outside of Germany.

Even poorer Jews who did not possess 1,000 English pounds were able to emigrate to Palestine with credits provided through the Haavara. The British authorities generally required minimum assets of 1,000 pounds for each immigrant to Palestine if he was not entitled to a so-called workerís certificate. Only a limited number of these certificates were available and they were issued only to persons with special job skills. In addition, Jews emigrating to Palestine were exempt from the so-called “Reich flight tax,” which all emigrating Germans normally had to pay. However, the Jewish companies which arranged the transfers charged the emigrants a fixed percentage of their total assets. The Haavara agreement remained in operation until the end of 1941 when the United States entered the war.

National Socialist Ethical Standards

I am always amazed whenever I read books about the Third Reich published after the war. Most give an almost totally false impression of the reality of the Third Reich. The Germany of Adolf Hitler was not the Germany described by such books. It was quite different. I was brought up during the Third Reich. Along with my entire generation, I received an education of the highest ethical standards. We were brought up to love and respect our country and people. We were taught to be proud of its great history. The heroes of Germanyís past represented our great ideals. They spurred us to honesty and responsibility in our own lives. In my opinion, the youth of Adolf Hitlerís Germany was the finest of all Europe and perhaps of the entire world.

The same ethical standards applied to the SS and SA. The SA stormtroopers were not sophisticated men. They usually preferred to use their fists before using their heads, but they acted according to the ideals which they had been taught: honor, faithfulness, honesty and devotion to their people and country. They were not at all the sadistic beasts portrayed by so-called historians. It was their faithfulness and gallantry which saved Germany from chaos and Communism. It is sheer stupidity to describe the SA men as blood-thirsty killers, as is widely done today. Although some individual SA men may have committed acts of brutality, it is nonsense to blame the entire organization or the whole German people and its government for such behavior. Individual SA men were indeed involved in the Crystal Night incident. But far fewer actually participated than has been claimed. Of the 28 SA Groups which existed in Germany at the time, the available evidence identifies only three as having actually received orders to join the anti-Jewish demonstrations.

What Really Happened During the Crystal Night

Now let us look at what really happened during that fateful night.

After 1945 any harm ever done to any Jew in National Socialist Germany has been described in great detail in many publications and combined with other.stories to give exaggerated figures which have then become the so-called “historical truth.” How strange it is then that despite the passage of more than forty years, no one has established the true extent of the damage done to the Jews during the Crystal Night. All one can learn from history writers is that “all” synagogues were demolished and that “all” shop windows were destroyed. Aside from this vague description, one is given almost no details.

On the basis of the so-called “historical truth” about the Crystal Night, the President of the World Jewish Congress, Nahum Goldmann, had the chutzpah in 1952 to claim 500 million dollars from German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer as reparation payment for the damage done during that November night. When Adenauer asked Goldmann for his justification for this enormous request, Goldmann replied: “You find the justification yourself! What I want is not the justification but the money.” [note 7] And he got his money! Goldmann may have interpreted the willingness of the German Chancellor to pay a half billion dollars as proof for the claim that all synagogues had been destroyed. Why else would Germany be so foolish as to pay for something which never happened? All the same, the “historical truth” that “all” German synagogues were destroyed is a lie.

In 1938 there were approximately 1,400 synagogues in Germany, of which only about 180 were destroyed or damaged. Furthermore, Jews owned approximately 100,000 shops and department stores in Germany in 1938. Of this number, only about 7,500 had their windows broken. These figures show just how much the so-called “historical truth” differs from what actually happened. The damage and destruction that did actually occur was, of course, a terrible shame, but the exaggerations, especially by German historians who use them to condemn their own people, are also a shame.

History writers tell us that during the Crystal Night all the Jews were frightened, meekly accepted whatever happened to them and watched the destruction of their property with no resistance. The contrary is true. While going through the files on this subject, I found many documents which report precisely just the opposite of what is claimed. The fact is that in many cases Jews and their German neighbors fought together against the attackers, pushing them down staircases. Street mobs were beaten up and chased away in more than one case. Police and Party officials were generally on the side of the Jews. Some Jewish community leaders went to police stations the next morning and asked the police to investigate the damage done to their synagogues. The resulting police reports are still available in the files today.

Also contrary to what we have been told, most Jews were not directly affected by these events. In Berlin, for example, all of the teachers and pupils of the cityís largest Jewish school, which served the entire Berlin area, appeared in their classes the next morning without having noticed anything unusual during the previous night. Heinemann Stern, the Jewish principal of that school, wrote in his postwar memoirs that he noticed a burning synagogue on his way to the school on the morning after the Crystal Night, but he thought it was just an accidental fire. It was only after he arrived at the school that he received a telephone call informing him of the destruction of the previous night. He then went on with his classes of the day and only during the first recess did he take the trouble to inform the entire student body about what had happened. [note 8]

How can such evidence be reconciled with the claim by Herman Graml, a prominent German historian and associate of the Munich Institute of Contemporary History, who wrote: “Every single Jew was beaten, chased, robbed, insulted and humiliated. The SA tore the Jews from their beds, mercilessly beat them in their apartments and then Ö chased them almost to death Ö Blood flowed everywhere.” [note 9] Is it conceivable that thousands of Jewish children would be have been sent to school by their parents on the morning after that fateful night if the attacks against Jews had been so horrific or extensive? Would any parents have let their children go to school if they had thought there was even the slightest danger of them being attacked by roving gangs of SA men? I think the answer is clearly no! Deplorable things did indeed happen which were bad enough, but the fantasies of modern historians and history writers such as Graml are simply inexcusable.

The Grynszpan Story

It was Herschel Feibel Grynszpan (Gruenspan) who initiated the entire Crystal Night affair by shooting the Secretary of the German Embassy in Paris, Ernst vom Rath. History writers tell us that the 17-year-old Grynszpan was merely a poor Jewish boy who had been driven to despair by the injustice done to his family and who, in his deep depression, shot the young German diplomat. The fact, however, is that Grynszpan had not shown any previous interest in his familyís fate. He had wanted to be free of them and had gone to Paris to live on his own.

When the French police asked Grynszpan why he had shot vom Rath, he gave several contradictory explanations:

Version 1: He did not mean to kill vom Rath. He had wanted to kill the German ambassador but because he did not know the ambassador personally, he shot vom Rath instead by mistake.

Version 2: He had only wanted to kill himself, but wanted to do so directly beneath a portrait of Adolf Hitler. In this way he hoped to become a symbol for the Jewish people, who were being murdered daily in Germany.

Version 3: He had not intended to kill anyone. Although he had a pistol in his hand, he did not know how to handle it properly and it simply went off accidentally.

Version 4: He could not remember what had happened while he stood in vom Rathís office. All he remembered was that he was there, but did not remember why.

Version 5: He couldnít understand the question at all. He must have had a complete blackout because he no longer remembered anything.

And finally, version 6, which he gave several years later to German officials: Whatever the French police had written down about his reason was nonsense. The true story is that he used to procure young boys for the German embassy secretary because vom Rath had been a homosexual. And he shot vom Rath because he had not been paid for his services. This is the only explanation which he later retracted during interrogation. However, none of these explanations is correct.

The true story is far less heroic. Grynszpan had left his family in Hannover, Germany, in 1936 after finishing elementary school but without graduating. His father had been a piece-work tailor who had moved from Poland to Germany after the First World War. Herschel had a reputation for disliking work and he hung out at the homes of his uncles in Brussels and Paris. In February 1938 his Polish passport expired and the French government refused to renew his residence permit. As a direct result, his Paris uncle insisted that Herschel leave his home because he was afraid of getting into touble with the law. And now the story begins to get extremely interesting. Although Grynszpan had no job or money (his uncle refused to support him), he was nevertheless able to move into a hotel. His hotel happened to be just around the corner from the offices of an important and influential Jewish organization, the International League Against Anti-Semitism, or LICA. The questions which now arise are: Who supported him after February 1938 and who paid for his hotel room? Although he had no apparent means of support or even valid identity papers between February and November 1938, Grynszpan was nevertheless able to purchase a handgun for 250 francs on the morning of 7 November 1938 and then, about an hour later, go to the German Embassy and shoot vom Rath.

Grynszpan was arrested at the scene and was taken to a police station. Although he was a totally obscure Polish Jew with no money and no apparent supporters, nevertheless one of Franceís most famous lawyers, Moro Giafferi, appeared at the police station a few hours after the shooting and told the police that he was Grynszpanís attorney. Nothing could possibly have appeared about the shooting in any newspaper before his arrival. How then could Moro Giafferi have possibly known about the shooting? Why was he so eager to defend this young foreigner? And finally, who was going to pay his attorney fees? As it turned out, Giafferi took good care of Grynszpan during the following years. Before the Grynszpan case could come before a French court, the war broke out. After the Germans occupied France, he was turned over to them by the French authorities. He was taken to Germany where he was interrogated many times, but no trial ever took place. Moro Giafferi, who had moved to Switzerland in the meantime, still managed to take good care of Grynszpan.

Many German officials were actively interested in the case. They wanted Grynszpan brought to trial, but this never happened. Rumors circulated. A trial date was scheduled but then postponed again and again and again. Whenever any official asked why Grynszpan had not been brought to trial, he was given a different answer each time. The veil of mystery surrounding this case was lifted only slightly many years after the war when a note was discovered among the many hundreds of pages in the Grynszpan file. This single short note stated simply that the trial against Grynszpan would not take place for “other than official reasons.” [note 10] It gave no further explanation. Although the National Socialist regime supposedly committed the greatest imaginable crimes against the Jews, the murderer Grynszpan survived the war and returned to Paris. Why to Paris, where he could still have been arrested and tried for murder? But instead he received a new name and new identity papers there. [note 11] From whom? Who was in Paris to help him and once again take such good care of him?

Incidentally, the Grynszpan family also survived the war. The young manís father, mother, brother and sister were deported to Poland as a result of the Polish passport affair and shortly thereafter were somehow able to emigrate to Palestine. Amazingly enough, this took place at a time when immigration to Palestine was limited to persons who possessed at least 1,000 English pounds in cash. Grynszpanís father, a poor piece-work tailor, certainly never had a fortune of 4,000 English pounds. Many years after the war the father testified at the Eichmann trial in Jerusalem that he and his family had to give up all of their money except for ten marks per family member when they arrived at the German-Polish border in October l938. [note l2] How did they ever raise the 4,000 English pounds only a short time later for their migration to Palestine? Who organized their move?

Perhaps the answer to all of these questions is Ö Moro Giafferi! He was not a sorcerer, but someone even more powerful: he was the legal counsel of the LICA. The LICA was founded in Paris in 1933 by the Jew Bernard Lecache and operated as a militant propaganda organization against real or imagined anti-Semitism. Its main office is still in Paris at the same address it was at in 1938. (Now known as the LICRA, it unsuccessfully sued Robert Faurisson a few years ago.) Moro Giafferi was well worth the fees LICA paid him as its legal counsel. He apparently enjoyed spectacular scenes. He had already achieved international renown at a mass meeting in Paris following the Berlin Reichstag fire of February 1933. Without knowing at all what had happened, he nevertheless delivered a spiteful speech against National Socialist Germany in which he accused Hermann Gˆring of setting the fire. In February 1936 Giafferi hurried to Davos, Switzerland, where the Jew David Frankfurter had shot and killed Wilhelm Gustloff, the head of the Swiss branch of the German National Socialist Party. During the subsequent trial it was clearly established that Frankfurter had been a hired murderer with backing from an unidentified but influential organization. All clues pointed to the LICA, but with Moro Giafferi as his defense counsel, Frankfurter remained silent about who, if anyone, had hired him. Amazingly enough, Frankfurterís answers to questions about the shooting showed the same pattern as Grynszpanís answers almost three years later after Giafferi arrived to help following the shooting of Ernst vom Rath.

Who Could the Provocateurs Have Been?

Like a medal, the Crystal Night has two sides. One side lies in the shining glare of historical research while the other remains in the shadows. Until now no one (at least as far as I know) has tried to examine the hidden side.

In the wake of the Crystal Night, almost everyone wanted to know who the culprits were. Dr. Goebbels had to give an official explanation which was, in effect, that the German people had been so enraged by the murder of Ernst vom Rath that they wanted to punish the Jews and therefore started the pogrom. But Goebbels did not really believe this story himself. To several persons he expressed his suspicion that a secret organization must have instigated the entire affair. He simply could not believe that anything so well organized could have been a spontaneous popular outburst.

One must understand the broad popularity of the National Socialist regime at that time to realize how incredibly difficult it was to imagine that any secret, well organized opposition movement could have instigated such a pogrom. We now know about some of these so-called resistance organizations. But at that time such well-organized opposition groups seemed preposterous, so overwhelming was the popularity and self-confidence of Hitler and the National Sociatist government. Although the National Socialists were probably more aware of the danger of Jewish power and influence than anyone else, they nevertheless totally underestimated it. In a real sense, they were far too naive. One consequence of this enormous popularity and self-confidence was that the Party leaders themselves simply could not imagine that it was not one of their own colleagues behind the whole affair. Among the Party leaders fingers were being pointed in all directions. Apparently to avoid internal wrangling and the harm that this would do to their public image, an investigation to determine the instigators never took place. Hitler believed that Dr. Goebbels, his closest confidant and the one man he could never abandon, had been the instigator.

The only persons actually punished were individual SA men who had participated directly in the pogrom and been accused in German courts of murder, assault, looting or other criminal acts by Jewish or German witnesses to these crimes. But before any of these cases ever actually came to trail, Hitler issued a special decree ordering the postponement of all such cases until after the accused individuals were first prosecuted by the Supreme Party Court, an internal court concerned with discipline within the National Socialist Party organization. The most severe punishment which the Court could impose was expulsion from the Party. In this way the Party hoped to remove any guilty members from its own ranks before they appeared as defendants in the criminal courts. In February 1939 the Chief Judge of the Supreme Party Court, Walter Buch, reported his findings to Hermann Gˆring. From an examination of the Buch report as well as many documents from some of the thousands of trials of so-called Nazi criminals held after the war, and corroborating testimony by thousands of defendants and witnesses, I have been able to gain a detailed and accurate understanding of what actually happened during those fateful days and nights of November 1938.

Already on 8 November 1938, one day before the Crystal Night, strange persons who had never been seen there before suddenly appeared in several small towns in Hessen near the French-German border. They went to mayors, Kreisleiters (district Party leaders) and other important officials in these towns and asked them what actions were being planned against the Jews. The officials were rather startled by these questions and replied that they didnít know of any such plans. The strangers acted as if they were shocked to hear this. They shouted and complained that something had to be done against the Jews and then, without further explanation, they disappeared. Most of those who were approached by these strangers reported the incidents to the police or discussed them with friends. They usually regarded the strangers as crazy anti-Semites and promptly forgot about the incidents ó until the next evening. Some of these apparently crazy individuals really outdid themselves. In one case two men, dressed as members of the SS, went to an SA Standartenf¸hrer (Colonel) and ordered him to destroy the nearby synagogue. To understand the absurdity of this one must know that the SS and SA were completely separate organizations. A real SS member would never have tried to give orders to an SA unit. This case shows that the strangers were foreigners who did not even understand the distinctions of German authority. The SA Standartenf¸hrer rejected the demands of the self-styled SS men and reported the incident to his superiors.

When the provocateurs realized that their efforts were not working with local officials, they changed their tactics. Instead they tried to incite directly the people in the streets. In another town, for example, two men appeared at the market place and began making speeches to the people there, trying to incite them against the Jews. Eventually some people did indeed storm the synagogue, but by then the two provocateurs had, of course, disappeared.

Similar incidents occured in several towns. Unidentified strangers suddenly appeared, gave speeches, started throwing stones at windows, stormed Jewish buildings, schools, hospitals, and synagogues, and then disappeared. These unusual incidents had already started on the 8th of November, that is, before Ernst vom Rath was dead. His death was only reported late on the evening of the gth. The fact that this strange pattern of incidents had already begun one day earlier proves that the death of vom Rath was not the reason for the Crystal Night outburst. Vom Rath was still alive when the pogrom began.

And this was only the beginning. Well organized and widespread incidents began on the evening of 9 November. Groups of generally five or six young men, armed with bars and clubs, went down the streets smashing store windows. They were not Jew-hating SA men, enraged over the murder of a German diplomat. They operated too methodically to have been motivated by anger. They carried out their work without any apparent emotion. Nonetheless, it was their destruction that encouraged certain other individuals from the lowest social classes to become a mob and contimue the destruction. There is another mysterious aspect to all this. Several district and local Party leaders (Kreisleiters and Ortsgruppenleiters) were awakened from their sleep in the middle of the night by telephone calls. Someone claiming to be from the regional Party headquarters or the regional Party propaganda bureau (Gauleitung or Gaupropagandaleitung) would ask what was happening in the officialís town or city.

If the Party official answered “Nothing, everything is quiet,” the telephone caller would then say in German slang that he had received an order to the effect that the Jews were going to get it tonight and that the respective official should carry out the order. In most cases the Party leader, disturbed from his sleep, did not even understand what had happened. Some simply dismissed the call as a joke and went back to bed. Others called back the office from where the telephone voice had pretended to be calling. If they managed to reach someone in charge, they were often told that nobody knew anything about such a call. But if they reached only a lower official they were often told: “Well, if you got that order, youíd better go ahead and do what you were told.” These telephone calls caused considerable confusion. All this came out months later during the trials conducted by the Supreme Party Court. The Chief Judge concluded that in every case a misunderstanding had arisen in one link or other of the chain of command. But when they were confronted with apparently genuine orders to organize demonstrations against the Jews that night, most of the Party leaders had simply not known what to do.

The pattern of seemingly sporadic anti-Jewish incidents in small towns, followed only later by a carefully planned outburst in many large cities throughout Germany, clearly suggests the work of a centrally organized group of well-trained agents. Even shortly after the Crystal Night, many leading Party officials suspected that the entire affair had been centrally cordinated. Significantly, even Hermann Graml, the only West German historian who has written in detail about the Crystal Night, carefully distinguished between provocateurs and people who were simply carried away by their emotions and spontaneously took part in the riot and destruction. Without providing the slightest shred of real evidence, Graml claims that the provocative agents were directed bv Dr. Goebbels.

Munich on the Ninth of November

While all this was happening across the Reich, a special annual commemoration was being held in Munich. Fifteen years earlier, on 9 November 1923, a movement led by Adolf Hitler, Erich von Ludendorff (a leading First World War General), and two major figures in the Bavarian government tried to depose the legal government and take responsibility themselves as a new national government. The uprising or putsch was put down and 16 rebels were shot down next to the Feldherrnhalle, a famous old monument building in central Munich. Accordingly, the 9th of November had been commemorated every year since 1933 as the memorial day for the martyred heroes of the National Socialist movement. Adolf Hitler and the Party veterans, as well as all of the Gauleiters (regional Party leaders) met every year in Munich for the occasion. Hitler would usually deliver a speech to a select audience of Party veterans at the famous Buergerbraeukeller restaurant on the evening of the 8th. On the morning of the 9th Hitler and his veteran comrades would reenact the 1923 “March to the Feldherrnhalle.” On the evening of the 9th the F¸hrer always held an informal dinner at the Old Town Hall (“Alte Rathaus”) with old comrades as well as all the Gauleiters. At midnight young men who were about to enter the SS and the SA were sworn in at the Feldherrnhalle. All of the Gauleiters and other guests participated in this very solemn ceremony. After it was over they left Munich and returned to their homes throughout the Reich.

It is clear that the 8th of November date was chosen very cleverly. The annual commemoration ceremony of that day insured that almost all of the Gauleiters would be away from their home offices when the anti-Jewish demonstrations began. In other words, the actual decision-making responsibilities that were normally carried out by the Gauleiters were temporarily in the hands of lower-ranking individuals with less experience. Between 8 and 10 November, subordinate officials stood in for the Gauleiters who were either in Munich or en route to or from the annual commemoration there. This temporary transfer of decision-making authority is very important because it contributed to much of the subsequent confusion and thus helped the provocateurs. Another contributing factor was the fact that no one expected any trouble. At that time Germany was one of the most peaceful countries in the world. There was no reason to expect any kind of unrest. It was only during dinner at the Old Town Hall that the first sporadic reports of riot and destruction reached Munich from some of the Gauleiterís home offices. At the same time it was learned that Ernst vnm Rath had died in Paris from his wounds.

What Was Goebbels Doing?

After the dinner was over, the F¸hrer left at about g p.m. and returned to his apartment. Dr. Goebbels then stood up and spoke briefly about the latest news. He informed the audience that vom Rath had died and that, as a result, anti-Jewish demonstrations had spontaneously broken out in two or three places. Goebbels was renowned for his passionate and inspiring speeches. But what he gave that evening was not a speech at all but only a short and very informal announcement. He pointed out that the times were over when Jews could kill Germans without being punished. Legal measures would now be taken. Nevertheless, the death of vom Rath should not be an excuse for private actions against Jews. He suggested that the Gauleiters and the head of the SA, Viktor Lutze, should contact their home offices to make sure that peace and order were being maintained. Itís very important to understand that Dr. Goebbels had no authority to give any orders to the others present.

As fellow Gauleiters they were colleagues of equal rank. Anyway, what he said was apparently considered so reasonable that the others agreed and did what he suggested.

You may have heard the widespread allegation that Goebbels started the Crystal Night pogrom with a fiery speech on that evening of 9 November. This widely accepted story is false. The following facts will clarify this point:

1. As Gauleiter for Berlin, Dr. Goebbels had no authority outside of his Berlin district. Although he was also the Propaganda Minister of the German government, this did not give him any authority over Party officials. Furthermore, he had no authority whatsoever over the SA or the SS.

2. Of all the National Socialist leaders, Dr. Goebbels would have understood better than anyone else the immense damage that an anti-Jewish pogrom would cause for Germany. On the morning of 10 November, when he first learned about the extent of the damage and destruction of the previous night, he was furious and shocked at the stupidity of those who had participated. There is substantial evidence for this.

3. How could a speech given after 9 p.m. on the evening of 9 November have possibly incited a “pogrom” which had already begun the day before when the first provocateurs appeared at municipal and Party offices to persuade officials to take action against the Jews?

4. Although we do not know exactly what Dr. Goebbels said in his supposedly fiery speech, we do know what the Gauleiters and the SA commander did after the speech had ended: they went to the telephones and called their espective home offices to order their subordinates to do everything necessary to maintain peace and order. They emphasized that under no circumstances must anyone take part in any demonstrations. These telephone instructions were written down at the home offices by whoever was on duty. The orders from each Gauleiter were then passed on by telex to other offices within the Gau or district. These telex messages are still in various records files and are available to anyone who wishes to examine them.

Orders to Stop the Pogrom

While the Gauleiters were calling their home offices, the head of the SA, Viktor Lutze, ordered all of his immediate subordinates, the SA Gruppenf¸hrers, who were together with him in Munich, to call their home offices as well. Lutze ordered that under no circumstances could SA men take part in any demonstrations against Jews, and that furthermore the SA was to intervene to stop any demonstrations already in progress. As a result of these strict orders, SA men began to guard Jewish stores that very night wherever windows had been broken. There is no doubt about this order by Lutze because we have the postwar court testimony of several witnesses confirming it. The SS and the police were given similar orders to restore peace and order. Himmler ordered Reinhard Heydrich to prevent all destruction of property and to protect Jews against demonstrators. The telex communication of this order still exists. It is in the files of the International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg. However, during the Nuremberg trial this telex order was presented in three different forms, with forged amendments to change the original meaning. In my book Feuerzeichen I undertook to restore the original text.

Adolf Hitler joined the midnight celebration at the Feldherrnhalle. It was only after he returned to his apartment about one oíclock in the morning that he learned about the demonstrations which had been taking place in Munich, during which one synagogue had been set on fire. He was furious and immediately ordered the police chief of Munich to come see him. Hitler told him to immediately stop the fire and to make sure that no other outrages took place in Munich. He then called various police and Party officials throughout the Reich to learn the extent of these demonstrations. Finally, he ordered a telex message sent to all Gauleiter offices. It read: “By express order from the very highest authority, arson against Jewish businesses or other property must in no case and under no circumstances take place.” Synagogues were not specifically mentioned, apparently because Hitler was still unaware of the burning of synagogues, apart from the one in Munich.

How Did the SA Get Involved Despite the Orders from Its Own Leaders?

How was it possible that in spite of all these emphatic orders, so much damage and destruction could have been done and that so many SA members could have participated? According to the records, at least three of the 28 SA Groups did not obey the orders of SA chief Lutze. Instead, they sent out their men to destroy synagogues and Jewish buildings. In effect they did precisely the opposite of what Lutze had ordered. What actually happened is clear from the testimony and evidence presented at postwar trials against former SA men accused of participating in the riot. The trials, held between 1946 and 1952, were based to a large extent on the report of SA Brigade 50 chief Karl Lucke and begins with these words: “On 10 November 1938, at 3 oíclock in the morning, I received the following order: ëBy order of the Gruppenf¸hrer, all Jewish synagogues within the Brigade district are to be immediately blown up or set on fireí.” Lucke then included in his report a listing of synagogues which had been destroyed by members of his Brigade. This report has been cited by the prosecution at the Nuremberg Tribunal and by practically all of the consensus historians ever since as proof that the SA was given orders to destroy Jewish stores and synagogues.

The contradiction between the orders actually given and the statement made in the Lucke report requires a detailed explanation. On 9 November the leader of SA Group Mannheim, Herbert Fust, was in Munich together with the other SA Group leaders and the SA Chief of Staff, Viktor Lutze. When Lutze ordered the Group leaders to contact their home offices to stop all anti-Jewish demonstrations, Fust, along with the other SA leaders, did just that. He called his office in Mannheim and passed on the orders he had received from Lutze. The man who was on duty that night at the Mannheim SA office telephone and who received Fustís order confirmed that he understood it and then hung up. But he never passed on the order he had received. Instead, he transmitted precisely the opposite order.

The normal procedure would have been for the man on duty at the telephone to immediately call the deputy group leader, Lucke, who was in nearby Darmstadt. But instead he called SA Oberf¸hrer (senior colonel) Fritsch and asked him to come to the office. Fritsch had a reputation for not being particularly clever. When he arrived, the man who had received the telephone call showed him a small paper slip with a few notes on it which said that the synagogues within the Mannheim SA Group district were to be destroyed. The man who had received the call explained to Fritsch that the order had just arrived from Munich. Slow-minded as he was, Fritsch did not know what to do and called the local Kreisleiter (district Party leader) and his deputy.

These two men then arrived at the SA office and discussed the situation, while at the same time the telephone duty man notified other SA leaders, but still not the deputy Group leader Lucke. In the meantime the small paper slip disappeared and the SA men now arriving at the headquarters met only the Kreisleiter, who told them about the order which he thought had come from Munich. No one asked for any further confirmation. The SA men then left to begin the destruction. Hours later, when the whole action was almost finished, the telephone guard finally called Deputy Group Leader Lucke and passed on the false order. He also informed Lucke that the action had already been going on for several hours. Since it was almost all over by this time, Lucke also neglected to ask for confirmation of the order. It was already 3 oíclock in the morning. Lucke then alerted the Standartenf¸hrer of his Brigade and carried out the destruction within the Darmstadt district.

At 8 oíclock the next morning Lucke sat down and wrote the report which was later cited at the Nuremberg Tribunal. In fact, as already shown, there was no order to commit arson or carry out destruction against any Jewish property from the Gruppenf¸hrer in Munich, but only from the telephone guard. Who he was remains a mystery. During the postwar trials against members of this SA unit, none of the judges asked for the name or identity of this telephone guard. This mysterious man was very probably an agent for those who were actually behind the entire Crystal Night Affair.

The Fine Imposed on the Jews

Early in the morning following the Crystal Night, Propaganda Minister Dr. Goebbels announced in a radio broadcast that any action against Jews was strictly prohibited. He warned that severe penalties would be imposed on anyone who did not obey this order. He also explained that the Jewish question would be resolved only by legal means. As already mentioned, German government and Party officials were furious about what had happened. Hermann Gˆring, who was responsible for Germanyís economy, complained that it would be impossible to replace the special plate glass of the broken store windows because it was not manufactured in Germany. It had to be imported from Belgium and would cost a great deal of precious foreign currency. Because of the Jewish boycott against German goods, the Reich was short of foreign exchange currency. Gˆring therefore decided that because this shortage was caused by the Jews, it was they who would have to pay for the broken glass. He imposed a fine of one billion Reichsmarks on the German Jews. This fine is always mentioned by anyone who writes about the Crystal Night. But historians and history writers invariably neglect to explain the reason for the fine.

It was certainly unjust to force Jews to pay for damage which they had not caused. Gˆring understood this. However, in private he justified the fine by citing the fact that the 1933 Jewish declaration of war against Germany was proclaimed in the name of the millions of Jews throughout the world. Therefore they could now help their co-religionists in Germany bear the consequences of the boycott. It should also be pointed out that only German Jews with assets of more than 5,000 Reichsmarks in cash had to con- tribute to the fine. In 1938, when prices were very low, 5,000 Reichsmarks was a small fortune. Anyone with that much money in cash would certainly have had far more wealth in other assets and could therefore well afford to pay their assessed portion of the fine without being reduced to poverty, despite what history writers have maintained.

The Consequences of the Crystal Night

It is often said that the Crystal Night incident was the official start of the German “Final Solution of the Jewish Question.” This is quite true, but “Final Solution” did not mean physical extermination ó it meant only emigration of the Jews from Germany. Immediately after the Crystal Night, Hitler ordered the creation of a central agency to organize the emigration of the Jews from Germany as rapidly as possible. Accordingly, Gˆring set up the Reich Central Office for Jewish Emigration (“Reichszentrale fuer die juedische Auswanderung”) with Reinhard Heydrich as director. This agency combined the various government departments which had been involved with Jewish emigration. It simplified official procedures for Jewish emigration, but its work was severely hampered by the unwillingness of almost all countries to admit Jews. The only country to which Jews could still easily emigrate was Palestine, provided they possessed one thousand pounds sterling each, as required by the British authorities there.

Despite the favorable terms of the Haavara or Transfer Agreement, only a few German Jews were willing to emigrate to Palestine. In those days Palestine was only at the beginning of its development. It was still an agrarian country with very little industry. It was only after the arrival of thousands of German Jews with their capital and experience that industrial development really began there. The Jews in Germany were generally employed in trade, industry, or the professions. There were little or no oppor tunities for them in Palestine. For example, there was virtually no financial structure in Palestine in the 1930s. There was no money market, no stock exchange, and no investment banking. How could businessmen operate in such an environment?

Because so few Jews wanted to migrate to Palestine, special efforts were made to open the doors of other countries, but this proved very difficult. Prosperous nations did not want Jewish immigrants and poor countries were very unattractive. In the summer of 1938 an Inter-Governmental Refugee Committee was established with the American lawyer George Rublee as its director. In January 1939 (that is, after the Crystal Night), Rublee and the German government signed an agreement by which all German Jews could emigrate to the country of their choice. Interestingly enough, it was the father of a future American president and the father of a future German president who nearly torpedoed this agreement: Jos‰ph Kennedy, the U.S. Ambassador to Britain, and Ernst von Weizsaecker, State Secretary of the German Foreign Office and father of the current president of the Ger- man Federal Republic. Adolf Hitler personally intervened in the negotiating process and saved the agreement by sending Reichsbank President Hjalmar Schacht to London to negotiate with Rublee.

Rublee himself later called it a “sensational agreement” ó and it was indeed sensational. Special arrangements between the Inter-Governmental Committee and governments of individual countries would guarantee the financial security of the migrating Jews. Training camps would be established to prepare emigrating Jews for new jobs in their future homelands. Jews in Germany who were more than 45 years old could either emigrate or remain in Germany. If they decided to remain, they would be exempt from discriminatory restrictions. They would be able to live and work wherever they wanted. Their social security would be guaranteed by the Reich government, the same as for any German citizen. As Rublee later noted, there were practically no incidents against Jews during the time between the signing of the agreement and the outbreak of war in September 1939.

The Reich Central Office for Jewish Emigration, which was organized shortly after the Crystal Night, was based on the provisions of the Rublee plan. A parallel Jewish organization, the Reich Union of Jews in Germany (“Reichsvereinigung der Juden in Deutschland”), was established. Its task was to advise Jews on all questions of emigration and to act on behalf of Jews with the Reich Central Office. The two agencies worked closely together to facilitate Jewish emigration as much as possible. In addition, the SS and certain other National Socialist organizations worked with Zionist organizations to facilitate Jewish emigration. Jewish groups greatly appreciated the cooperation of the SS. For example, the SS established training centers where prospective Jewish emigrants learned new job skills to prepare them for their new lives.

With the help of the Transfer Agreement and the Rublee plan, hundreds of thousands of Jews migrated from Europe to Palestine. In September 1940 the Jewish news agency in Palestine, “Palcor,” reported that 500,000 Jewish emigrants had already arrived from the German Reich, including Austria, the Sudetenland, Bohemia- Moravia, and German-ruled Poland. Nevertheless, after 1950 it was claimed that the total number of Jewish emigrants to Palestine from all European countries was only about 80,000. What happened to the other 420,000 Jews? In 1940 they probably had no idea that later on they were supposed to have been “gassed”!


I have tried to point out just a few unmentioned aspects of the Crystal Night issue which, in my opinion, give a picture of what actually happened that is entirely different than the one generally accepted. I am convinced that neither the German government nor the leaders of the National Socialist Party instigated the Crystal Night. Ultimately it was not the Jews but the Germans who suffered most as a result of this event. Even persons sympathetic to National Socialism are still appalled when they think of the Crystal Night. Many are under the impression that murder and arson were quite common under National Socialism and that no Jew could be sure of his life or property. Nazi Germany was supposedly a country without any civil rights. The Crystal Night incident was indeed one of the darkest episodes of German history in the era of 1933 to 1945. But based on all of the available evidence, these demonstrations were neither thought up nor organized by German Party or government officials. In fact, they were completely suprised and shocked when they learned of the riot and destruction. The pogrom must have been thought up and organized by those who actually benefited from it and who wanted to create havoc in Germany.

Who could they have been? If we keep in mind the deep involve ment of the Jewish organization LICA in the murder of vom Rath, we may ask: Could the Jews themselves have hoped to benefit from a pogrom? In the aftermath of the Crystal Night, the world press became overwhelmingly sympathetic to the Jews, which is precisely what they wanted above all else. The Zionists in particular counted on worldwide support in their struggle against England, which then ruled Palestine as a British mandate. Jewish immigration to Palestine was strictly limited at that time by the British because of vehement Arab opposition to the arrival of ever larger numbers of Jews. As a result, the number of Jewish immigrants dropped in 1938 to the lowest level since the beginning of the century, when the Zionist mass migration to Palestine began.

To stabilize the situation, the British formulated a partition plan dividing Palestine into Arab and Jewish portions. Despite serious reservations, the Jews agreed to the plan, but the Arabs did not. They responded with an uprising known as the Arab Revolt. In March 1938 the British government sent Sir Harold MacMichaels as High Commissioner to Palestine. He succeeded in suppressing the uprising, but to appease the Arabs he promised to urge his government to abandon the partition plan and halt further Jewish immigration. MacMichaels returned to London in October 1938 to discuss his proposals with the British parliament. The scheduled date for the final decision was 8 November 1938, the day on which the Crystal Night violence actually began.

German Embassy Secretary Ernst vom Rath had been shot just one day earlier, on 7 November. The conspirators no doubt hoped that vom Rath would die immediately, in which case the anti-Jewish demonstrations would probably have also started on the 7th. Could someone have hoped that a pogrom in nearby Germany would influence the British to change their Palestine policy? Or that it would induce the outside world to exert pressure on Britain to open Palestine to the Jews who were being so terribly treated in Germany? I cannot give any definite answers. I can only speculate as to who conspirators behind the Crystal Night really were and as to their motives. To me it seems entirely plausible that certain Jewish groups were involved. The LICA was almost certainly involved in the murder of vom Rath. In any case, the Crystal Night incident was not an expression of the will of the German people. Nor was it organized by Dr. Goebbels or any of the other German leaders. On the contrary, it was carefully organized by people who worked in the shadows.


1.William P. Varga, The Number One Nazi Jew-Baiter: A Political Biography of Julius Streicher (New York: 1981).

2. Even Helmut Heiber, a prominent contemporary German historian, had to admit these facts. Helmut Heiber, “Der Fall Gruenspan,” ViertelFahrshefte f¸r Zeitgeschichte, 5. Hg., 1957, pp. 154-172.

3. See: Werner Feilchenfeld, Dolf Michaelis, and Ludwig Pinner, Haavara-Transfer nach Palaestina (Tuebingen: 1972); and, Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement (New York and London: 1984)

4. Ingrid Weckert, Feuerzeichen: Die “Reichslcristallnacht,” Anstifter und Brandstifterpfer und Nutzniesser (Tuebingen: 1981), p. 225.

5. Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement, p. 382.

6. W. Feilchenfeld, et al., Haavara-Transfer Nach Palaestina, p. 71.

7. Nahum Goldmann, Das Juedische Paradox: Zionismus und Judentum nach Hitler (Cologne: 1978), p. 181.

8. Heinemann Stern, Warum Hassen Sie Uns Eigentlich? (Duesseldorf: 1970), pp. 298-299.

9. Hermann Graml, Der 9. November 1938 (Bonn: 1958), p. 47.

10. H. Heiber, “Der Fall Gruenspan,” p. 164.

11. H. Heiber, “Der Fall Gruenspan,” p. 172.

12. Gideon Hausner, Justice in Jerusalem (New York: 1968), p. 41.

From The Journal of Historical Review, Summer 1985 (Vol. 6, No. 2), pages 183-206. This item was first presented at the Sixth IHR conference, February 1985, in Anaheim, California.

Author Ingrid Weckert

About the Author:Ingrid Weckert is the author of a detailed examination of “Crystal Night” and German-Jewish relations during the 1930s that was published as a book in Germany in 1981 under the title Feuerzeichen, and in the USA in 1991 under the title Flashpoint At the end of the Second World War Weckert was a teenager in devastated Berlin. After Gymnasium graduation she studied theology, including Judaic studies, in Switzerland. She deepened her understanding of the history and character of the Jewish people during numerous visits to Israel. Frau Weckert lived for years in Munich, where she worked as a librarian, and then devoted considerable time to historical research and writing.

Rudolf Hess: The Fuhrer’s Deputy

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on August 13, 2011
What secret did he take to the grave?

Until just a few weeks ago, an old man’s bones lay buried in a family grave in an impeccably kept cemetery in a Bavarian town called Wunsiedel. His name was Rudolf Hess. Born 1894, he suffered a mysterious death in 1987 at age 93.

Twenty-four years later, in the dark of the night of 20 July 2011, some ghouls dug up his remains, as well as the bones of his wife and his parents, and holocausted them.

Now who would want to do a ghoulish thing like that? Dracula? Some spiteful force beyond our comprehension that needs to drive a silver stake into the spirit of a man long gone - whose very memory still carries the pulse beat of an era we are not ever to investigate, much less to honor and respect?

David Irving, known even to his friends as the “reluctant Revisionist”, who, brilliant writer that he is, cannot resist to take a verbal swipe or two at twelve short years that ought to awe us at the very least with their scientific marvels, wrote this in introducing “Rudolf Hess: The Missing Years 1941-45”, Grafton Books, 1989:

“Semi-blind, his memory gone, he languished for 46 years in prison, and spent over half of that time in solitary confinement. At first, he was detained in cells with blackened windows, sentinels flashing torches on his face all night at half-hour intervals, and later in conditions only marginally more humane.

“Occasionally, mankind remembered that he was there: at a time when political prisoners were being released as a token of humanity, the world knew that he was there in Spandau, and timid souls felt somehow the safer for it. In 1987 the news emerged that somebody had recently stolen the prisoner’s 1940s flying helmet, goggles, and fur-lined boots, and fevered minds imagined that these, his hallowed relics of 1941, might be used in some way to power a Nazi revival.

“The prisoner himself had long forgotten what those relics had ever meant to him. The dark-red brick of Spandau prison in West Berlin was crumbling and decaying around him, and the windows were cracked or falling out of mouldering frames. He was the only prisoner left - alone, outliving all his fellows, his brain perhaps a last uncertain repository of names and promises and places, grim secrets that the victorious Four Powers might have expected him to take to the grave long before.

“The prisoner was Rudolf Hess, the last of the “war criminals.” In May 1941 he had flown single-handedly to Scotland on a reckless parachute mission to end the bloodshed and bombing. Put on trial by the victors, he had been condemned to imprisonment in perpetuity for “Crimes against the Peace.” The Four Powers had expected him to die and thus seal off the wells of speculation about him, but this stubborn old man with the haunting eyes had by his very longevity thwarted them.

“Few questions remained about the other Nazis. Hitler’s jaw bone was preserved in a Soviet glass jar; Ley’s brain was in Massachusetts; Bormann’s skeleton was found beneath the Berlin cobblestones; Mengele’s mortal remains were dis- and reinterred; Speer had joined the Greatest Architect. Dead, too, were Hess’s judges and prosecutors.

Hess himself was the last living Nazi giant, the last enigma, unable to communicate with the outside world, forbidden to talk with his son about political events, his diary taken away from him each day to be destroyed, his letters censored and scissored to excise illicit content. The macabre Four Powers statute - ignored, in the event - ordained that upon his death his body was to be reduced to ashes in the crematorium at Dachau concentration camp. The bulldozers were already standing by to wreck Spandau jail within hours of his decease, so that no place of Nazi pilgrimage remained.

“For forty years this Berlin charade was the sole remaining joint activity of the wartime Allied powers, a wordless political ballet performed by the Western democracies and high-stepping Red Army guards. Every thirty days the guard was rotated. Each time that the British or the American or the French came to hold the key, they could in theory have turned it and set this old man free. But they did not, because the ghosts of Churchill, Stalin, and Roosevelt were themselves the jailers. In the name of a Four Power agreement that had long since been dishonored, these ghosts kept Hess behind bars; and so Hitler’s deputy lived on in Spandau, mocking history and making a mockery of justice itself.

“Despite everything, he became a martyr to a cause. Mankind dared not turn the key to set him free, and mankind did not know why.”

Hess Family Grave - Recently Vandalized

In this essay, I will speculate why. I claim no certainty. What I am writing is strictly conjecture, stitched together from an intriguing pattern of clues.

Conventional wisdom has it that the proposal that Hess tried to take to Britain in 1941 was Hitler’s more than generous offer to prevent the ominous bloodshed that would descend on Europe in years to come exactly as the F¸hrer feared. 

And even now enough geopolitical and financial investments are still at risk, embedded in the Order that we know, that would embarrass the Powers entrenched in London, New York, and Tel Aviv.

I offer an alternative guess - that Hess was kept from informing the world what he knew, was contained in the UFO files in his possession. His briefcase contained something else that is still being kept securely under lock and key. That “something” is widely believed to have been the secrets of Third Reich space exploration.

After all, Hess was the one who was in charge of Hitler’s Antarctic projects that were mysteriously stopped in 1938 when a curtain descended on what, exactly, was found or done beneath the ice - mind-boggling technical advances, raced with great fervor to production once World War II broke out, astounding inventions then known as Flying Saucers, called UFOs today.

I speculate, as many do, that Hess might well have meant to offer to factions friendly to the Third Reich within the British government a roadmap to the stars.

Just who was Rudolf Hess?

Hess with Child - The Family Side

 Born to a wealthy merchant family of German background in Egypt, Hess grew up in palatial surroundings.

He enjoyed the finest classical education that money could buy in those years, part of it through private tutoring in Egypt, later on in Switzerland and Britain where he was privileged to mingle with the English-speaking upper crust, even as a youngster fascinated by astronomy.

He was described as “Ö a man of excellent breeding, moral rectitude and industry, upright, courageousÖ” - a “Ö moral compass for others”. Professor Haushofer, his mentor, said that his strength was not so much intelligence as heart and character.

Hess became Adolf Hitler’s closest comrade, though by temperament and background they were of a different shade. Hitler was of an iconoclastic nature that had the force of a volcano.

Hess was a man of quiet but flawless discernment. Hitler was a pragmatist politically yet utterly uncompromising at the core as to his aims and visions; Hess knew only the rule of his heart.

This is not ever acknowledged today in politically correct society, but Hitler in his early reign projected as seductive warmth of spirit through impeccable manners that were the envy of the rulers of his time, whereas Hess remained reticent and private by nature, not a man out to woo attention and favors for himself.

Hitler and Hess - The Early Days
In a staid and placid world, Hess might well have been the Fuhrer’s superior by virtue of social position alone, but in the Twenties and the Thirties in a Europe coming apart at the seams, there was never a question in either man’s mind who was the leader called by destiny.

Hess might have been described as the finest specimen that centuries of culture and sophistication had brought forth, but Hitler was the avatar, on a trajectory like every immense persona who is guided from within, and Hess was his disciple.

After hearing Hitler speak in the spring of 1920, Hess joined the National Socialist movement as member # 16. He knew that he had met a man of a gigantic strength of will combined with a magnetic radiance.

The trust in each other these two young men enjoyed as political comrades was total. Maybe Hitler never had another friend like Hess he could trust utterly. For his part, Hess saw in Hitler the Messiah against Satan threatening his mother country in the guise of bestial Bolshevism from the East.

Likewise, Hess’s moral standing in the hearts of Germans of his time was absolute. He was commonly referred to as “the Conscience of the Party.” In the Third Reich’s hierarchy, Hess stood third in the chain of command as the leader of the NSDAP, the Nationalsozialistische deutsche Arbeiterpartei. Only Fieldmarshall Hermann Goering enjoyed higher ranking.

Hitler and Hess - Numbers One and Three in the Party

Common experiences bound Hess and Hitler as well. Both had honorably served in battle.

Both participated in an awkward uprising that history remembers as the Munich Beer Hall Putsch, a coup d’etat against the Weimar Republic that landed them briefly in Landsberg prison where conditions were relaxed for dissidents.

There, acting as Hitler’s private secretary, Hess volunteered as stylist and copy editor for Hitler’s book, Mein Kampf, for which world Jewry would never forgive him.Much nastiness has been claimed, then and since, about the Nazi leadership in general, but I have never read a single word of hate against Hess from his own inner circle. He was feared and persecuted with an inexorable hatred by Jewry.

 He was kept isolated from human interaction for more than half of his life, beset and tormented like few other men on this earth. Why? What did this man know? What did he try to convey to the world - and was prevented from sharing?Expanding his backgroundRudolf Hess’s path in life was tragedy writ large.

In 1941, On the eve of war with the Soviet Union, Hess flew solo to Scotland on a private peace mission in an attempt to ward off the horror to come. Instead, he was arrested by the British government and held incommunicado until the war was over.

Rudolf Hess - Open Cockpit Days

After the guns fell silent, Hess was handed over to the Nuremberg Tribunal, tried in a political show trial where white became black, found “not guilty of crimes against humanity” but “guilty for conspiring against peace”, and sentenced to life internment at Spandau Prison.

Although he was in captivity for almost 4 years of the war and thus he was basically absent from it, in contrast to the others who stood accused at Nuremberg.

He was 52 years old when he set foot in Spandau. He lived another 41 years. He died mysteriously in 1987 - as widely advertised, by suicide, as even more widely believed, by murder.

Allegedly, the magnanimous peace offer he had in his briefcase, were it to come out, would embarrass the Brits to his day. I belong to a handful of skeptics who suspect he was about to offer something vastly more important, which would have made short shrift of the prevailing political order based on expensive energy provided by the industries we know.

Metapedia, the dissident counterpart website to Wikipedia, describes this failed peace mission as follows:

“Hess planned to meet the Duke of Hamilton and Brandon. He believed Hamilton to be an opponent of Winston Churchill, whom he held responsible for the outbreak of the war. His proposal of peace included returning all the western European countries conquered by Germany to their own national governments, but German police would remain in position. Germany would also pay back the cost of rebuilding these countries. In return, Britain would have to support the war against Soviet Russia. (Ö)

“Churchill turned down the proposal for peace and held Hess as a prisoner of war in the Maryhill army barracks. Later Hess was transferred to Mytchett Place near Aldershot. The house was fitted out with microphones and sound recording equipment. Frank Foley and two other MI6 officers were given the job of debriefing Hess ó”Jonathan”, as he was now known. Churchill’s instructions were that Hess should be strictly isolated and that every effort should be taken to get any information out of him that might be useful.

“Controversy surrounds the case of whether Hitler knew of Hess’ plans to make peace with Britain. It is known that Hess had been getting flying lessons in a personalized Messerschmitt aircraft in the early stages of this preparation. He was accompanied by Hitler’s personal pilot, Hans Baur.

Lured into a trap?

“There is circumstantial evidence which suggests that Hess was lured to Scotland by the British secret service. Violet Roberts, whose nephew, Walter Roberts was a close relative of the Duke of Hamilton and was working in the political intelligence and propaganda branch of the Secret Intelligence Service (SO1/PWE), was friends with Hess’s mentor Karl Haushofer and wrote a letter to Haushofer, which Hess took great interest in prior to his flight.

“According to data published in a book about Wilhelm Canaris, the head of German intelligence, a number of contacts between England and Germany were kept during the war. It cannot be known, however, whether these were direct contacts on specific affairs or an intentional confusion created between secret services for the purpose of deception. (Ö)

“Certain documents Hess brought with him to Britain were to be sealed until 2017 but when the seal was broken in 1991-92 they were missing. Edvard Bene_, head of the Czechoslovak Government in Exile and his intelligence chief Franti_ek Moravec, who worked with SO1/PWE, speculated that British Intelligence used Haushofer’s reply to Violet Roberts as a means to trap Hess.

“The fact that the files concerning Hess will be kept closed to the public until 2016 does allow the debate to continue, since without these files the existing theories cannot be fully verified.

In his final statement to the court on August 31, 1946 after his conviction, Hess declared in words that are sheer poetry in German but can only be an approximation in English:

“I had the privilege of working for many years of my life under the greatest son my nation has brought forth in its thousand-year history. Even if I could, I would not wish to expunge this time from my life. I am happy to know that I have done my duty toward my people, my duty as a German, as a National Socialist, as a loyal follower of my F¸hrer. I regret nothing. No matter what people may do, one day I shall stand before the judgment seat of God Eternal. I will answer to Him, and I know that He will absolve me.”

After having served in prison for 20 years with other leaders of the Reich, the last two prisoners, Baldur von Schirach and Albert Speer, were released. Hess remained. He was the sole remaining inmate of Spandau Prison for yet another 21 years.

Metapedia reports:

“Keeping one man in Spandau cost the West German government about 850,000 marks a year. In addition, each of the four Allied powers had to provide an officer and 37 soldiers during their respective shifts, as well as a director and team of wardens throughout the entire year. The permanent maintenance staff of 22 included cooks, waitresses and cleaners.

“In the final years of his life, Hess was a weak and frail old man, blind in one eye, who walked stooped forward with a cane. He lived in virtually total isolation according to a strictly regulated daily routine. Regulations stipulated that prison officials could not ever call Hess by name. He was addressed only as “Prisoner No. 7.”

During his rare meetings with his wife and son, Hess was not allowed to embrace or even touch them. Why this inhuman cruelty?

Of the four powers that had won the war against Germany, three - the U.S., Russia, and France - proposed that he be released on humanitarian grounds due to his age. The British government balked. Thatcher was Prime Minister of Britain, and Chancellor Kohl - some call him Cohn or Cohen - was heading Germany.

On 17 August 1987, Hess died while under Four Power imprisonment at Spandau Prison in West Berlin. At 93, he was one of the oldest prisoners in the world. He was found in a summer house in a garden located in a secure area of the prison with an electrical cord wrapped around his neck. His death was ruled a suicide by self-asphyxiation, accomplished by tying the cord to a window latch in the summer house.

Prison guards who knew him in his last years say that he was so crippled by arthritis that he could not lift his arms above his shoulders. No way could this old man have strangled himself.

Hess was buried in Wunsiedel, and Spandau Prison was subsequently demolished to prevent it from becoming a shrine. Instead, his grave became exactly that.

Metrapedia continues:

“Every year after Hess’s death, nationalists from Germany and the rest of Europe gathered in Wunsiedel for a memorial march. Similar demonstrations took place around the anniversary of Hess’s death. These gatherings were banned from 1991 to 2000 and nationalists tried to assemble in other cities and countries (such as the Netherlands and Denmark). Demonstrations in Wunsiedel were again legalised in 2001. Over 5,000 nationalists marched in 2003, with around 7,000 in 2004, marking some of the biggest national demonstrations in Germany since 1945. After stricter German legislation regarding demonstrations by nationalists was enacted in March 2005 the demonstrations were banned again.

Roosevelt Telegram to Churchill

It has often been said that a people defeated, besieged from all sides but not neutered, , will keep its myths alive. I have been told a few. One of them has it that the F¸hrer is said to have insisted that there would be one “Last Battalion” that would come back after certain defeat and would finish what he himself could not do. That “Last Battalion” would be German.

Nazi UFO technology is legendary. Cold hearts insist that Nazi UFOs are wishful thinking. What I am telling you below is things that I heard, saw, and read. I also claim, for my own protection, that as a novelist, I am attuned to lyric tapestries that translate and record things that may not pass rigorous checks but make sense by conjecture and inference and leave you with a question mark. What I am recording below is what I was told by Ernst Zundel and others.

Things that go bump in the night?

Wreckage of Hess's ME-110 in Scotland
Please understand that in the sixties, seventies, and even eighties, it was still possible to speak of Hitler and his times nostalgically if not respectfully, just as it is okay today to recount the battles of, say, General Lee who fought heroically for his beloved South but lost to overwhelming power from the North. A people need models of hope, and such models live on in their hearts.

Among many myths that survived, there lives the myth that the best of the bravest escaped, among them the F¸hrer and his scientific-minded friends.

In Ernst’s circles, people would often joke about the “Last Battalion” and claim that the F¸hrer escaped to Antarctica where he and his comrades continued his work and were busily plotting a comeback.

Why not call that as myth and keep snoozing the sleep of the righteous? Can Germans not even honor their dead by embossing the life that they lived?

On one of our trips, Ernst shared a glimpse of his young days in Canada. He claims he once saw one of those crafts, in broad daylight, rising like a phantom out of the waters of Lake Ontario. He had his two young sons in his car; they saw it, too. He was traveling in one of the middle lanes on what is called the QE2 in honor of the Queen of England. It was glistening and blinking like a Hollywood production, and by the time he could pull over, the tantalizing UFO was gone.

Roswell UFO Museum

In the late 1990s, Ernst and I were traveling through the Southwest, and stopped at the Roswell Museum. There, under glass, were tiny replicas of what was allegedly found - a saucer with a swastika!

A few tin soldiers surrounded their craft, and those toy soldiers were likewise painstakingly adorned with swastikas.

On that long trip, Ernst told me yet another story out of his young and reckless years that might bring a smile to your face but will be frowned upon by Zundel foes, who spook easily.

Have you ever heard of Hacienda Dignidad? My Spanish is a bit rusty, but I believe the name translates loosely into “Ranch of Honor” or “Plantation of Pride.”

Hacienda Dignidad is a mysterious place, deep in the Chilean mountains. Allegedly, it is a trading post for Nazi UFOs.

In 2004, when Ernst was already in prison in Canada, courtesy of the American Patriot Act, my friend Jeff Rense asked me about the place. I said I would ask Ernst.

Please find Ernst’s full letter posted on Rense:


The Hacienda Dignidad myth is only a small piece of a puzzle that is much larger, much more mysterious, encompassing people all over the globe for at least 60, maybe even 70 or 75 years.

When I was young, I stumbled upon it because of my interest in space exploration and space journeys to the near planets - to the Moon, to Mars, Venus and, beyond, to Orion and Sirius. It did not take long for me to make all kinds of interesting contacts in Canada, America, Germany, Austria, Spain and, especially, South America - and, strange as it may seem, Japan of all places.

My first encounter with Japanese interests in space came in 1967 when I met the CEO of what was then a sizeable conglomerate of Japanese corporations worth well over US$250 million, all involved in the most diverse business fields. That man, let’s call him the Chairman, was a Japanese Naval AttachÈ in Germany during World War II. He was ultimately taken to Japan by German submarine in late 1943 with a secret cargo apparently involving jet planes. The Germans were far ahead of the Japanese, even the British and the US in that field, having had operational jets, several different kinds, by different manufacturers and designers since 1938. If you go and look at my UFO books, you will find the story of just such a submarine which carried nothing but mercury, which the Japanese apparently needed in war production.

Incidentally, I corresponded with some of the crew of Captain Sch‰fer’s sub which landed in Argentina long after Germany’s surrender in Europe - there is also the story of a German sub using an uninhabited island in the Falklands/Antarctic/South Atlantic region. That island could still not be visited in the 1970s because it seems the Germans used a mine barrier at the lagoon entrance to prevent the Allied ships from landing there.

This Chairman was the one who told me over a slow meal of many courses that Japan was at war with America. He pointed to an attachÈ case and said, “This time we will defeat [America] with this (meaning commerce) and not with tanks, ships, or planes.”

He said in parting that Japan would never forgive the Americans for dropping the atomic bomb and for making Japan lose face before other Asians, especially the Koreans and Chinese. That was a big deal with him, as were the humiliations and executions by hanging of Japanese leaders via the Tokyo war crimes trials and tribunals. He was far less forgiving than the Germans! (Ö)

My UFO booklets were in those days only used by me to generate interest for more serious interviews on the post World War II lies of the “death camps” like Auschwitz, a concentration camp that was, in fact, a war production center. I was beginning to concentrate on far more serious topics involving Holocaust revisionism.

I would imagine that it must have been in ‘78 or ‘79 when a reporter finally made arrangements to come over from Japan to interview me at length.

Money seemed no object with this Japanese reporter, who arrived with a photographer/sound man with state of the art tape recorders in tow. They parked their stretch limousine, chauffeur and all, in a “no parking, no stopping” zone outside my house. The bored white driver would sit there for hours, pulling away once in a while because Toronto police told him to move on. Meanwhile, we talked and looked through my UFO/Nazi Secret Weapon/Antarctica file, only interrupted by lunch, tape changes, and coffee breaks. Later on, we went out to the CN Tower where I was treated to one of the most expensive dinners in my life.

The two came back the next day, and this time they seemed quite interested in talking to one of my male secretaries, Sepp. He and I used to horse around a lot, talking of olden times, and I used to call him my “Adjutant”, for Sepp had an illustrious past. He had served as an aide-de-camp and interpreter for Field Marshall Kesselring in Italy during the latter part of the war. We were young and brazen then. We thought we would supply some visual aids for our Japanese guests, so for the occasion we dressed Sepp up in a spiffy Nazi uniform of an officer of the communications section - visor’s officer’s cap, the works! The photographer just loved that man and his uniform! I could see why - it would lend authenticity to the story being told for a magazine or television special.

Then my Japanese guests left, loaded with UFO- as well as anti-Holocaust literature, which was of course discussed at great length, once the UFO stuff was out of the way, which did not interest me all that much any more.

In the months that followed, I helped them gain entry to some circles and installations, such as the former German submarine base and bunkers in Bergen, Norway, which operated undamaged until after surrender in May 11th, 1945 - not May 8th! The Norwegians used those facilities, along with the most modern German subs, into the 1970s.

My guests also visited the Hydrographic Institute in Hamburg and looked into the thousands of air photos taken over Antarctica and its German bases, established by the Ritscher Expedition under the protection of Hermann Goering, with Rudolf Hess as the liaison for the project. They went to Camp Dora in the Harz Mountains and to the bunker complexes in the Alpine Redoubt, which figured large in the Allied propaganda in ‘44 and ‘45. They sent me many postcards from those places. Unfortunately, the 1995 arson claimed all of those files.

In the wake of those visits, UFO orders for books, spotter charts and investigator passes began to pour in from Japan. We even sold frisbees resembling UFOs. The first articles appeared, and true to his word, the writer/reporter had included the 206 Carlton Street address, and we did a brisk business for a while with Japan in that period. Many of my subsequent Holocaust trials were partially paid for by UFO trinkets and donations by fervent supporters who believed in those Nazi UFO stories. In fact, some believe them deeply to this day.

Then one day, I received a call from our Japanese writer. He was in the US, in Los Angeles. Could he drop by? He wanted to make me a proposal about a research trip.

Sure, said I. Come on up.

He arrived within a week and suggested that I accompany him to Latin America, together with another Japanese tape recorder man and photographer, using my trusty German aide - minus Nazi uniform, I insisted! - on the trail of the Nazi UFOs. The expedition was to last from 4 to 7 weeks.

I was still a hands-on graphic artist at that time. I ran a lucrative graphic arts studio, along with my publishing house, and I had important contracts with some of Canada’s largest corporations. There was no way I could stay away that long without losing my business. So we made a compromise. I would not go, but I would lend him my German “AttachÈ”.

The trip to Chile

My contact there was a man by the name of Mattern, a German who had emigrated to Chile in the 1920s as a professional photographer. In time, he became the official photographer for all the presidents and most of the military big wigs in Chile in the early 1930s and thereafter. He was in and out of the Presidential Palace, the military academies, the Parliament - he simply knew everybody! Chile’s military was thoroughly Prussian, having adopted Prussian drills, ethos, code of honor, WWII German uniforms, helmets - even the goose steps! - which, by the way, they have kept to this day. Just recently, a young Revisionist sent Ingrid a video of such a parade.

The Chilean army under Pinochet was like an extension of the World War II German Army in looks, behavior and feel as well as in outward appearance. Exclusively German marching bands and German marches were, and are, still played to this day by that time warp Chilean army!

Only a few times, Mattern told his guests, did he think that he saw strange aerial activity going on [in Hacienda Dignidad] by even stranger craft. He was never told what was it was, and it was clear to him that the host was unwilling or perhaps under orders not to expand on those strange noises and those odd goings-on.

My man on the scene spoke five languages. As a German military officer on Field Marshall Kesselring’s staff, Sepp had served as a liaison to Benito Mussolini’s government, and as such he had participated in all the high level meetings, including the ones concerning Mussolini’s liberation by German commando leader Otto Skorzeny at the Gran Sasso. But that’s a different story for a different time.

Sepp had memorized the map at the mayor’s office. A decision was made to head out into the general direction of those colored/shaded areas. Sepp was certain it had to be the Hacienda’s location, going by the description of the landscape Mattern had given them in his briefings. Sepp was confident that he could find the Hacienda by asking local people in the foothills.

By now it had begun to rain, and as they were climbing steadily, it was getting colder and darker. Quickly, they left civilization behind. Telegraph poles and electric wires ended. Farmers’ fields gave way to bushland, poor soil, and the odd Indio shack made of corrugated metal roofs, old leftover wooden pallets, crates etc. with run-down or broken down cars strewn in the fields. The road got progressively worse, and the asphalted surface had long given way to potholes and gravel, which made for a bouncy ride as they wound their way ever higher into the foothills.

It was a miserable afternoon drive. The Japanese wanted to turn back. Sepp wanted to press on, and since he was the driver and navigator, German stubbornness won out. With his cold and grumbling passengers getting more weary by the minute, things were heading for a crisis, when suddenly the rain stopped just as they came to an area of clearly man-planted, 25-year-old conifer trees on either side of the road. They could see a light flicker in some hut on a hillside in the distance.

They hit upon a paved road, and soon they found themselves on a driveway with a cut lawn on each side. They could see a white stucco gate, Latin American style, with a high wrought iron fence on either side, and then a long, heavy wire security fence, metal links with barbed wire continuing on into a distant, man-planted forest. They were, in fact, in a turn-around, circular driveway area, and there was even an electric bell.

By the street lamp they could see some metallic reflections in some high birch trees inside the fence behind the large gate, which had a smaller gate for pedestrians on the side of it. This road carried on behind the gate into a well-kept landscaped area, dotted by majestic 25-35 year old coniferous, German-type blue spruce, or Norwegian pine trees familiar to people in Central Europe, the Black Forest and the Alpine regions. There was a winding path up to the blinking light shack a few hundred meters up a steep bank.

It began to drizzle again. The Japanese were lightly clad, shivering and uncomfortable, sitting huddled in the car. Sepp had a waterproof ski jacket and offered to investigate the light, while the others waited. He decided to take a shortcut and climb straight up the hill. It was slippery and rough going - when, suddenly, a car horn sounded, and as he turned around and looked down, he saw several men in non-descript rain coats surrounding the Volkswagen Beetle.

Hastily, he slid down the hillside to get there faster, getting himself wet and muddy by the rain-covered high vegetation. The men had started questioning the Japanese who did not speak Spanish and were clearly at a loss as to what to do next. One of the strange men, to Sepp’s surprise, wore a forage cap used by German mountain troops in World War II, the famous Gebirgsj‰ger of Oberst Dietl in Narvik, Murmansh and later the Caucasus when they climbed the highest mountain, Mount Elberus, and planted the Swastika flag on the peak, creating a worldwide sensation at the time.

The German spread-eagle insignia and the Edelweifl had been neatly removed from the cap, but one could still see the outline in the sun-bleached material. This man was muscular, bronzed, blue-eyed, and blond. More yet, he spoke a heavily accented Spanish with a clear Bavarian twang, familiar to my south Tyrolian born Sepple! Sepp knew he was in the right place. He knew that was no local Indio or Chilean.

Sepp addressed him in German; however, the man refused steadfastly to answer in German. In Spanish, he asked the team what they wanted, (Ö) and requested that they hand him their passports, airline tickets, cameras and tape recorders. He then motioned them inside the gate which opened electrically, although no wires or high poles were visible anywhere. He motioned them to drive down the driveway, while the rest of the “reception committee” followed them in their own, four-wheel drive military type vehicle.

After 300-400 meters, they came to a series of typically German type buildings - sturdy masonry with baked-tile roofs, stone and stucco Alpine style architecture. They were told to park their car. Politely, they were assisted with their luggage. They entered a large office/reception type room, tastefully decorated, again Alpine type, and were asked to make themselves comfortable. It was a building with all modern amenities, electric lights, flush toilets, wash basins, typewriters, office desks, office lamps, clothes racks etc. It had the feel of a military officers’ quarters.

By now, it was pitch dark outside.

They were given sandwiches, hot herbal tea, some dessert, and then the interrogations began - at first, separately in different rooms by different people, some of whom spoke English with the Japanese. With Sepp they insisted on speaking Spanish, an odd situation. They could not be persuaded to speak German - even though they were clearly Germans.

No one answered any questions as to where they were, what the place was called. No one admitted that this was indeed Hacienda Dignidad.

The interrogations lasted several hours, and about 10 p.m. they were all brought together again. They were told that they had penetrated a restricted military area without authorization, and that this was a serious offense - that a military police escort was on its way from Parral to pick them up, and that it would be up to the military to decide what to do with them once they got there. Their passports, cameras, tape recorders, films, and luggage would be turned over to the military. It was suggested that they could get some rest in a room that had some bunk beds and blankets, and they were warned not to try anything foolish. They could use the rest room but not leave the building for any reason.

The Japanese seemed pretty upset by all this and wondered what they had gotten into. Their ardor had considerably cooled by then, and they felt it was wiser not to press their luck und instead beat it back to Parral, get their passports back and get out of the jam they were in! They were satisfied that out in nowhere, cut off from civilization, there obviously were people living with all the accountrements of civilization, European no less, who had video surveillance cameras, electricity, flush toilets, heating systems, paved roads, tall metal wire fences, automatic electric door openers as well as a facility where there were multilingual people working in shifts, people connected somehow with the military or at least the federales, the police, who had the power to take people’s passports.

Everybody was tired, and soon all were asleep, only to be wakened in the early morning hours by truck motors howling, doors being slammed, loud voices in Spanish. They were introduced to the head of their military escort - a whole convoy of trucks and jeeps! After a short breakfast, they headed out into more rain and fog, making visibility difficult. Even so, they could make out numerous European type buildings in the distance which looked like part of a community with neatly cut lawns, garden flowers, and all asphalt roads everywhere they looked!

The trip back to Parral was slow and rocky. The team was taken to an army or federal police compound where they were herded into a large room and, once again, separately interrogated. They were told what they already knew - that they had entered a restricted military area without authorization, for which they could be jailed for a substantial period, but seeing that they were foreigners, and that their press credentials and stories checked out, they were only going to lose their undeveloped film, same with the tape recordings. They were told to take their rental car, drive it all the way to Santiago, check at the federales’ posts along the way, have their expulsion orders stamped at each place - and be out of the country in 72 hours! Pronto!

A decade later, I was invited to Princeton University for a lengthy series of Nazi UFO-related interviews, which were aired on prime time Japanese TV in a remarkable if sensationalized UFO special with superb computer animations of realistic Nazi UFOs. (Ö)

From other sources, such as El Mercurio, a left-leaning mass circulation Chilean newspaper, as well as from the German weekly, Der Stern, and the German news magazine, Der Spiegel, the following story emerges:

Hacienda Dignidad is a colony totally self-sufficient in everything, technologically equipped with the very latest amenities. The community has its own schools, teachers, hospital, medical staff, technical people. It is claimed that mysterious testing of some sort is being carried on at the Hacienda for the Chilean military. Even Chilean senators and parliamentarians find all their efforts blocked, usually by courts, the police, and the military. The German Embassy reports that numerous Germans receive their World War II army, air force, and other pension checks, which are sent to a collective address in the town of Parral, where they are deposited into a joint account.

The El Mercurio newspaper reported already in the late ‘40s and ‘50s that one of their reporters, in fact, did penetrate the Hacienda terrain via back roads through the mountains, using pack horses, and that he did observe strange flying craft taking off and landing in some remote area of a valley away from the actual community - which is what Mattern reported seeing during his one and only visit in the 1950s or 1960s - I don’t remember now exactly just when his visit took place.

The latest report about Hacienda Dignidad I read in the late 1990s in Der Spiegel. There was talk that the community was run by an autocratic leader. It was described almost like a semi-religious cult, but that there were married couples with children there. After his visit to what he certainly believed had been Hacienda Dignidad or a similar enterprise in the remote foothills of the Chilean mountains, Mattern was of the view that this place was a supply base for fresh fruit and vegetables picked up by “flying saucers”. He also felt that the colony served as a rest/recuperation and medical facility for German-staffed UFO bases further to the South like Tierra del Fuego and even Antarctica proper.

The story of the El Mercurio reporter, except for Mattern the only other human being claimed to have visited Hacienda Dignidad, is in one of my booklets in excerpted form. It was a bestseller in its time and is still widely quoted, as is the hastily organized Admiral Byrd Expedition to the mysterious continent of Antarctica in 1947.

The most extensive photographic documentary is to be found in an exhaustive article in one of the National Geographic Magazines, replete with maps and flight paths of the Byrd overflights, leaving out the far more sensational revelations supposedly contained in Byrd’s private diary, which was forbidden to be published by U.S. authorities - or so it is alleged. Its content was leaked by Admiral Byrd’s son, who himself came to a rather bizarre and mysterious end. [End excerpt]

Can you blame me for feeling intrigued? And shouldn’t you be, too?

I know someone who functions as a European diplomat at the UN - who is a firm believer in the existence of German UFOs. He told me to keep a close watch on what happens on earth, in the skies, and deep in the oceans.

Some years ago, I saw a write-up about two US Submarines having been “lost” and I third limping home with its schnozzle all crushed up and bandaged.

Here’s what your mainstream media reports:

“The US nuclear submarine USS San Fransisco en route to Brisbane Australia, for a port visit, came up all standing on Saturday, the 8th. of January 2005, when it ran into an underwater mountain about 350 miles south of Guam. One sailor died and 24 were injured.”

Then there was that strange “earthquake”, remember, in Indonesia, causing a gargantuan tsunami that mysteriously spared Diego Garcia? I read somewhere that there is no marine life at the epicenter of that “quake”. It’s probably just wicked conspiracy talk - don’t you think?.

And now we have Japan. Was that really an “earthquake”? Inquiring minds want to know.

I claim no certainty. I just put two and two together. I tell myself: If those darn, wicked Nazis could technically achieve what they achieved in 12 short years - six of which were blood and gore and human suffering beyond description - imagine what they could achieve while working undeterred and undisturbed off-earth?

Recommended viewing:

The German Reich Exists!

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on September 5, 2011

About three months ago I sent some 80 copies of two German-language DVDs to friends and supporters in Europe, most of them living in Germany. Intended recipients of these DVDs were mostly elderly people who had assisted in various ways in our lengthy struggle for Truth in History.

These were friends in their eighties and nineties - one would not think that these retired folks in their last years on earth are capable of insurrection or even revolution endangering the Vaterland!

The customs censors of the Federal Republic of Germany - in short, the Bundesrepublik - saw fit to confiscate these documentaries, apparently based on an order from the Mannheim District Court, staffed with notorious “Holocaust Denier” hounds, empowered to badger and bully. The customs civil servants duly notified the addressees of their intent to scrutinize these little disks, inferring they might well be politically suspect - and, hence, not suitable for ordinary citizens to watch.

These DVDs are now in “temporary custody” so as to be investigated bureaucratically. The functionaries of the Bundesrepublik want to make sure that their own senior citizens won’t be contaminated with politically incorrect content.

My addressees are eyewitnesses of World War II who know they live on borrowed time. It is emotionally consoling to them to be informed on how their country’s truthful history at long, long last unfolds. These people have a vested interest in seeing their ill-treated country freed from the curse of a deceitful propaganda deluge known as the “Holocaust”. They know what happened in the Third Reich concentration camps is not what current party line proclaims. To them, Ernst Zundel is both martyr and hero.

Since I am the producer and initiator of this mailing, I need to tell you of the content of these two sequestered titles.

The first is titled “Off Your Knees, Germany!”, which has been widely disseminated on the Internet in English - to wide acclaim, I feel proud and even boastful to report. There, you can check for yourself what Ernst Zundel said - and what was said about him by his detractors. Just type the title into your favorite search engine - and presto! The DVD is some 90 minutes long.

This documentary has never been censored by Youtube. There is nary a peep of dissent! I know it has been reposted on at least two dozen other websites, and I have already distributed more than 700 of them. So far, no viewer of this DVD has fainted or turned into a frog from having been exposed to the flamboyant Zundel Saga. The version sent to Europe is identical - with subtitles in German.

The second DVD is German-language only. It’s called “Feldzug gegen die Offenkundigkeit des Holocausts” - roughly translated as “Crucade against Judicial Notice of the Holocaust” - a 2-hour documentary I stitched together from 9 hours of raw footage of informal, lawyerly debriefing sessions pertaining to the 2007 Mannheim Zundel Trial that cost Ernst five years of his life, in addition to the two already served in Canada.

The Mannheim prosecution against Ernst saw fit to cloak its illegal attack on human rights and dignity on what is called Paragraph 130 - the man in the street calls it “Jewry’s Holocaust cudgel.” A sub-section of Paragraph 130 of the German penal code, known as the “Incitement Section,” punishes “approval, trivialization, or denial of the National Socialist era”. In its application, it created a new variety of a “criminal” - primarily a “Holocaust Denier.”

As the Catholic Church relies on Infallibility, judges in the German courts rely on “Manifest Obviousness” or “Offenkundigkeit”, roughly akin to the Anglo-Saxon concept of “Judicial Notice” - “Ö what exists need not be proven.” In practice, it means “The Holocaust happened! Shut up!”

“Offenkundigkeit” exists to enforce political dogma and punish heresy. It means that if you are unlucky enough to land before a judge of the kind of Dr. Meinerzhagen, a hysterically volatile servant of the entrenched status quo, a defense on the merits is sternly precluded by law. Nor are your attorneys allowed to offer a defense on your behalf - or else, they themselves become “guilty” by association and intent and maybe even, Heaven forbid, compassion for a client whose fix is in before a trial even begins.

“Offenkundigkeit” has, thus, become the Holy Cow of German jurisprudence. It gives judges court jester license.

Since the 1990s, the Mannheim District Court has become something very similar to the Victors’ Tribunal at Nuremberg for Holocaust revisionists. Guilt is a foregone conclusion. The rest is just for show and for headlines to keep the sheeple subdued.

How can a defense attorney then offer a workable defense, if the law not only forbids it but endangers the attorney himself?

Defense attorneys at the Zundel Trial decided to cut a new swath. Since it was known that it would be impossible, by law, to submit exculpatory evidence for Ernst’s “heretical” beliefs based on forensic evidence, a new form of defense was introduced by sheer necessity. The system itself would be on put on trial for its craven contravention of the law.

The Zundel Trial was uniquely suited for this strategy for two reasons:

It had international significance owing to Ernst Zundel’s high profile and the fact that the USA and Canada had collaborated with the Bundesrepublik to use trickery to abduct and extradite the dissident;-  and - Ernst’s lead defense attorney, Sylvia Stolz, a petite snippet of a female with a girlish voice and unflappable poise made it a dramatic and often hilarious “OMF-BRD” trial under the watchful eye of her lover, the brilliant but politically disbarred attorney, Horst Mahler.

“OMF-BRD” is an acronym that stands for a typically German mouthful: “Organisationsform einer Modalit‰t der Fremdherrschaft.” What it means in the vernacular is that the Bundesrepublik is known to strut and prance much like the pompous “sovereign” in the Christian Anderson tale, while everybody bows and grovels - until a child calls out: “The Emperor is naked!”

As I have come to understand the meaning of the “OMF-BRD line of attack”, it can be stripped down to four words:

“The German Reich Exists.”

Now don’t you snicker before you understand what this idea means. Thanks to three generations’ worth of brainwashing, the concept of the “German Reich” has been deformed to such an extent it has become a Pavlovian prompt - one shudders at the implied corollary “Ö the Reich might rise again!” In fact, that is not at all what it means. “The Reich” is not wishful thinking or Hitler propaganda. “The Reich” does exist as a subject of international law because it preceded the Third Reich and continues to exist after the destruction of the Third Reich. It is a venerable institution. It exists much as China exists, despite internal upheavals as well as external attacks. The German Reich does not mean “Hitler’s Reich.” It is a lawful entity in international jurisprudence - but it is helpless to act in its own interest.

The German Reich was not obliterated when the German Wehrmacht surrendered, but it was kept feeble on purpose so it could be ruled by a malicious cabal that took over as a provisional government that was not meant to last. It was a temporary administration - put in its place because there was a vacuum - until such time as the ill-fated Germans, held to be pathologically addicted to authoritarian rule of grandiose design, were sufficiently “matured politically” to vote themselves a democratic government of their own choice.

From the Allies’ point of view, it was a noble concept - on paper. Until desirable maturity in the German populace had taken root, the powers-that-be would rule the besieged, bloodied, starving, decimated Germans in their own ruins, and “re-educate” them thoroughly and for all time to come for their own good.

There was not ever even a peace treaty. Did you know that? Only a cease fire existed, and exists to this day. Theoretically, “The Reich” is still “at war” with the Allies.

The pity is that the Germans were never told of this provisional arrangement that would give them their freedom as soon as they showed proper remorse. It was quietly swept under the rug. The usurpers of Germany’s sovereignty smugly stayed on because they liked their warm nests and their power.

Today, more than three generations later, most Germans fancy themselves to be benevolently ruled by a bona fide entity dressed up in democratic finery that calls itself the “Bundesrepublik”, which has remained, in fact and law, still a provisional arrangement kept carefully controlled so as to serve an alien agenda.

The story of Germany’s “re-education” that brought this unnatural situation about is long and exceedingly seamy.

In a passionate interview with an Israeli journalist, Ernst Zundel explained it this way:

YouTube - Veterans Today -

Wicked tongues insist that now, three generations later - you have an entire country filled end to end with Stockholm Syndrome slaves whose pride is to identify with their oppressors and who, almost to a man and woman, saw Bonn and now see Berlin as the seat of “legitimate” rulers.

And who could blame them, given their proscribed world view of their own history? The Bundesrepublik looks German. The Bundesrepublik talks German. The Bundesrepublik parades in front of friend and foe as German. In oily proclamations, it claims it wants the best for Germany. It likes to scold China for its lack of Freedom of Speech.

These ruling mandarins, however, are not in spirit and in law anything near what in olden times a German might have called “German.” They are obedient vassals of a foreign rule - and that is what the Mannheim Zundel Trial brought sharply to the fore.

That is the essence of what my DVDs make clear. The first merely serves as a political backdrop in which Ernst Zundel confronts his mendacious detractors - again and again and again! It is fast-paced and entertaining, but for me, it is the second DVD that has real meat, because the situation in the Vaterland is dismal.

No transcripts in political show trials are allowed. No exculpatory evidence is allowed to be brought forth by the defense. As stated before, if a defendant opens his mouth and points to unassailable forensic evidence as a basis for the fact that science does not lie, not even for the “Nazis”, he automatically doubles his sentence. If an attorney does likewise, he earns himself a prison sentence for his pains - as Sylvia Stolz found out.

A Mannheim Zundel Trial observer wrote this:

The mainstream media showed an unusual interest in the Z¸ndel trial. The reports in the mainstream media exposed very clearly the phoniness and hypocrisy of the much-touted German “constitutional guarantee” of freedom of opinion and information, which is indeed purely theoretical - as the entire world now knows.

This ceaseless blathering about “human rights” and “freedom of opinion”, which have in fact been ever more violated and trampled underfoot, are mere trappings for foreign consumption.

OMF yes-men freely criticize repression in foreign countries while they keep their real agenda in the dark.

Here I need to tell you, for the record, that neither Ernst nor I knew of - much less approved of - the OMF trajectory that came about by default. We wanted it to be a traditional Holocaust trial or, at the very least, a kidnapping trial. We had nothing to do with this little understood political thorn in the side of the unsuspecting populace. Ernst says he knew about the concept as a tangential issue in terms of his own information outreach, but I did not. Until I came in the possession of the debriefing tapes, I did not know any of this. I would guess that the average German has never heard of it either.

However, now in retrospect, what happened in the Zundel Trial makes lots of sense to me - why it played out as bizarre as it did, and why it is so difficult today to let a ray of light ride on a simple Zundel DVD that gets itself in trouble with customs.

I’ll show you by example:

There was a little ten-year-old boy in the audience. He had listened intently at home as his parents discussed the Zundel Trial farce where Truth was no defense and a maximum sentence already a foregone conclusion. In his little mind, he concluded correctly that Ernst Zundel was an icon of sorts. The next morning, in court, he asked if he could shake the renowned prisoner’s hand.

Do you know that five police - count ëem, five! - moved forward in a phalanx and surrounded that youngster to prevent him from doing just that?

Ernst said he and the little boy merely locked glances across the width of that sorry joke of a courtroom for what seemed a very long time. Ernst described it to me as a moment of exquisite poignancy. Isn’t that a perfect scene for a movie?

That little boy is not likely to forget for as long as he lives that a nasty police force was needed to prevent him from sharing a handshake with a man whose integrity and importance he sensed.

Talk about a phony ruling system being skittish!

To come back to the sequestered DVDs our elderly friends are not allowed to watch. Since I knew from past experience how brutal political censorship is practiced in the country of my ancestry, I made sure that what I did was not a violation of the law and would not negatively impact on my recipients.

I put an explanation in my monthly letter, Germania, that these two documentaries were meant as gifts of gratitude for past support and that, at least according to the law, a German citizen is still allowed to receive one copy each for private use of otherwise “indexed” items the current Bundesrepublik deems unfit for grown-ups to own. I even put a little paper slip inside each mailing to explain that also to the customs officials, in case they might not be all that familiar with the law.

After having received a stern notice from customs about suspected contraband, two or three of our oldsters took their trembling hearts into their hands, called customs and inquired what their options were in a politically delicate case such as this. They were told they had two choices: either refuse a well-meant present and have it sent back to America, or brace themselves for predictable political fall-out.

You have to understand that to a law-abiding German of vintage times it is a very scary thing to receive a notice in the mail that tells him he is suspect of harboring politically incorrect thoughts. Our elderly friends are terrified that they will now be hauled before a judge to account for receiving intellectual contraband from an American citizen, Ingrid Zundel. In today’s gagged and cowed Germany, that might morph overnight into media vilification, disgrace and ostracism in the neighborhood, a political show trial such as their friend, Ernst Zundel, already had to endure or, at the very least, horrendous fines few of our oldsters can afford.

So far, I have only received two returns - the rest, presumably, still lies at customs headquarters so that the Kommissars of Mannheim can hatch a solid plan to terrorize their senior citizens some more.

I say that is why these two DVDs are vitally important, especially the second one, to receive the widest distribution possible among all freedom-loving folks of German ancestry. In the second DVD, particularly, four attorneys explain what has happened to the law in light of a manipulated past. It has real intellectual and legal substance, but that’s not all. There is hilarity.

There is irreverence. The presiding Judge, Ulrich Meinerzhagen, is boldly raked over the coals. But it is more than that - it talks about the obscene roots of this abnormal judicial situation at Nuremberg. These documentaries are of invaluable merit for those who are not yet aware that Germany is still a country under covert Allied rule. Veterans of WWII who may still think they “liberated” Germany from a “dictatorship” - take note!

But in the meantime, what to do?

To mind comes Dr. Robert Countess, a former US Army Chaplain, a true-blue Holocaust revisionist who, in the olden days, would smuggle Bibles into the Soviet Union wrapped in a customs declaration that stated brazenly: “The Joys of Jewish Cooking.”

Iron Sky: The Movie

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on September 7, 2011

Okay, for the record, before I lose my scalp: I personally have never seen a UFO. I have never been “contacted”, much less abducted. I don’t believe in little green men. I think the idea of invisible “greys” among us is loony. The notion that a “highly advanced society” of non-earthlings is planning a humanitarian visit to lift us onto a “higher plane of ethical awareness” is baloney.

However, I do believe that several governments, including the U.S., are up to their ears in covert UFO projects that are blacker than black and off every radar. I also believe that people with guilty consciences have every reason to fear UFOs. I think their fear controls what we are not to see or know ñ and that the prime Weapon of Mass Deception is ridicule of the fiercest, most ferocious kind against anyone who asks for information and disclosure. Their fear is palpable. Why is that?

YouTube - Veterans Today -

In my youth I lived in several countries in South America. I know for a fact that after World War II there were two countries ñ Chile and Argentina ñ that offered shelter and protection to German scientists who had worked on space exploration. Under Peron, particularly, there was a lot of sympathy for Germans.

I am open to the possibility ñ not certainty! ñ that there exists a colony of German science expats somewhere on a near planet, perhaps even on the back side of the moon. I don’t know any specifics, so don’t come to me for additional info ñ I cannot help you there. But I am curious, and so should you be. Look for the William Pavelec interview on youtube about U.S. black projects on UFOs to get a whiff of what could possibly be true.

YouTube - Veterans Today -

So, when I read that there exists a European movie maker team who is in post-production about a film depicting a return of “Moon Nazis”, it naturally piqued my interest. I contacted Timo Vuorensola, the director, on behalf of Veterans Today to see what they were up to.

Sit back and relax. Don’t blame Gordon Duff ñ it was my idea. Take this for what it is ñ it is meant in a light-hearted vein Ö

YouTube - Veterans Today -

Veterans Today: Internetters know that there exists a huge global community of believers in “Moon Nazis”. This would include the common man in the street who is fascinated by science fiction as well as the scientific community, primarily those engaged in space exploration.

Respected NASA scientists and space researchers have spoken out about the existence of earth-like communities on the dark side of the moon. Where does your film draw the line? How much credence is given to the possibility that there exists an off-earth community of entities who look like us, talk like us, think like us ñ in essence, who are a “breakaway society” from earth?

Iron Sky: On behalf of everyone working for Iron Sky, I can say that no one of us believes in the real existence of Nazis on the Moon ñ or anywhere else outside of Earth, for that matter. Yet, we find the idea compelling; given the fact that Nazis had a lot of secret tech which eventually led partially to the big space race and space exploration, we find it intriguing to think the “what-if” -scenario, and try to approach it with two things in mind: if it would be true, how would it be even theoretically possible, and ñ even more importantly ñ how to make it cinematic. But of course, more importantly, it’s a human story, and the whole “Nazis on the Moon” issue is just a setting for a story to be told.

Veterans Today: I am a great believer in shortcuts to thinking by using precision words or phrases. In your preliminary correspondence you used the phrase “Moon Nazis”. This phrase would work for both your fans and your detractors. I actually think that “Moon Nazis” would have been a more catchy title than “Iron Sky” ñ which is excellent also with more serious and weighty connotations. Who chose the current title ñ and why?

Iron Sky: We do like subtexts, and the whole needs to be something more poetic than the core of the plot of the movie. We also liked the idea of concretically having a sky full of iron when the Nazi UFOs and Zeppelins roar on close orbit of Earth. And strangely enough, nobody had done a film with the name, so in the end it was an easy pick.

Veterans Today: I understand “Iron Sky” is a black comedy feature film. Several of your promo pieces give the impression that “Moon Nazis” are fair game for poking fun of the Hitler regime and its admittedly impressive scientists. Regardless of the negative political taint still clinging to the era, is your approach not merging respectable science and politically correct but one-dimensional political sentiment?

Iron Sky: Our political agenda is that we believe that what happened back in early 1900’s is so very close, and with people not paying attention to what the politicians are saying and blindly believing these people know better what’s good for them, we’ll end up in the same mess very soon. Hitler’s and Stalin’s eras are still so close, and watching which direction the politics in Europe are slowly stumbling to, I think Iron Sky’s message is a timely one.

Veterans Today: For decades, governments have justified a curtain of secrecy around the concept of life in space with entities who might have an interest in earth. The argument has been that such a concept would topple conventional belief systems such as religion. Do you see any harm in people projecting their own fantasies and wishes onto artistic creations that might have negative fallout in societies?

Iron Sky: Honestly believing in extraterrestial life, but not believing human kind has or will ever have connection (or at least reasonable in any intelligible way) with it, I believe humouring ourselves with such thoughts has always been a good way to learn of ourselves. Many of similar topical movies take the idea of an enemy, or friend, or something in between coming from outside of our world, and realize it among people of today to speculate what would our reactions be ñ because we want to experience, speculate and learn from “our own” reactions in a safe environment of a movie theater. And if at the same time it ignites some thought process in our heads challenging our fundamental thoughts and values and looking at everything from outside the box, I consider it to be solely a good thing.

Veterans Today: Your film is unusual in several ways. First, it is a non-Hollywood film in that it is being produced at a fraction of the costs of what a Hollywood film would cost. Secondly, fundraising involves a global community rather than a handful of fat cats. How did that novel idea come about ñ by design or by default?

Iron Sky: In many ways, by default. We had finished our previous film “Star Wreck in the Pirkinning” with the help of our Internet community, and knew that just by applying normal methods in production and funding we would not be able to reach the budget we were looking for. We again turned over our financial plight to our community, and again they were out there, ready to pitch in to see some Nazi arsekicking.

Veterans Today: Whether or not one might wish it to be so, your film will bring the concept of “Moon Nazis” into mainstream awareness and largely remove the current taboo attached to discussing such a “flat-earth conspiracy”. It is known that there has been a tight clamp on serious scientific discussions of this kind. Does your film not open the door to millions of people questioning why there exists such a curtain of silence on the part of official governments ñ in other words, make them “conspiracists”?

Iron Sky: I wouldn’t be too worried of that. It’s the same thing as with any conspiracy theory movie. It does push our imagination and offers a great “what-if” -sandbox, but in the end, I don’t assume anyone walks out of the theater and starts calling their government to reveal the big Moon Nazi plot they’ve been hiding. Well, crazy people might, but they can be triggered by anything.

Veterans Today: Has there been any censorship targeting your project? Or is this film approved at least in part so as to let off steam and prepare the global community for dramatic, in fact tectonic shifts in what folks in the future will not only believe but take for granted?

Iron Sky: Not sure what you mean by “tectonic shifts”, but we’ve had some censorship issue discussions for sure, especially regarding Germany. Their laws are very tight in portraying Nazis, but as soon as they read the script and realized the intention behind, we were clear to do the film. There are some extra-tight laws in Germany, for example with costumes and marketing, but we knew of them beforehand and were prepared for them.

Veterans Today: It is my understanding that this film is a triple production, involving Finland, Germany, and Australia? These are countries commonly seen as traditionally European by ancestry and background. We in America see large factions of Finland as openly approving of the Hitler era, and Germany as covertly approving. I don’t know about Australia, but I find it puzzling that the United States are not involved. Is this a clandestine “Declaration of Independence,” from Europe, at least in the artistic realm?

Iron Sky: Finland absolutely does not approve of the Hitler regime, and Germany even less so; not sure where this impression could be coming from. The reason why USA is not one of the production parties is simply that we didn’t find a suitable US production partner to join the production, and managed to do it without them. Three countries already involved is quite a heap.

Veterans Today: Finally, put your hand on your heart and tell me: How do you account for the enormous fascination with German science that came out of the Hitler Era, which is commonly believed to be expressed in a belief in so-called “UFOs”? Nobody talks about Russians having gone to the moon and set up housekeeping there, or Americans ñ or anybody else, for that matter. It’s always the “Moon Nazis.” This is an amazingly robust belief that defies common sense ñ for most people. Could fear be involved that such a thing as an invasion could come true?

Iron Sky: Not so much fear. I honestly don’t think there are too many people really believing in Moon Nazi invasion and being able to survive in the current day world. What fascinates people is the secrecy of the Nazi technology that’s been glorified over the decades in movies and literature and the idea that whatever the Russians or the US would be doing secretly behind our backs on the Moon without us knowing would never be as dramatic as what Nazis would be doing. There’d be only one thing they’d be doing, that’s invasion. Russians and Americans would probably be just digging for some Helium-3, which would not be so bad, given the oil dependency of today’s world.

Veterans Today: Except for making money, which I believe this film will make hand over fist, what do you expect this project to do?

Iron Sky: I hope it helps people open their eyes and ears and read between today’s political messages, especially the ones of right wing ideology and religious fundamentalists (both Christian and Muslim). We hope Iron Sky inspires people to think, but also to create and be creative. Filmmaking is no more the game of a few selected people. Anyone can pick up a camera, buy some software and start shooting the next masterpiece.

A Jewish Defector Warns America: Benjamin Freedman Speaks on Zionism - Part I

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on September 8, 2011
This speech was given 50 years ago - half a century ago! It is a classic now - well-known to many dissidents, especially historical revisionists. I am posting it today for those who never heard of it, because it permits us to look at today in light of yesterday and see a lot of parallels.

Let this lecture speak for itself:

Introductory Note

Mr. Freedman, born in 1890, was a successful Jewish businessman of New York City who was at one time the principal owner of the Woodbury Soap Company. He broke with organized Jewry after the Judeo-Communist victory of 1945, and spent the remainder of his life and the great preponderance of his considerable fortune, at least 2.5 million dollars, exposing the Jewish tyranny which has enveloped the United States.

Mr. Freedman knew what he was talking about because he had been an insider at the highest levels of Jewish organizations and Jewish machinations to gain power over our nation. Mr. Freedman was personally acquainted with Bernard Baruch, Samuel Untermyer, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Joseph Kennedy, and John F. Kennedy, and many more movers and shakers of our times.

This speech was given before a patriotic audience in 1961 at the Willard Hotel in Washington, D.C., on behalf of Conde McGinley’s patriotic newspaper of that time, Common Sense. Though in some minor ways this wide-ranging and extemporaneous speech has become dated, Mr. Freedman’s essential message to us ó his warning to the West ó is more urgent than ever before. ñ [Start]

What I intend to tell you tonight is something that you have never been able to learn from any other source, and what I tell you now concerns not only you, but your children and the survival of this country and Christianity. I’m not here just to dish up a few facts to send up your blood pressure, but I’m here to tell you things that will help you preserve what you consider the most sacred things in the world: the liberty, and the freedom, and the right to live as Christians, where you have a little dignity, and a little right to pursue the things that your conscience tells you are the right things, as Christians.

Now, first of all, I’d like to tell you that on August 25th 1960 ó that was shortly before elections ó Senator Kennedy, who is now the President of the United States, went to New York, and delivered an address to the Zionist Organization of America. In that address, to reduce it to its briefest form, he stated that he would use the armed forces of the United States to preserve the existence of the regime set up in Palestine by the Zionists who are now in occupation of that area.

In other words, Christian boys are going to be yanked out of their homes, away from their families, and sent abroad to fight in Palestine against the Christian and Moslem Arabs who merely want to return to their homes. And these Christian boys are going to be asked to shoot to kill these innocent [Arab Palestinians] people who only want to follow out fifteen resolutions passed by the United Nations in the last twelve years calling upon the Zionists to allow these people to return to their homes.

Now, when United States troops appear in the Middle East to fight with the Zionists as their allies to prevent the return of these people who were evicted from their homes in the 1948 armed insurrection by the Zionists who were transplanted there from Eastern EuropeÖ when that happens, the United States will trigger World War III.

You say, when will that take place? The answer is, as soon as the difficulty between France and Algeria has been settled, that will take place. As soon as France and Algeria have been settled, that will take place. As soon as France and Algeria have settled their difficulty, and the Arab world, or the Moslem world, has no more war on their hands with France, they are going to move these people back into their homes, and when they do that and President Kennedy sends your sons to fight over there to help the crooks hold on to what they stole from innocent men, women and children, we will trigger World War III; and when that starts you can be sure we cannot emerge from that war a victor. We are going to lose that war because there is not one nation in the world that will let one of their sons fight with us for such a cause.

I know and speak to these ambassadors in Washington and the United Nations ó and of the ninety-nine nations there, I’ve consulted with maybe seventy of them ó and when we go to war in Palestine to help the thieves retain possession of what they have stolen from these innocent people, we’re not going to have a man there to fight with us as our ally.

And who will these people have supporting them, you ask. Well, four days after President Kennedy ó or he was then Senator Kennedy ó made that statement on August 28, 1960, the Arab nations called a meeting in Lebanon and there they decided to resurrect, or reactivate, the government of Palestine, which has been dormant, more or less, since the 1948 armed insurrection by the Zionists.

Not only thatÖ they ordered the creation of the Palestine Army, and they are now drilling maybe a half a million soldiers in that area of the world to lead these people back to their homeland. With them, they have as their allies all the nations of what is termed the Bandung Conference Group. That includes the Soviet Union and every Soviet Union satellite. It includes Red China; it includes every independent country in Asia and Africa; or eighty percent of the world’s total population. Eighty percent of the world’s population. Four out of five human beings on the face of the earth will be our enemies at war with us. And not alone are they four out of five human beings now on the face of this earth, but they are the non-Christian population of the world and they are the non-CaucasiansÖ the non-white nations of the world, and that’s what we face.

And what is the reason? The reason is that here in the United States, the Zionists and their co-religionists have complete control of our government. For many reasons too many and too complex to go into here at this ó time I’ll be glad to answer questions, however, to support that statement ó the Zionists and their co-religionists rule this United States as though they were the absolute monarchs of this country.

Now, you say, “well, that’s a very broad statement to make”, but let me show what happened while you were ó I don’t want to wear that out ó let me show what happened while we were all asleep. I’m including myself with you. We were all asleep. What happened?

World War I broke out in the summer of 1914. Nineteen-hundred and fourteen was the year in which World War One broke out. There are few people here my age who remember that. Now that war was waged on one side by Great Britain, France, and Russia; and on the other side by Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Turkey. What happened?

Within two years Germany had won that war: not alone won it nominally, but won it actually. The German submarines, which were a surprise to the world, had swept all the convoys from the Atlantic Ocean, and Great Britain stood there without ammunition for her soldiers, stood there with one week’s food supply facing her ó and after that, starvation.

At that time, the French army had mutinied. They lost 600,000 of the flower of French youth in the defense of Verdun on the Somme. The Russian army was defecting. They were picking up their toys and going home; they didn’t want to play war anymore; they didn’t like the Czar. And the Italian army had collapsed.

Now Germany ó not a shot had been fired on the German soil. Not an enemy soldier had crossed the border into Germany. And yet, here was Germany offering England peace terms. They offered England a negotiated peace on what the lawyers call a status quo ante basis. That means: “Let’s call the war off, and let everything be as it was before the war started.”

Well, England, in the summer of 1916 was considering that. Seriously! They had no choice. It was either accepting this negotiated peace that Germany was magnanimously offering them, or going on with the war and being totally defeated.

While that was going on, the Zionists in Germany, who represented the Zionists from Eastern Europe, went to the British War Cabinet and ó I am going to be brief because this is a long story, but I have all the documents to prove any statement that I make if anyone here is curious, or doesn’t believe what I’m saying is at all possible ó the Zionists in London went to the British war cabinet and they said: “Look here. You can yet win this war. You don’t have to give up. You don’t have to accept the negotiated peace offered to you now by Germany. You can win this war if the United States will come in as your ally.”

The United States was not in the war at that time. We were fresh; we were young; we were rich; we were powerful. They [Zionists] told England: “We will guarantee to bring the United States into the war as your ally, to fight with you on your side, if you will promise us Palestine after you win the war.”

In other words, they made this deal: “We will get the United States into this war as your ally. The price you must pay us is Palestine after you have won the war and defeated Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Turkey.”

Now England had as much right to promise Palestine to anybody, as the United States would have to promise Japan to Ireland for any reason whatsoever. It’s absolutely absurd that Great Britain ó that never had any connection or any interest or any right in what is known as Palestine ó should offer it as coin of the realm to pay the Zionists for bringing the United States into the war.

However, they made that promise, in October of 1916. October, nineteen hundred and sixteen. And shortly after that ó I don’t know how many here remember it ó the United States, which was almost totally pro-German ó totally pro-German ó because the newspapers here were controlled by Jews, the bankers were Jews, all the media of mass communications in this country were controlled by Jews, and they were pro-German because their people, in the majority of cases came from Germany, and they wanted to see Germany lick the Czar.

The Jews didn’t like the Czar, and they didn’t want Russia to win this war. So the German bankers ó the German-Jews ó Kuhn Loeb and the other big banking firms in the United States refused to finance France or England to the extent of one dollar. They stood aside and they said: “As long as France and England are tied up with Russia, not one cent!” But they poured money into Germany, they fought with Germany against Russia, trying to lick the Czarist regime.

Now those same Jews, when they saw the possibility of getting Palestine, they went to England and they made this deal. At that time, everything changed, like the traffic light that changes from red to green. Where the newspapers had been all pro-German, where they’d been telling the people of the difficulties that Germany was having fighting Great Britain commercially and in other respects, all of a sudden the Germans were no good. They were villains. They were Huns. They were shooting Red Cross nurses. They were cutting off babies’ hands. And they were no good.

Well, shortly after that, Mr. Wilson declared war on Germany.

The Zionists in London sent these cables to the United States, to Justice Brandeis: “Go to work on President Wilson. We’re getting from England what we want. Now you go to work, and you go to work on President Wilson and get the United States into the war.” And that did happen. That’s how the United States got into the war. We had no more interest in it; we had no more right to be in it than we have to be on the moon tonight instead of in this room.

Now the war ó World War One ó in which the United States participated had absolutely no reason to be our war. We went in there ó we were railroaded into it ó if I can be vulgar, we were suckered into that warñ merely so that the Zionists of the world could obtain Palestine. Now, that is something that the people in the United States have never been told. They never knew why we went into World War One.

Now, what happened?

After we got into the war, the Zionists went to Great Britain and they said: “Well, we performed our part of the agreement. Let’s have something in writing that shows that you are going to keep your bargain and give us Palestine after you win the war.” Because they didn’t know whether the war would last another year or another ten years. So they started to work out a receipt. The receipt took the form of a letter, and it was worded in very cryptic language so that the world at large wouldn’t know what it was all about. And that was called the Balfour Declaration.

The Balfour Declaration was merely Great Britain’s promise to pay the Zionists what they had agreed upon as a consideration for getting the United States into the war. So this great Balfour Declaration, that you hear so much about, is just as phony as a three dollar bill. And I don’t think I could make it more emphatic than that.

Now, that is where all the trouble started. The United States went in the war. The United States crushed Germany. We went in there, and it’s history. You know what happened.

Now, when the war was ended, and the Germans went to Paris, to the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, there were 117 Jews there, as a delegation representing the Jews, headed by Bernard Baruch. I was there: I ought to know. Now what happened?

The Jews at that peace conference, when they were cutting up Germany and parceling out Europe to all these nations that claimed a right to a certain part of European territory, the Jews said, “How about Palestine for us?” And they produced, for the first time to the knowledge of the Germans, this Balfour Declaration.

So the Germans, for the first time realized, “Oh, that was the game! That’s why the United States came into the war.” And the Germans for the first time realized that they were defeated, they suffered this terrific reparation that was slapped onto them, because the Zionists wanted Palestine and they were determined to get it at any cost.

A Jewish Defector Warns America: Benjamin Freedman Speaks on Zionism - Part II

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on September 8, 2011

When the Germans realized this, [that they had been double-crossed by the Jews] they naturally resented it. Up to that time, the Jews had never been better off in any country in the world than they had been in Germany.

You had Mr. Rathenau there, who was maybe 100 times as important in industry and finance as is Bernard Baruch in this country. You had Mr. Balin, who owned the two big steamship lines, the North German Lloyd’s and the Hamburg-American Lines. You had Mr. Bleichroder, who was the banker for the Hohenzollern family. You had the Warburgs in Hamburg, who were the big merchant bankers ó the biggest in the world. The Jews were doing very well in Germany. No question about that. Now, the Germans felt: “Well, that was quite a sellout.”

It was a sellout that I can best compare ó suppose the United States was at war today with the Soviet Union. And we were winning. And we told the Soviet Union: “Well, let’s quit. We offer you peace terms. Let’s forget the whole thing.” And all of a sudden Red China came into the war as an ally of the Soviet Union. And throwing [Red China] into the war brought about our defeat. A crushing defeat, with reparations the likes of which man’s imagination cannot encompass.

Imagine, then, after that defeat, if we found out that it was the Chinese in this country, our Chinese citizens, who all the time we thought they were loyal citizens working with us, were selling us out to the Soviet Union and that it was through them that Red China was brought into the war against us. How would we feel, in the United States against Chinese? I don’t think that one of them would dare show his face on any street. There wouldn’t be lampposts enough, convenient, to take care of them. Imagine how we would feel.

Well, that’s how the Germans felt towards these Jews. “We’ve been so nice to them”; and from 1905 on, when the first Communist revolution in Russia failed, and the Jews had to scramble out of Russia, they all went to Germany. And Germany gave them refuge. And they were treated very nicely. And here they sold Germany down the river for no reason at all other than they wanted Palestine as a so-called “Jewish commonwealth.”

Now, Nahum Sokolow ó all the great leaders, the big names that you read about in connection with Zionism today ó they, in 1919, 1920, ‘21, ‘22, and ‘23, they wrote in all their papers ó and the press was filled with their statements ó that “the feeling against the Jews in Germany is due to the fact that they realized that this great defeat was brought about by our intercession and bringing the United States into the war against them.”

The Jews themselves admitted that. It wasn’t that the Germans in 1919 discovered that a glass of Jewish blood tasted better than Coca-Cola or Muenchener Beer. There was no religious feeling. There was no sentiment against those people merely on account of their religious belief. It was all political. It was economic. It was anything but religious.

Nobody cared in Germany whether a Jew went home and pulled down the shades and said “Shema’ Yisrael” or “Our Father.” No one cared in Germany any more than they do in the United States. Now this feeling that developed later in Germany was due to one thing: that the Germans held the Jews responsible for their crushing defeat, for no reason at all, because World War One was started against Germany for no reason for which they [Germans] were responsible. They were guilty of nothing. Only of being successful. They built up a big navy. They built up world trade.

You must remember, Germany, at the time of Napoleon, at the time of the French Revolution, was what the German Reich consisted of 300 ó three hundred! ó small city-states, principalities, dukedoms, and so forth. Three hundred little separate political entities. And between that time, between the period of. . . between Napoleon and Bismarck, they were consolidated into one state. And within 50 years after that time they became one of the world’s great powers. Their navy was rivaling Great Britain’s, they were doing business all over the world, they could undersell anybody and make better products. And what happened? What happened as a result of that?

There was a conspiracy between England, France, and Russia that: “We must slap down Germany”, because there isn’t one historian in the world that can find a valid reason why those three countries decided to wipe Germany off the map politically. Now, what happened after that?

When Germany realized that the Jews were responsible for her defeat, they naturally resented it. But not a hair on the head of any Jew was harmed. Not a single hair. Professor Tansill, of Georgetown University, who had access to all the secret papers of the State Department, wrote in his book, and quoted from a State Department document written by Hugo Schoenfelt, a Jew who Cordell Hull sent to Europe in 1933 to investigate the so-called camps of political prisoners. And he wrote back that he found them in very fine condition. They were in excellent shape; everybody treated well. And they were filled with Communists.

Well, a lot of them were Jews, because the Jews happened to be maybe 98 per cent of the Communists in Europe at that time. And there were some priests there, and ministers, and labor leaders, Masons, and others who had international affiliations.

Now, the Jews sort of tried to keep the lid on this fact. They didn’t want the world to really understand that they had sold out Germany, and that the Germans resented that.

So [the Germans] did take appropriate action against them [against the Jews]. They. . . shall I say, discriminated against them wherever they could. They shunned them. The same as we would the Chinese, or the Negroes, or the Catholics, or anyone in this country who had sold us out to an enemy and brought about our defeat.

Now, after a while, the Jews of the world didn’t know what to do, so they called a meeting in Amsterdam. Jews from every country in the world attended in July 1933. And they said to Germany: “You fire Hitler! And you put every Jew back into his former position, whether he was a Communist, no matter what he was. You can’t treat us that way! And we, the Jews of the world, are calling upon you, and serving this ultimatum upon you.”

Well, the Germans told them. . . you can imagine. So what did they [the Jews] do? They broke up, and Samuel Untermyer, if the name means anything to people here. . . (You want to ask a question? ó Uh, there were no “Communists” in Germany at that time. They were called “Social Democrats”.)

Well, I don’t want to go by what they were called. We’re now using English words, and what they were called in Germany is not very material. . . but they were Communists, because in 1917, the Communists took over Germany for a few days. Rosa Luxembourg and Karl Liebknecht, and a group of Jews in Germany took over the government for three days. In fact, when the Kaiser ended the war, he fled to Holland because he thought the Communists were going to take over Germany as they did Russia, and that he was going to meet the same fate that the Czar did in Russia. So he left and went to Holland for safety and for security.

Now, at that time, when the Communist threat in Germany was quashed, it was quiet, the Jews were working, still trying to get back into their former ó their status ó and the Germans fought them in every way they could, without hurting a hair on anyone’s head. The same as one group, the Prohibitionists, fought the people who were interested in liquor, and they didn’t fight one another with pistols, they did it every way they could.

Well, that’s the way they were fighting the Jews in Germany. And, at that time, mind you, there were 80 to 90 million Germans and there were only 460,000 Jews. . . less than one half of one percent of Germany were Jews. And yet, they controlled all of the press, they controlled most of the economy, because they had come in and with cheap money ó you know the way the Mark was devalued ó they bought up practically everything.

Well, in 1933 when Germany refused to surrender, mind you, to the World Conference of Jews in Amsterdam, they broke up and Mr. Untermyer came back to the United States ó who was the head of the American delegation and the president of the whole conference ó and he went from the steamer to ABC and made a radio broadcast throughout the United States in which he said:

“The Jews of the world now declare a Holy War against Germany. We are now engaged in a sacred conflict against the Germans. And we are going to starve them into surrender. We are going to use a world-wide boycott against them, that will destroy them because they are dependent upon their export business.”

And it is a fact that two thirds of Germany’s food supply had to be imported, and it could only be imported with the proceeds of what they exported. Their labor. So if Germany could not export, two thirds of Germany’s population would have to starve. There just was not enough food for more than one third of the population.

Now in this declaration, which I have here, it was printed on page ó a whole page ó in the New York Times on August 7, 1933, Mr. Samuel Untermyer boldly stated that: “This economic boycott is our means of self-defense. President Roosevelt has advocated its use in the NRA” . [National Recovery Administration] ó which some of you may remember, where everybody was to be boycotted unless they followed the rules laid down by the New Deal, which of course was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court at that time.

Nevertheless, the Jews of the world declared a boycott against Germany, and it was so effective that you couldn’t find one thing in any store anywhere in the world with the words “made in Germany” on it.

In fact, an executive of the Woolworth Company told me that they had to dump millions of dollars worth of crockery and dishes into the river; that their stores were boycotted. If anyone came in and found a dish marked “Made in Germany,” they were picketed with signs: “Hitler”, “murderer”, and so forth, and like ó something like these sit-ins that are taking place in the South.

R. H. Macy, which is controlled by a family called Strauss who also happen to be Jews. . . a woman found stockings there which came from Chemnitz, marked “Made in Germany”. Well, they were cotton stockings. They may have been there 20 years, because since I’ve been observing women’s legs in the last twenty years, I haven’t seen a pair with cotton stockings on them. So Macy! I saw Macy boycotted, with hundreds of people walking around with signs saying “MURDERERS” and “HITLERITES”, and so forth.

Now up to that time, not one hair on the head of any Jew had been hurt in Germany. There was no suffering, there was no starvation, there was no murder, there was nothing.

Now, that. . . naturally, the Germans said, “Why, who are these people to declare a boycott against us and throw all our people out of work, and our industries come to a standstill? Who are they to do that to us?” They naturally resented it. Certainly they painted swastikas on stores owned by Jews.

Why should a German go in and give their money to a storekeeper who was part of a boycott who was going to starve Germany into surrender to the Jews of the world, who were going to dictate who their premier or chancellor was to be? Well, it was ridiculous.

That continued for some time, and it wasn’t until 1938, when a young Jew from Poland walked into the German embassy in Paris and shot one of the officials [a German official] that the Germans really started to get rough with the Jews in Germany. And you found them then breaking windows and having street fights and so forth.

Now, for anyone to say that ó I don’t like to use the word ëanti-Semitism’ because it’s meaningless, but it means something to you still, so I’ll have to use it ó the only reason that there was any feeling in Germany against Jews was that they were responsible: number one, for World War One; number two, for this world-wide boycott, and number three ó did I say for World War One, they were responsible? For the boycott ó and also for World War II, because after this thing got out of hand, it was absolutely necessary for the Jews and Germany to lock horns in a war to see which one was going to survive.

In the meanwhile, I had lived in Germany, and I knew that the Germans had decided [that] Europe is going to be Christian or Communist: there is no in between. It’s going to be Christian or it’s going to be Communist. And the Germans decided: “We’re going to keep it Christian if possible”. And they started to re-arm.

And their intention was ó by that time the United States had recognized the Soviet Union, which they did in November, 1933 ó the Soviet Union was becoming very powerful, and Germany realized: “Well, our turn is going to come soon, unless we are strong.” The same as we in this country are saying today, “Our turn is going to come soon, unless we are strong.”

And our government is spending 83 or 84 billion dollars of your money for defense, they say. Defense against whom? Defense against 40,000 little Jews in Moscow that took over Russia, and then, in their devious ways, took over control of many other governments of the world.

A Jewish Defector Warns America: Benjamin Freedman Speaks on Zionism - Part III

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on September 8, 2011

Now, for this country to now be on the verge of a Third World War, from which we cannot emerge a victor, is something that staggers my imagination. I know that nuclear bombs are measured in terms of megatons. A megaton is a term used to describe one million tons of TNT.

One million tons of TNT is a megaton. Now, our nuclear bombs have a capacity of 10 megatons, or 10 million tons of TNT. That was when they were first developed five or six years ago. Now, the nuclear bombs that are being developed have a capacity of 200 megatons, and God knows how many megatons the nuclear bombs of the Soviet Union have.

So, what do we face now? If we trigger a world war that may develop into a nuclear war, humanity is finished. And why will it take place? It will take place because Act III. . . the curtain goes up on Act III.

Act I was World War I. Act II was World War II. Act III is going to be World War III.

The Jews of the world, the Zionists and their co-religionists everywhere, are determined that they are going to again use the United States to help them permanently retain Palestine as their foothold for their world government. Now, that is just as true as I am standing here, because not alone have I read it, but many here have read it, and it’s known all over the world.

Now, what are we going to do? The life you save may be your son’s. Your boys may be on their way to that war tonight; and you don’t know it any more than you knew that in 1916 in London the Zionists made a deal with the British War Cabinet to send your sons to war in Europe. Did you know it at that time? Not a person in the United States knew it. You weren’t permitted to know it.

Who knew it? President Wilson knew it. Colonel House knew it. Others knew it. Did I know it? I had a pretty good idea of what was going on: I was liaison to Henry Morgenthau, Sr., in the 1912 campaign when President Wilson was elected, and there was talk around the office there. I was ëconfidential man’ to Henry Morgenthau, Sr., who was chairman of the Finance Committee, and I was liaison between him and Rollo Wells, the treasurer. So I sat in these meetings with President Wilson at the head of the table, and all the others, and I heard them drum into President Wilson’s brain the graduated income tax and what has become the Federal Reserve, and also indoctrinate him with the Zionist movement.

Justice Brandeis and President Wilson were just as close as the two fingers on this hand, and President Woodrow Wilson was just as incompetent when it came to determining what was going on as a newborn baby. And that’s how they got us into World War I, while we all slept.

Now, at this momentÖ at this moment they may be planning this World War III, in which we don’t stand a chance even if they don’t use nuclear bombs. How can the United States / about five percent of the world / go out and fight eighty to ninety percent of the world on their home ground? How can we do itÖ send our boys over there to be slaughtered? For what? So the Jews can have Palestine as their ëcommonwealth’? They’ve fooled you so much that you don’t know whether you’re coming or going.

Now any judge, when he charges a jury, says, “Gentlemen, any witness that you find has told a single lie, you can disregard all his testimony.” That is correct. I don’t know from what state you come, but in New York state that is the way a judge addresses a jury. If that witness said one lie, disregard his testimony.

Now, what are the facts about the Jews?

The Jews / I call them Jews to you, because they are known as Jews. I don’t call them Jews. I refer to them as “so-called Jews”, because I know what they are. If Jesus was a Jew, there isn’t a Jew in the world today, and if those people are Jews, certainly our Lord and Savior was not one of them, and I can prove that.

Now what happened? The eastern European Jews, who form 92 per cent of the world’s population of those people who call themselves Jews, were originally Khazars.

They were a warlike tribe that lived deep in the heart of Asia. And they were so warlike that even the Asiatics drove them out of Asia into eastern Europe / and to reduce this so you don’t get too confused about the history of Eastern Europe / they set up this big Khazar kingdom: 800,000 square miles. Only, there was no Russia, there were no other countries, and the Khazar kingdom was the biggest country in all Europe / so big and so powerful that when the other monarchs wanted to go to war, the Khazars would lend them 40,000 soldiers. That’s how big and powerful they were.

Now, they were phallic worshippers, which is filthy. I don’t want to go into the details of that now. It was their religion the way it was the religion of many other Pagans or Barbarians elsewhere in the world.

Now, the [Khazar] king became so disgusted with the degeneracy of his kingdom that he decided to adopt a so-called monotheistic faith / either Christianity, Islam / the Moslem faith / or what is known today as Judaism / really Talmudism. So, like spinning a top and calling out “eeny, meeny, miney, moe,” he picked out so-called Judaism. And that became the state religion.

He sent down to the Talmudic schools of Pumbedita and Sura and brought up thousands of these rabbis with their teachings, and opened up synagogues and schools in his kingdom of 800,000 people / 800,000 thousand square miles / and maybe ten to twenty million people; and they became what we call Jews. There wasn’t one of them that had an ancestor that ever put a toe in the Holy Land, not only in Old Testament history, but back to the beginning of time. Not one of them! And yet they come to the Christians and they ask us to support their armed insurrection in Palestine by saying:

“Well, you want to certainly help repatriate God’s chosen people to their Promised Land, their ancestral homeland, It’s your Christian duty. We gave you one of our boys as your Lord and Savior. You now go to church on Sunday, and kneel and you worship a Jew, and we’re Jews.” Well, they were pagan Khazars who were converted just the same as the Irish [were converted]. And it’s just as ridiculous to call them “people of the Holy Land,” as it would be. . . there are 54 million Chinese Moslems. Fifty four million! And, Mohammed only died in 620 A.D., so in that time, 54 million Chinese have accepted Islam as their religious belief.

Now imagine, in China, 2,000 miles away from Arabia, where the city of Mecca is located, where Mohammed was born. . . imagine if the 54 million Chinese called themselves ëArabs’. Imagine! Why, you’d say they’re lunatics. Anyone who believes that those 54 million Chinese are Arabs must be crazy. All they did was adopt as a religious faith; a belief that had its origin in Mecca, in Arabia.

The same as the Irish. When the Irish became Christians, nobody dumped them in the ocean and imported from the Holy Land a new crop of inhabitants that were Christians. They weren’t different people. They were the same people, but they had accepted Christianity as a religious faith.

Now, these Pagans, these Asiatics, these Turko-Finns. . . they were a Mongoloid race who were forced out of Asia into eastern Europe. They likewise, because their king took the faith / Talmudic faith / they had no choice. Just the same as in Spain: If the king was Catholic, everybody had to be a Catholic. If not, you had to get out of Spain. So everybody / they lived on the land just like the trees and the bushes; a human being belonged to the land under their feudal system / so they [Khazars] all became what we call today, Jews!

Now imagine how silly it was for the Christians. . . for the great Christian countries of the world to say, “We’re going to use our power, our prestige to repatriate God’s chosen people to their ancestral homeland, their Promised Land.”

Now, could there be a bigger lie than that? Could there be a bigger lie than that? And because they control the newspapers, the magazines, the radio, the television, the book publishing business, they have the ministers in the pulpit, they have the politicians on the soap boxes talking the same language . . . so naturally you’d believe black is white if you heard it often enough. You wouldn’t call black black anymore / you’d start to call black white. And nobody could blame you.

Now, that is one of the great lies. . . that is the foundation of all the misery that has befallen the world. Because after two wars fought in Europe / World War I and World War II / if it wasn’t possible for them to live in peace and harmony with the people in Europe, like their brethren are living in the United States, what were the two wars fought for? Did they have to / like you flush the toilet / because they couldn’t get along, did they have to say, “Well, we’re going back to our homeland and you Christians can help us”?

I can’t understand yet how the Christians in Europe could have been that dumb because every theologian, every history teacher, knew the things that I’m telling you. But, they naturally bribed them, shut them up with money, stuffed their mouths with money, and now. . . I don’t care whether you know all this or not. It doesn’t make any difference to me whether you know all these facts or not, but it does make a difference to me [for this reason]. I’ve got, in my family, boys that will have to be in the next war, and I don’t want them to go and fight and dieÖ like they died in Korea. Like they died in Japan. Like they’ve died all over the world.

For what?

To help crooks hold on to what they stole from innocent people who had been in peaceful possession of that land, those farms, those homes for hundreds and maybe thousands of years? Is that why the United States must go to war? Because the Democratic Party wants New York State / the electoral vote? Illinois, the electoral vote? And Pennsylvania, the electoral vote?Ö which are controlled by the Zionists and their co-religionists?. . . the balance of power?

In New York City there are 400,000 members of the liberal party, all Zionists and their co-religionists. And New York State went for Kennedy by 400,000 votes. Now, I don’t blame Mr. Kennedy. I’m fond of Mr. Kennedy. I think he’s a great man. I think he can really pull us out of this trouble if we get the facts to him. And I believe he knows a great deal more than his appointments indicate he knows. He’s playing with the enemy. Like when you go fishing, you’ve got to play with the fish. Let ‘em out and pull ‘em in. Let ‘em out and pull ‘em in. But knowing Mr. Kennedy’s father, and how well informed he is on this whole subject, and how close Kennedy is to his father, I don’t think Mr. Kennedy is totally in the dark.

But I do think that it is the duty of every mother, every loyal Christian , every person that regards the defense of this country as a sacred right, that they communicate / not with their congressman, not with their senator, but with President Kennedy. And tell him, “I do not think you should send my boy, or our boys, wearing the uniform of the United States of America, and under the flag that you see here, our red, white and blue, to fight there to help keep in the hands of these that which they have stolen”. I think everyone should not alone write once, but keep writing and get your friends to write.

Now, I could go on endlessly, and tell you these things to support what I have just asked you to do. But I don’t think it’s necessary to do that. You’re above the average group in intelligence and I don’t think it’s necessary to impress this any more.

But. . . I want to tell you one more thing. You talk aboutÖ “Oh, the Jews. Why the Jews? Christianity. Why, we got Christianity from the Jews and the Jews gave us Jesus, and the Jews gave us our religion”. But do you know that on the day of atonement that you think is so sacred to them, that on that dayÖ and I was one of them! This is not hearsay. I’m not here to be a rabble-rouser. I’m here to give you facts.

When, on the Day of Atonement, you walk into a synagogue, the very first prayer that you recite, you stand / and it’s the only prayer for which you stand / and you repeat three times a short prayer. The Kol Nidre. In that prayer, you enter into an agreement with God Almighty that any oath, vow, or pledge that you may make during the next twelve months / any oath, vow or pledge that you may take during the next twelve months shall be null and void. The oath shall not be an oath; the vow shall not be a vow; the pledge shall not be a pledge. They shall have no force and effect, and so forth and so on.

And further than that, the Talmud teaches: “Don’t forget / whenever you take an oath, vow, and pledge / remember the Kol Nidre prayer that you recited on the Day of Atonement, and that exempts you from fulfilling that”.

How much can you depend on their loyalty? You can depend upon their loyalty as much as the Germans depended upon it in 1916.

And we’re going to suffer the same fate as Germany suffered, and for the same reason. (Ö)

[The rest of this presentation consisted of Mr. Freedman explaining his informational outreach and a follow-up question-and-answer period. I am sure that audio tapes exist that can be ordered from dissident websites, maybe even from Amazon.]

Hitler and the Banksters: The Abolition of Interest-Servitude

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on September 13, 2011

This article was written for mature and thoughtful people who want to understand today in light of yesterday. It was not written for baboons who start to howl the moment they hear “Hitler” ñ the way the monkeys of my youth used to howl in front of my window in South America when they heard a thunderclap.

Its author is a relatively young South African banker by the name of Stephen Goodson. I have his permission to post it.

Here goes:


At the end of November 1918, Adolf Hitler returned to Munich and then proceeded to a military camp in Traunstein in south-eastern Bavaria. When the camp was disbanded in April 1919, he went back to Munich, which was still being ruled by a Soviet republic founded by a Polish Jew Kurt Eisner (real name Salamon Kosmanowsky).

At the beginning of May, a few days after the communist revolution had been terminated on May 1, 1919 by the Bavarian Freikorps, Hitler was summoned as a member of the 2nd Infantry Regiment to attend a course on political instruction. The purpose of this course of lectures was to provide the soldiers with a background of politics, which would enable them to monitor the many revolutionary and political movements present in Munich at that time.

One of the lecturers was a former construction engineer turned economist, Dr Gottfried Feder (1881-1941).(1) His first lecture was entitled “The Abolition of the Interest-Servitude”. Hitler was enthralled by what he heard, and this was to be a turning point in his political career. The following quotations from Mein Kampf reflect his initial thoughts.

“ For the first time in my life I heard a discussion which dealt with the principles of stock exchange capital and capital which was used for loan activities. After hearing the first lecture delivered by Feder, the idea immediately came into my head that I had found a way to one of the most essential prerequisites for the founding of a new party.

To my mind, Feder’s merit consisted in the ruthless and trenchant way in which he described the double character of the capital engaged in stock exchange and loan transactions, laying bare the fact that this capital is ever and always dependent on the payment of interest. In fundamental questions his statements were so full of common sense that those who criticized him did not deny that au fond his ideas were sound, but they doubted whether it be possible to put these ideas into practice. To me this seemed the strongest point in Feder’s teaching, though others considered it a weak point.(2)

And again,

ÖI understood immediately that here was a truth of transcendental importance for the future of the German people. The absolute separation of stock exchange capital from the economic life of the nation would make it possible to oppose the process of internationalization in German business without at the same time attacking capital at such, for to do this would be to jeopardize the foundations of our national independence. I clearly saw what was developing in Germany, and I realized then that the stiffest fight we would have to wage would not be against the enemy nations but against international capital. In Feder’s speech I found an effective rallying-cry for our coming struggle.”(3)

Further, he wrote,

“The struggle against international finance capital and loan capital has become one of the most important points in the program on which the German nation has based its fight for economic freedom and independence.”(4)

A few weeks later Hitler received an instruction from his superiors to investigate a political association called the Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (German Workers Party). At this meeting held in the Sterneckerbrau Inn in Munich, about 20 to 25 persons were present. The main speaker was Dr Gottfried Feder.

Shortly thereafter Hitler joined this party and received a provisional certificate of membership numbered seven. His first act on assuming control of the party was to rename it the Nationalsozialistiche Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (National Socialist German Workers Party).

Feder, who was the principal drafter of the party’s 25 points, became the architect and theoretician of the program (5) until his unfortunate dismissal as Secretary of State for Economic Affairs in August 1934.

Approximately 40 percent of Feder’s “The  Program of the NSDAP” is devoted to economic and financial policies. Below are some of the highlights.

Adolf Hitler prints its two main points in leaded type:

“THE COMMON INTEREST BEFORE SELF-THE SPIRIT OF THE PROGRAM  ABOLITION OF THE THRALLDOM OF INTEREST ñ THE CORE OF NATIONAL SOCIALISM.” “Once these two points are achieved, it means a victory of their approaching universalist ordering of society in the true state over the present-day separation of state, nation and economics under the corrupting influence of the individualist theory of society as now constructed. The sham state of today, oppressing the working classes and protecting the pirated gains of bankers and stock exchange speculators, is the area for reckless private enrichment and for the lowest political profiteering; it gives no thought to its people, and provides no high moral bond of union. The power of money, most ruthless of all powers, holds absolute control, and exercises corrupting, destroying influence on state, nation, society, morals, drama, literature and on all matters of morality, less easy to estimate.(6)

“Break down the thralldom of interest” is our war cry.(7) What do we mean by thralldom of interest? The landowner is under this thralldom, who has to raise loans to finance his farming operations, loans at such high interest as almost to eat up the results of his labor, or who is forced to make debts and to drag the mortgages after him like so much weight of lead.

So is the worker, producing in shops and factories for a pittance, whilst the shareholder draws dividends and bonuses which he has not worked for. So is the earning middle class, whose work goes almost entirely to pay the interest on bank overdrafts.(8)

Thralldom of interest is the real expression for the antagonisms, capital versus labor, blood versus money, creative work versus exploitation. The necessity of breaking this thralldom is of such vast importance for our nation and our race, that on it alone depends our nation’s hope of rising up from its shame and slavery; in fact, the hope of recovering happiness, prosperity and civilization throughout the world. It is the pivot on which everything turns; it is far more than a mere necessity of financial policy. Whilst its principles and consequences bite deep into political and economic life, it is a leading question for economic study, and thus affects every single individual and demands a decision from each one: Service to the nation or unlimited private enrichment. It means a solution of the Social Question.(9)

Our financial principle: Finance shall exist for the benefit of the state; the financial magnates shall not form a state within the state. Hence our aim to break the thralldom of interest.

Relief of the state, and hence of the nation, from its indebtedness to the great financial houses, which lend on interest.

Nationalization of the Reichsbank and the issuing houses, which lend on interest.

Provision of money for all great public objects (waterpower, railroads etc), not by means of loans, but by granting non-interest bearing state bonds or without using ready money.

Introduction of a fixed standard of currency on a secured basis.

Creation of a national bank of business development (currency reform) for granting non-interest bearing loans.

Fundamental remodeling of the system of taxation on social-economic principles. Relief of the consumer from the burden of indirect taxation, and of the producer from crippling taxation (fiscal reform and relief from taxation).(10)

Wanton printing of bank notes, without creating new values, means inflation. We all lived through it. But the correct conclusion is that an issue of non-interest bearing bonds by the state cannot produce inflation if new values are at the same time created.

The fact that today great economic enterprises cannot be set on foot without recourse to loans is sheer lunacy. Here is where reasonable use of the state’s right to produce money which might produce most beneficial results.”(11)

Feder was appointed Secretary of State for Economic Affairs when the National Socialists came to power on January 30, 1933, but his efforts to implement official National Socialist economic policy were immediately frustrated by Dr. Hjalmar Schacht, who had been appointed President of the Reichsbank in March 1933. Schacht was an enigmatic character. Although he was born in Tingleff, Schleswig-Holstein in 1877, his family originally came from Hungary. In 1903 at the age of 26 he joined the Dresdner Bank, and in 1908 he became a Freemason.

He was also a student of Hebrew(12) as he deemed that knowledge of this language was necessary if one wished to advance one’s career in banking.

Schacht immediately set out to destroy Feder’s plans, which culminated in the latter’s removal from office in August 1934, after Schacht had been appointed head of the Ministry of Economic Affairs.

This tragic dismissal may be partially attributed to Hitler’s lack of a deep understanding of financial and economic matters. He admitted as much when he first met Feder in 1919,

“Thus the judgement arrived at by Gottfried Feder determined me to make a fundamental study of a question with which I had hitherto not been very familiar.”(13)

A somewhat attenuated version of monetary reform was introduced. In order to finance the state’s work and rearmament programs, two dummy corporations called Gesellschaft fuer Offentliche Arbeiten (Offa) and Metallforschung Gesellschaft (Mefo) were established. These corporations accepted bills of exchange from suppliers who fulfilled state orders. These bill of exchange were then discounted at the Reichsbank at a rate of 4 percent. They were issued for three months only, which was clearly unsatisfactory in view of the long-term nature of the various projects they were financing. They could, however, be extended at three monthly intervals for up to five years.

In January 1939 matters came to a head when Schacht refused extension of RM3 billion worth of Offa and Mefo bills, because of fears of “inflation”. On January 7, 1939, he sent Hitler the following memorandum:

“1) The Reich must spend only that amount covered by

2) Full financial control must be returned to the Ministry of Finance. (Then forced to pay for anything the army desired.)

3) Price and wage control must be rendered effective. The existing mismanagement must be eliminated.

4) The use of money and investment markets must be at the sole discretion of the Reichsbank. (This meant a practical elimination of Goering’s Four Year Plan)”(14)

By these means Schacht intended to collapse the German economy, which during the period 1933-39 had increased its gross national product by 100 percent. From being a ruined and bankrupt nation in January 1933 with over six million unemployed persons, Hitler had transformed Germany into a socialist paradise and the most powerful and prosperous state in the history of Europe. He angrily rejected the recommendations of the Reichsbank, describing them as “mutiny”.(15)

On January 19, 1939 he sacked the impudent lackey of international finance.(16) Without further ado he instructed the Reichsbank to issue all credits requested by the state. A form of Federgeld (Feder money) was now in circulation, although the bills of exchange still attracted nominal interest.

A new Reichsbank law, which was promulgated on June 15, 1939, made the bank “UNCONDITIONALLY SUBORDINATED TO THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE STATE.”(17) Article 3 of the law decreed that the bank should be “directed and managed according to the instructions and under the supervision of the Fuehrer and Reich Chancellor.”(18) Hitler was now his own banker, but having departed from the fold of international swindlers and usurers he would, like Napoleon Bonaparte, suffer the same fate: an unnecessary war followed by the ruination of his people and country.

Events quickly unraveled. On March 31, 1939, Poland received a blank check(19) from England, which unilaterally offered to guarantee her sovereignty; not only if Germany invaded Poland, but also if Poland invaded Germany! This merely served to stiffen Polish resistance to Hitler’s genuine desire to achieve a permanent solution of all outstanding issues emanating from the Treaty of Versailles.

During the next five months the Polish government progressively intensified the oppression, harassment of and attacks on the 1.5 million ethnic Germans living in Poland. These attacks, in which over 58 000 German civilians were killed by Poles in an orgy of savagery, culminated in the Bromberg Massacre on September 3, 1939, in which 5 500 people were murdered. These provocations and atrocities were stoically ignored.(20) Eventually Hitler was forced to employ military intervention in order to protect the Germans in Poland.

On August 30, 1939, in an act of great statesmanship, Hitler again offered to the Poles the Marienwerder proposals,(21) namely retention of the existing 1919 borders, the return of Danzig (97% German), the construction of a 60-mile autobahn and rail link connecting West and East Prussia (from Schoenlanke to Marienwerder) and an exchange of German and Polish populations. On the orders of the international bankers, the British Foreign Secretary, Lord Halifax, strongly advised the Poles NOT to negotiate. This is how and why World War II was started. The ensuing forced war resulted in victory for the international financiers and defeat and slavery for all the people of Europe.

Today the bankers reign supreme. The European Union with its commissars in Brussels and its so called “European” Central Bank headquartered in Frankfurt,(22) increasingly resembles the old Soviet Union. However, with the recent ongoing “sovereign” debt crisis and the collapse of the Euro, the plan for a united Europe anchored in perpetual debt enslavement has received a major setback and has indeed started to disintegrate.

Notwithstanding the inability of Adolf Hitler to permanently liberate Europe, it behooves us to appreciate that what he achieved was not done in vain. It is incumbent on us to learn and understand the fundamentals of usury and to spread that knowledge relentlessly, until our material and spiritual liberties have been restored.

End Notes

In 1917 Feder formed an organization called the Deutscher Kampfbund gegen Zinsknechtschaft (German Fighting League for the Breaking of Interest Slavery). Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Hurst and Blackett, London, 1922, 122. Ibid., 124. Ibid., 124. Gottfried Feder, The Program of the NSDAP, The National Socialist German Workers’ Party and its General Conceptions, translated by E.T.S. Dugdale, Fritz Eher Verlag, Munich, 1932. Ibid., 21. Ibid., 25. Ibid., 26. Ibid., 27. Ibid., 30. Ibid., 43. Roger Elletson, Monetary Parapometrics: A Case Study of the Third Reich, Christian International Publications, Wilson, Wyoming, 1982, 16. Hitler, op.cit., 125. Edward N. Peterson, Hjalmar Schacht: For and Against Hitler, The Christopher Publishing House, 179. David Marsh, The Bundesbank: The Bank That Rules Europe, William Heinemann Ltd. London, 1992, 119. David Irving, The War Path: Hitler’s Germany 1933-1939, Macmillan, London, 1978, 172. Footnote: “Montagu Norman, governor of the Bank of England, told the U.S. ambassador in London that Schacht was his constant informer over 16 years about Germany’s precarious financial position (U.S. Ambassador Joseph Kennedy reported this to Washington on February 27, 1939.)  In 1945, Norman tried to intercede for Schacht at Nuremberg through a fellow Freemason on the British prosecuting team, Harry Phillimore (Schacht was also a Freemason). The U.S. team flatly rejected Phillimore’s advances, but the British judge, Birkett, successfully voted for an acquittal. Marsh, op.cit., 128 Marsh, op.cit., note 40, 300. This was a check that was guaranteed to bounce, as England was only prepared to come to Poland’s aid in the event of a German or Polish invasion, but not one from the Soviet Union. The Poles were unaware of this circumscription. The Soviets took by far the larger portion of Poland viz. 77 300 square miles, as opposed to the 49 800 square miles acquired by Germany. David L. Hoggan, The Forced War: When Peaceful Revision Failed, Institute for Historical Review, Costa Mesa, California, 1989, Chap. 16, “The Terrified Germans of Poland”, 388-90 and The Lodz Riots, 4-7. Das Letze Angebot (The Last Offer) in Verheimlichte Dokumente-Was den Deutschen verschwiegen wird, Fz-Verlag, Munich, 1993, 172-4. It contains all 16 points. Mayer Anselm Rothschild (1743-1812) founded his banking empire in Frankfurt. He infamously counseled his five sons, “Let me control a nation’s money and I care not who writes its laws.”


The Western anti-German Narrative

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on October 30, 2011 Editor Ö Jim W. Dean

In our troubled times, it’s cool to bash to Germans. My enemies, of course, make German-bashing their favorite sports, but they can be forgiven because that’s in their nature as well as in their political interest.

However, sad to say, some of my best friends are German-bashers also.

Why? Don’t ask me. Because it is so easy? Just paint a mustache on anybody you don’t like ñ and presto! Sheeple Power! You can strut around with a halo. Few are the braves who’ll confront you and object.

It is no secret that I am on the war path against Sheeple Power. Today I launch the following two scholarly sorties ñ not written by me, I modestly hasten to add! ñ for those who strive for clarity of thought, no matter what the fall-out.

One is an excerpt from a website called www.germanviews.de/ . The commentary following that excerpt is brought to you courtesy of one of my favorite writers, the Canadian Ian Macdonald, a former diplomat par excellence and one-time anti-Sheeple columnist for the beleaguered Zundelsite.

L.Ian MacDonald and Christopher Waddell

Here goes:

The most common and widespread basis for hostility toward things German is what I call the Western anti-German narrative. In this ideology, which is spread by films, literature, and popular depictions of history, Germany has represented a danger for its neighbors in the past and still represents a potential danger.

For this reason, Germany must be fettered, disempowered and diluted because the German national character is anti-democratic, excessively obedient to established authority, collectivistic, violence-prone, warlike, genocidal, etc., etc. [ad nauseam!]

Otto von Bismark

Present day historians are generally too sophisticated to draw a clear and direct line between Luther, Frederick, Bismarck and Hitler, but the lingering effects of such propagandistic historiography are still quite noticeable today, expressed in the tendency to treat all German history as the prehistory of the Third Reich.

One cannot understand this concept of history unless one understands the historical context of the European civil war that has been raging since 1789.

This civil war is being fought by the adherents of three ideologies who constantly change their names, slogans and programs but still retain a recognizable identity and continuity.

We are dealing with two utopian and one non-utopian worldviews, Liberalism and Socialism on one hand and what is variously called Conservatism, Reaction or simply the Political Right on the other hand.

The utopian approach assumes the possibility of peaceful and civilized coexistence among mankind. This would not have to be a miracle, but is rather something that can come about as a matter of course. For this reason one does not have to examine and analyze the fundamentals of society itself; one can directly and immediately pursue the realization of paradise on earth, either through gradual reform or revolutionary violence.

The Utopian Ideologies Imply a Number of Assumptions

Firstly, utopian societies hold that man is by nature good. Social conditions such as inequality and lack of freedom are responsible for the existence of evil and must therefore be banished.

The approach of the political Right is that man is inadequate and weak and mired in original sin and must therefore rely on a social order for support. Therefore a certain measure of inequality and bondage must be accepted as necessary. The alternatives are not “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity” but rather chaos, violence and barbarism.

Liberty, Equality, Fraternity

Secondly, Utopian ideologies hold that society can be rationally planned; its design is a matter of reason and enlightenment. The Right, by contrast, believes that what is traditional and established can be destroyed by criticism, but cannot be replaced by anything better through rational processes.

Examples of what cannot be replaced by rationalism are the concepts of family, faith, tradition and Fatherland.

Thirdly, Utopian societies hold that what is “Good” (such as Freedom and Equality) can be rationally inferred, thus the Good is culturally independent and universally valid.

They believe that mankind can be redeemed if the Utopia derived from Enlightenment principles can be globally introduced.

For Conservatives, on the other hand, each culture is a unique, unplanned and irreproducible response to the elementary question of whether an orderly society is possible. The Right emphasizes the legitimacy of the particular as opposed to the validity of universal ideology.

Fourthly, Utopian societies harbor the belief that society has to be defined and analyzed according to their standards.

These standards comprise a standpoint of norms rather than facts ñ thus “What Should Be” trumps “What Is.” They are derived from rights rather than duties.

The Utopian concept of society confuses itself with “Reason and Enlightenment” because it is built on unreal notions instead of imperfect reality, and thus mistakes itself for “The Good.”

The reason Utopia mistakes itself for “The Good” is because it proceeds from the assumption that Man himself is good, and this implies that “The Bad” resides in social structures and concepts including tradition, articles of faith, duty, etc. In their way of thinking, if the structures are bad the defenders of these structures must likewise be bad.

Attaining Enlightenment

The Utopian concept of society produces an apocalyptic concept of politics, according to which politics is a struggle between the powers of light and of darkness.

Consequently, war is not perceived as tragic and inescapable. It is perceived as justified when it is conducted for revolutionary aims and purposes. In that case, every atrocity is acceptable.

The Utopian concept perceives war as criminal when it is conducted for counterrevolutionary aims and purposes, and then the means by which it is conducted are not taken into consideration.

And what does all this have to do with hostility against all things German?

If we conceive of 20th Century wars as parts of a global ideological civil war, Germany obviously represents the Right. Germany could never accept the idea that wars are conducted in order to bring about “The Good Order” such as “War to End All War.” This Utopian idea results in an apocalyptic concept of politics.

The idea of “Good War” is part of the Utopian concept of the liberalist world order as pursued by the Western “democracies” as well as the variant of Communism pursued by the Soviet Union. The accusation that Germany was striving for world domination, which was put forward at the beginning of the 20th Century, would have been absurd even if not raised by the Anglo Saxon powers!

At every moment of the 19th and 20th centuries, those countries were infinitely closer to world domination than Germany ever was, and they continue to be so in the 21st Century.

Nations that were protected by insular geography have historically indulged in bold thinking ñ and thanks to this geography, have been able to pursue global expansionist policies.

Global Expansionist Policies

The liberal New World Order that appeared on the world stage before the First World War was also a fitting ideology for global Utopian thinking, since imperialistic power politics functioned as the armed branch of Utopia.

It is not true that one was merely a function of the other. Both aspects of Anglo Saxon (and particularly American) policy were aspects of one and the same understanding of politics.

By contrast, Germany traditionally represented institutionalized counter-revolution.

Globalist Utopian thinking was alien to the German power elite, since they faced the reality of governing a state that was constantly threatened from the inside as well as the outside.

Their political horizon was continental as opposed to insular, and so they were concerned with the consolidation of what actually existed.

The Reich did indeed adopt liberal, democratic and even socialistic ideas ñ consider the Bismarckian social legislation. However, it did so only on condition that these ideas would consolidate the existing order. The door was open for socialistic ideas to develop, but they would never be allowed to destroy the existing order.

This political concept (renunciation of revolutionary or utopian policies) determined the policies not only of conservatives, but of the Liberals as well, and ultimately even the policies of the Social Democrats. The tendency to think in revolutionary and utopian terms was simply alien to Germany ó it was too weak and exposed to attempt changing the world order or to entertain ideas of world conquest.

However, Germany was at least potentially strong enough to bring Europe into its sphere of influence and thus block establishment of a New World Order; and if Europe were going to be true to its name, it would have to do likewise.

The First Thirty Years War

The war against Germany, which, as Winston Churchill observed, was in fact a Thirty Years War lasting from 1914 ñ 1945, was obviously not fought in response to any “crimes” committed by the National Socialists.

Instead, the Thirty Year War Against Germany was fought to force Europe into the liberalist-utopian world order and the Anglo Saxon sphere of control.

Germany did not subscribe to any grandiose principle that it wanted to make real.

It was a nation rooted in concrete reality whose order and goals was derived not from utopian designs but practical necessity.

The Germans had no abstract loyalty toward liberal or “democratic” ideals, and this is what brought on the propagandistic accusation of being excessively obedient. Germany did not pretend to be fighting for universal bliss, therefore it had to defend interests that were defined not ideologically but rather ethnically.

Germany’s enemies construed this as “nationalism.” In fact, Germany championed communal values instead of individual entitlements. (Ö) Communal ideals are operative only when they are anchored in genuine emotions, the source of the clichÈ of German “romanticism” and “irrationality.”

The Thinker

In short, the facts that the Germans were different and thought differently from the Anglo Saxons and that they had no sense of Utopia, but rather represented a danger for its global realization, made them the principal enemy figure for Western Utopian thinking.

The clichÈs about the German national character represent the distorted and demagogically biased description of tendencies and dispositions that actually were (and still are) present. These clichÈs were indispensable because a country like Germany could not afford globalistic Utopianism.

As we see today, Germany still cannot afford it. Whether the Anglo Saxon peoples themselves can continue to afford it remains to be seen Ö

(Compiled and excerpted from notes of a speech given before the Berlin Institute for State Policy on the subject of “Hostility Towards Germans ñ An Appraisal” last summer by Manfred Kleine-Hartlage. Translated by James M. Damon. Full text www.german-views.de/Ö/hostility-towards-germans-part-i-the-anti-german- narrative-in-the-west/ )

What does that mean in today’s Utopian thinking with its corollary of fervent German-bashing, where it is almost seen as “normal” that institutional torture is an acceptable means to an end ñ or, worse, that it is quite okay to “liberate” a downtrodden people on the other side of the globe by lynching its titular head in full view of some cheering folks on the Net?

I am speaking of tangible costs, as summarized by my friend, Ian Macdonald:

Ian MacDonald

America’s participation in [World War II] is seen as having been undertaking for the defense of Western Christian civilization.

[ People accept] without question the thesis that Hitler and the Nazis had to be stopped ñ lest “we all end up in concentration camps” or worse, under the heel of a ferocious dictator and his sinister Gestapo. Such was the temper of the times.

[There was no awareness] that there could be a much more menacing evil afoot, even though some coverage was given to the Soviet invasion of Finland and the Nazi-Soviet pact that expanded Stalin’s bloodthirsty rule into Poland and the Baltic countries where thousands died at the hands of anti-Christian Kommissars, many tortured to death and their families sent to Siberia in sealed box cars.

It was the festering resentment of the misery caused (Ö) that set the stage for the emergence in the ëtwenties of an inspiring populist Fuehrer, promising to restore German honor and dignity, and the German economy, by the retrieval of its conquered territories.

Like most other media, the [Western media] glamourized the war, helping to persuade hundreds of thousands of young men, including the writer, to lust for the opportunity to get into action, preferably in the RCAF even when, for a time, the chance of survival in Bomber Command was slim, at best.

Creating enthusiasm for martyrdom was a challenge shared by the [media] with the Government (who controlled the news) and with almost all Canadian institutions of learning, especially high schools where morning assemblies featured patriotic songs most every day and teenage volunteers were accorded virtual hero status.

A Young Volunteer

Combining such inducements with the stigma of cowardice for malingerers ensured the Armed Forces of a steady flow of volunteers and enabled the Government to postpone the introduction of politically-unpalatable conscription for overseas service that had created fury in Quebec in World War I.

Servicemen and women who emerged from the conflict unscathed, typically referred to their experience as the most exciting and meaningful of their lives, and except for the loss of comrades, the most satisfying.

The pride of being part of the Big Show, the camaraderie among new friends from all classes, the defiance of death, the admiration of the public, the girls who couldn’t resist a uniform (thousands of whom were taken home as war brides), the travel to Britain and the battle zones, the mastery of new skills, and above all the supreme satisfaction of having defended one’s family and one’s country successfully against a ruthless enemy intent on destroying our democracy, our freedom, and our basic human rights, turned ordinary young men into warriors.

THE HITLER REGIME has passed from the scene, as have most participants in the war it so vividly and optimistically portrayed, leaving survivors to wonder how a Good War and Total Victory could have brought such calamity and so tragically betrayed the trusting patriots who had dedicated, and often lost, their lives in rallying to the defense of Freedom.

It is now clear that the celebrated Allied Victory did not save Western Christian Civilization as promised, but precipitated its demise.

There is even good reason to doubt that the case for making war was ever sufficiently plausible and compelling to justify the inevitable horrendous sacrifice, especially coming on the heels of the Great War (“to end all war”) that already had stripped both the Allied nations and Germany of many of their best and brightest, and, in most cases, of the victims’ priceless progeny. (Ö)

"Endless Crosses I did See..."

Very few had the insight, integrity and courage to challenge the ostensible purpose of the war or to recount the hideous atrocities committed on Germans during and after the fighting, let alone the authenticity of the “victory” for the democracies.

Few dared to elucidate on the disastrous geopolitical repercussions and eclipse of European power.

In retrospect, the [media], with the best of intentions and in tune with the times, appears to have accepted the Hollywood version of German intentions, and along with the entire country, acceded to the most monstrous contrived miscalculation in history, carried out against the best interests of the British Commonwealth and Western democracies.

Britons and Canadians were led to believe that their German kinfolk, who held no animosity towards them, were the enemy who threatened their freedom, when in fact the enemy was the atheistic Soviet regime whose bloodthirsty Kommissars had liquidated, by 1939, at least 20 million Christians and was intent on subjugating Europe at the earliest opportunity. Germany offered the sole effective defense against such a fearful prospect.

Germany, astutely and persistently but with increasing frustration, sought peace with Britain in order to concentrate on eliminating the imminent Soviet threat but, on Churchill’s orders, the generous “peace with honor” proposals were rejected out of hand, sounding the death knell for tens of millions, including 45 thousand young Canadians..

The same Churchill, when shortly after the destruction of Germany the Soviet threat quickly re-emerged, quipped flippantly to an Aide “It looks like we slaughtered the wrong pig!”.

Britain and Canada were soon in a military alliance with Germany, but it was a decade too late. The hostile Soviet Union had already enslaved Eastern and Central Europe, the Baltic countries. Poland, the country whose independence Britain had ostensibly gone to war to defend from Hitler, was cynically delivered into the bloodstained clutches of a far more sinister and malevolent dictator.

On the Outside - Looking In

Even more ominous was the invasion, occupation and sacrilegious militarisation of Palestine, the Christian Holy Land, by ruthless Zionist Jews, a part of the “tiny remnant” of East European Jewry who had “miraculously escaped extermination in the gas chambers” of what is now described as The Holocaust.

The Star Weekly made scant reference to the implications of this impending European colonization in the Middle East, nor to the oppressive colonization of Germany and Eastern Europe and, perhaps caught up in the euphoria of “Victory”, was content to accept the widespead prognosis of a Brave New World and lasting peace.

Other newsworthy issues and anomalies even more studiously ignored by the Star Weekly were the identity of the sinister forces behind the inexplicable decision to declare war on Germany alone when both Germany and the Soviet Union invaded Poland in September, l939 (no less illogical than the subsequent refusal of the Churchill government to accept an honorable peace).

The rationale for making war was not widely debated at the time, partly because of censorship and self-censorship by the media, but it is difficult to imagine that the issue did not loom large in the minds of all knowledgeable observers who had the best interests of their country at heart, who knew the true meaning of war and wondered whose interests were served.

An early vigorous campaign by the media against the Unnecessary War, based on self-interest, patriotism and common sense, could well have changed the course of history.

Dangerous Realignments

In the dangerous realignments of the immediate post-war era, the miscalculations of Allied “statesmen” became clear; the most calamitous being the designation of our Christian European ethnic and cultural German kin-folk as the “enemy”.

In fact, Germany was our natural ally, just as the atheistic, genocidal anti-Christian Stalin dictatorship was our natural enemy.

Making war on Germany ensured that Communism (and Zionism) would triumph, and that British and European importance in world affairs would decline accordingly.

With the strengthening of Soviet influence by the communist victory and occupation in Europe, the communist takeover in China was a foregone conclusion, as was the further extension of communism and revolt into the former Japanese, British, French and Dutch colonies, ultimately causing the death of untold millions, including thousands of Allied soldiers who died in Korea and Vietnam.

In the Middle East the outcome of the misguided, fratricidal war against Germany was no less disastrous, leading to the dispossession and cultural genocide of an entire nation and brutal desecration of the Christian Holy Land.

Worse still was the subversion and corruption of the Christian democracies leading to perpetual strife in Palestine and bloody invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq by the U.S.A. (Ö)


Might There Have Been Brighter Days?

Could there have been a more palatable outcome than the Pyrrhic victory? “What if Hitler had won?” ñ a rhetorical question asked usually to evoke shivers of horror among listeners.

But if Germany had won, arguably the world would by now be a much better and safer place.

And the “what if” is not nearly as far-fetched as Allied propagandists would have us believe. Germany certainly would have won if Britain and France, and eventually America, had acted in their own obvious best interests and remained neutral or entered the war on Germany’s side.

An Anglo-German alliance was by no means a total implausibility given that the immensely popular pro-German King Edward VIII would have remained on the throne had it not been for the fateful intervention of the seductive Wallis Warfield Simpson (described as a “god-send” by the vengeful pro-war lobby).

As King, Edward VIII could have kept war-weary Britain from declaring war on Germany and, following German success on the Eastern Front against the universally-hated Stalin dictartorship, could have brought Britain into a NATO-style alliance of anti-communist European nations (as took place in any event a few years later).

In such circumstances a grateful, friendly Germany could have guaranteed the integrity and survival of the British Empire, which Hitler much admired.

The Fate of Many - Held in the Hand of One

What if then our German anti-communist coalition had liberated the Soviet Union and reconstituted its components as semi-autonomous states under German hegemony? Surely then the Stalinist threat to freedom would have been eliminated for the foreseeable future.

Had events followed such a favorable course, almost a certainly had Edward VIII remained as King, the outlook for Western Christian civilization would now be decidedly less ominous and control of our destiny would have remained securely in our own hands.

Had Britain not been deceived and betrayed into war with Germany, with whom she had no authentic quarrel, there would have been no Second World War, tens of millions of lives would have been spared, priceless European architecture would not have been destroyed, Europe would have been united under German leadership, international communism would have become a footnote in history.

What Could There Have Been - If, if, if....?

Trillions of dollars could have been used for the betterment of mankind, the environment could have been protected, the Cold War would have been forestalled, (along with the Korean and Vietnamese wars and communist sponsored revolutions elsewhere).

Six Million or more Jews would have been harmlessly ensconsed in a tropical paradise, there would have been peace and justice in the Middle East, China would have evolved along Taiwanese lines under capitalism, sharing with Japan and the Colonial Powers influence over S.E. Asia.

There would have been no UN meddling, no Third World turmoil, no “refugee” migrations, no deprivation of freedom in the name of “human rights”, no Affirmative Action, no asinine Political Correctness and, above all, no subversion and corruption of Western society and the democratic political process by a cunning, avaricious alien minority.

Terror and Torture: Made in America

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on November 21, 2011

Dictators and Depots I Have Known

From an admittedly skewed perspective of my very young, impressionable years, I’d like to shine a brief spotlight on four twentieth century dictatorships I have personally known.

Stalin first. I was too little to have witnessed his brutalities first-hand in the Ukraine where I was born to German-descent parents.

But I heard plenty of stories about the artificial famine of the mid-Thirties where the death-cart passed each day along the street to pick up the dead by the wayside.

Seven million are said to have perished.

My young parents, then still single, were students in a teachers’ college in Odessa. A particularly poignant story I heard all my life is that my father came courting my mother each evening with a handful of beans in his pocket.

Imagine Beans as a Sole Diet

They would soak them overnight on the windowsill and cook their only meal of the day in the morning. I was born the following year. I suspect that had it not been for the beans in my father’s pockets, you wouldn’t be reading my missives in Veterans Today.

My father was arrested six years later by the Soviet Torquemadas. Every male age 14 and over was arrested in our German-descent town in the early days of September 1941, only weeks before Hitler’s Wehrmacht arrived and drove the tormentors away.

My father’s “crime”? Being German. We never saw him again. He never saw a “Nazi” in his life.

Adolf Hitler in WWI

Hitler next: I know that most of my readers have a different view of history from mine. I won’t pontificate here about the power of decades of relentless atrocity tales about what the “monster of monsters” allegedly did ñ or at least ordered.

Let me just say that, having been raised in a pacifist setting of Germans of Russian descent in a religious community deep in the Paraguayan jungle, I was well into my thirties when it dawned on me that Hitler was perceived by most of what passes as the “civilized world” to be a ghoul who used to chew on a carpet in his rage against the Jews ñ and not the trustworthy liberator that I and my people experienced.

Alfredo Stroessner - Paraguay

General Stroessner of Paraguay.

He came to power when I was still a teenager and ruled, I believe, for 30-plus years in a moderate fashion.

Not so in the beginning. I heard he made short shrift of same obstreperous liberal padres of the Catholic Church by throwing them into a tiger cage, thus crushing any serious opposition.

The simple paisanos loved Don Alfredo Stroessner to abandon. I glimpsed him only once, in 1984, when I went back to the places of my youth.

Stroessner and Peron

As he did each Thursday afternoon, there he walked the streets with a handful of cronies on the way to a hotel to play a game of cards. He had no bodyguards, and people greeted him without pretense as you might greet a neighbor.

Stroessner disliked and distrusted his own son, Gustavo, a not-too-bright spoiled brat. Legend has it that when he fell mortally ill, he masterminded his own benign revolution to get himself deposed to assure a successor to his liking.

His place was taken briefly his son-in-law ñ who died shortly thereafter ñ I was told, in New York hospital. Mean conspiracy buffs claim he was killed.

Juan and Evita Peron

General Peron of Argentina. More or less the same story in terms of unreserved admiration by the populace. His wife, Evita, was worshiped like a goddess for her activism on behalf of her “descamisados” ñ the Shirtless Ones.

She helped arrange “aguinaldo” ñ at Christmas, all employees in Argentina received an extra month’s pay.

At age 17, I experienced only the end of Peron’s popular rule. A personal insight why it ended came to me by accident.

I worked at the time as a maid for a well-to-do Argentine family who, I found out much later, were personal car-racing buddies of the Perons.

As I was serving food at a small family dinner one evening, I overheard one of them say:

“Well, he finished off la rubia (the Blond One)” ñ and there were guffaws all around. A week later, Evita’s “terminal cancer” was announced, and after another few weeks, she was supposed to have succumbed.

A Rare Photo of Evita

Ever since, Argentina has been in the clutches of the banksters.

The four gents above were unabashed dictators. They didn’t hide behind “democracy” ñ as “democratic” governments these days are wont to do as they rain terror on civilians.

From the perspective of a simple youth caught in the juggernaut of a world war and brutal postwar struggles for survival, in my book only Stalin was to be feared.

Ever heard of the “School of Americas”- the place where torturers were trained in Fort Benning, Georgia? The following press release was sent to me last night:

SOA Watch ñ info@soaw.org

Solemn voices lifted up the spirits of those killed by graduates of the School of the Americas and filled the air as the music team sang out their names from the stage during this morning’s funeral procession in front of the entrance to Fort Benning. The crowd of thousands responded, “PRESENTE!”

Joining actor Martin Sheen on stage this weekend was Georgia NAACP State President Edward DuBose, who told the crowd many had asked him why he’d come here.

“I made a promise to Troy Anthony Davis that I would continue to speak out against any system that takes any innocent life,” DuBose told the crowd. “However long it takes, we’ll be here. We’re on this road until justice is served!”

United Auto Workers President Bob King also addressed the gathering, lifting up the voice of organized labor standing in solidarity with workers all across the Americas.

School of the Americas - Ft. Benning Georgia

Social movement leaders from Colombia, Haiti, Honduras and Costa Rica joined the thousands of activists who made the trek to this year’s vigil. Jimena Paz, who helped organize the SOA Watch Encuentro in Venezuela, and who, as a young member of the Honduran Resistance, has lost friends to the SOA-led repression campaign, shared her compelling story from the stage.

Dr. Luther Castillo, a young, Afro-indigenous Garifuna doctor and community organizer, directs the foundation For the Health of Our People (“Luagu Hatuadi WaduheÒu” in the Garifuna language), and is the founder and director of the First Popular Garifuna Hospital of Honduras.

Exposing the effects of SOA training of Honduran soldiers since the 2009 graduate-led military coup, Luther shared that he and the hospital have been subject to many threats of closure and other attacks by the military and coup government.

Jani Silva, a community organizer from La Perla Amazonica, Putumayo, Colombia, addressed the reality of US foreign policy in her country, which has sent more than 10,000 soldiers to be trained at the SOA with chilling results.

Mario Joseph, a prominent Haitian human rights lawyer, is representing political prisoners and victims of political violence in Haiti. He spoke from the stage, urging solidarity with Haitian struggle to keep the army from being brought back.

Also present among those giving testimony to SOA violence was Nelly del Cid, one of the Feminists in Resistance in Honduras. She shared her deep concerns about the huge number of femicides since the coup.

Costa Rican lawyer and peace advocate Luis Roberto Zamora also gave updates about the lawsuit he filed against the Costa Rican government for sending police to the School of the Americas/WHINSEC.

Theresa Cusimano, 43, of Denver, Colorado, crossed the line for the second time following the morning’s solemn funeral procession. She was arrested by military police and faces up to six months in prison. Stay tuned for a message from Theresa!

Editing: Jim W. Dean

Faurisson: The Poor Man’s Atom Bomb

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on March 15, 2012

Even though this article was written almost four years ago, it is still timely today. I am posting it for two reasons:

First, as explanation why we keep paying so much at the pump, and secondly ñ and much more importantly ñ because there is a rather cavalier attitude afoot even among our most savvy and well-informed dissident comrades, that one still has the luxury of tiptoeing around the “Holocaust” so as not to trigger a volley of verbal spitballs from well-known thought-policing quarters.

Vicious character assassination is a Weapon of Mass Destruction in and of itself, targeting not only individuals but whole groups that are perceived to be inimical to political interests. There is ample justification to fear targeted character assassination ñ but only because it rides on our willingness to allow it to be used.

Why grant the enemies of Freedom of Speech such an assist?

A perfect example is what has happened to the jazz musician Gilad Atzman. He is an Israeli. He is famous. He is ethical. I would call him liberal in the classical sense. He has many friends in places where it counts. Yet nothing protects him once he decided to fearlessly tackle El Gran Taboo!

Why is that? Only because people fear verbal spitballs?

Here goes:

Geostrategic effects of Revisionism: the Iranian lesson by Dr. Robert Faurisson

The energy crisis is causing worry. However, Iran, which possesses huge reserves of oil and gas, wishes to exploit them better, with our help, and sell us the products, a procedure that would lead to a marked softening of worldwide petrol, diesel, fuel oil and gas prices. A good many nations have an eye on this great potential wealth and would be apt to respond favourably to Tehran’s business proposals.

But the United States has decreed the boycott of Iran and, up to now, the world’s policeman has generally been obeyed. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad can make all the proposals he likes: he still finds himself considered a criminal. His request for a collaboration that would let him fully re-equip the country’s drilling, production and processing operations is refused. He goes so far as to suggest that countries using the single European currency pay in euros and no longer in dollars, but to no avail. People turn their back to him. Some threaten him. Even the Pope refuses to receive him.

In many countries, his embassies and diplomatic staff are deprived of contact with the local authorities and foreign delegations; they have ended up with pariah status. One may well ask oneself where such radical behaviour towards the Iranians ever originated and why the international community acts so obviously against its own economic interests.

Three grounds are usually brought up to explain this policy of boycott and open hostility: 1) the Iranian president is perhaps trying to arm his country with nuclear weapons; 2) it seems he wants to exterminate the Jews in Israel; 3) he holds the extermination of the European Jews during the Second World War to be a myth. The first two grounds do not make much sense; only the third is serious and, for that reason, instructive.

In reply to the first ground, it’s fitting to observe that if Ahmadinejad’s accusers possessed the slightest evidence that Iran was trying to acquire nuclear weapons, such evidence would long since have been brandished before the world; however, up to now, they have supplied no real evidence and, in any case, if Iran had a nuclear bomb at her disposal, she could not launch it towards a geographic zone populated by as many Palestinians as Jews; her bomb would kill or maim both populations without distinction.

The second ground rests on the absurd manipulation of a text. Ahmadinejad has had and continues to have ascribed to him an incendiary statement according to which the Jewish State is to be “wiped off the map”, words taken to mean the extermination of the Jews in Israel.

Actually, he’d merely repeated in 2005 Ayatollah Khomeyni’s 1979 declaration that “the regime [in Persian, “rezhime”] occupying Al Qods [Jerusalem]” would one day “vanish from the page of time”. Ahmadinejad took care to spell out his phrase by specifying that, if all the inhabitants of the land of Palestine ñ Moslems, Jews and Christians ñ had the right one day to vote freely and opt for a regime of their choice, the Zionist regime would disappear from Palestine just as, for example, the Communist regime disappeared from Russia. The Western media, as a whole, have reported neither the exact wording nor the explanation.

The third ground is the true one: if the Iranian president causes so much fear, it’s owing to his revisionism. He has wielded the sole weapon that can deeply worry the Jewish State and its ally, the United States. He possesses what I’ve called the poor man’s atomic weapon. In the findings of historical revisionism he effectively holds a “device of mass destruction” that would kill no-one but could neutralise Israel’s number one political weapon: the Great Lie of the alleged Nazi gas chambers and the alleged genocide of Europe’s Jews.

Raised in the religion of “the Holocaust”, the peoples of North America and Europe generally believe in this Great Lie and see Ahmadinejad as a heretic; thus they dare not defend any policy of rapprochement with Iran, or call for a lifting of the boycott, although therein lies the only chance of seeing their energy costs decrease. Doubtless some of these peoples’ leaders desire an understanding with Iran, but they back away at the prospect of being criticised as accomplices of the new Satan, of the “denier”, the “negationist” who “kills the Jews once again by denying their death”.

The news of the international “Holocaust” conference in Tehran (December 11th ñ 12th 2006) rang out like a warning shot. By no means reserved to revisionists, that conference was open to all. Confrontation of opposing views was allowed, and it took place. The rout of the antirevisionists was dramatic. And President Ahmadinejad, already fully apprised of revisionist argumentation, was thus able to restate that “the Holocaust” was a myth.

Bush, Blair, Chirac, who know nothing of revisionism, responded by making a terrible fuss. As for the Israelis, they are aware of the Jewish authors’ utter inability to answer revisionist arguments on the scientific level; they now uphold their Great Lie only with Elie Wiesel-style fake testimony or cinematic guff in the manner of Claude Lanzmann, when they don’t resort to novels, drama or even sham museum exhibitions like those at Yad Vashem in Jerusalem or the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington. They have therefore seized the occasion to draw up a bill in the Knesset that would let the State of Israel demand that any revisionist, wherever in the world he might be, be delivered to its own courts! When there’s no proof to show, the cudgel is used.

The Zionists and their friends are getting more and more alarmed at the diffusion of revisionism over the Internet. They make many attempts, cynical or veiled, to strengthen Internet censorship but, up to today at any rate, they have not yet achieved their aims. Throughout the Western world repression of revisionism is worsening, but it’s all a waste of effort so far. The holocaustic propaganda and Shoah Business grow ever more deafening, but henceforth they tend to annoy or tire people.

Revisionism has long been an intellectual adventure, experienced by a certain number of academics, researchers and various other persons ready to sacrifice their lives or their tranquillity for the defence of historical truth, and of justice. Today, revisionism is becoming, on the international plane, a noticeable bone of contention; it is asserted by some and violently denounced by others, and is present even in certain political or economic altercations. It is destined to play no small role in the endless crisis in the Middle East as well as in the current energy crisis. For the powerful, it will constitute a threat and, for others, a way out. In any case, the times when revisionism could be treated with contempt or quite simply ignored are decidedly past. June 5, 2008

Demonization: The Lobby’s Resourceful Weapon of War

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on November 19, 2012
Ernst Zundel

Silencing One Man - Why is it So Important

 by   Ingrid Rimland Zundel

After four assassination attempts - some traced to Jewish perps, some self-admitted in phone calls to a beholden media - Ernst Zundel spoke for the record, for all the world to hear:

YouTube - Veterans Today -

This clip, as well as the one right below, are part of Ernst’s piËce de rÈsistance, taken from an interview conducted by an Israeli Journalist in 1998, three years after the Zundel-Haus was burned down on the 50th anniversary of Germany’s surrender to the Allies:

YouTube - Veterans Today -

The full interview has been on the Net for more than two years, and I have yet to hear a serious objection.

Some of my best friends, lamentably, are Holocaust Enforcers. By that I don’t mean that they wish for yet another Holocaust on G-d’s Own Chosen Tribe - they merely grant the yammerers a nod of courtesy to their creative version, so near and dear to Stephen Spielberg and his ilk.

And then there are those pesky folks, some in my orbit also, who will heave the Leuchter Report in your face. Fred Leuchter is the one who caught the Zundel Taint when he mistakenly assumed truth could be used a defense in 1988 in Canada and testified accordingly in Ernst Zundel’s Second Great Holocaust Trial.

Fred used to be America’s most competent, handsomely paid government expert witness of gas chamber execution equipment used in years past in our fair land to do away with criminals beyond redemption.

Before he could say Mauschwitz, a barrage of the most vicious political demonization demolished Fred’s highly regarded career - I understand now he is driving a school bus.

What happened? What always happens in political trials of this sort. When Fred tried to testify about what he had found - or, better, not found - during a fact-finding expedition to Auschwitz - a red-faced Judge took cover behind “judicial notice”, thus throwing a perfectly sane but politically incorrect defense overboard.

In legal parlance, “judicial notice” means you can’t question the “obvious” on fear of professional ruin - such as that Monday follows Sunday, or that the moon hangs in the sky by unseen threads as one of the Almighty’s ornaments.

Here is what Leuchter had to say about his derailed testimony in a follow-up interview with one of Ernst attorneys, Kirk Lyons:

YouTube - Veterans Today -

Five minutes of plain common sense by an experienced, court-certified expert whose testimony used to carry weight in any other trial - except in a trial challenging Auschwitz! That’s really all it takes to grasp the kindergarten ABCs of a forensic finding - is it not?

I wish!

Despite Fred’s testimony, given under oath, that ought to have shaken the world to its core and reigned in the power of Abe’s Blocksman Brigade, most worthy individuals in our Western world will have nothing to do with Ernst Zundel who started it all by sending Fred Leuchter to Auschwitz. It is a sight to see how folks recoil, should they encounter a Denier.

If they can’t get away because those irritating Holocaust Negationists, as they are called in France, insist on facts versus dogma, a few invectives placed expertly will strangle a heresy neatly. Most of the time, that settles it. A sure-fire moral victory.

If all else fails because those Deniers are known to be stubborn and dig in their heels, the Holocaust Enforcers likewise know their Pappenheimers, as the Germans like to say - their mawkish media pack - who will play fast and loose with those who dare question “the obvious”.

Here is an early demonization cartoon that appeared in the Edmonton Journal when the Canadian Lobby’s Hate Campaign first gathered speed like a political tornado to get the world’s best-known “Denier of the Obvious” deported and out of the way. We’re talking 1985:

Boy, did they try! Did those sick monsters ever try!

And why did they succeed? They counted on the rings in people’s noble noses. As Ernst found out to his dismay, Canadians who ought to have used a few brain cells to put two and two together are passionate nose ring wearers. Those rings are made-to-order trinkets for Beings Sans Spine - the world’s BSSs, in short. Abe gives it a yank - and BSSs dance!

Dr. Ingrid Rimland Zundel

Were I not such a Lady of Decorum, I would use ber words than “spine”, but I control myself. My point is this: Abe’s energetic marketing campaign is targeting a lot of spineless Gentiles who wouldn’t hurt a fly but who are strangely keen to parade around with their nose rings.

Those rings can come in handy. They can make you shed tears on command. Unless you shed a few tears for hapless Fuehrer victims, it’s easy for some folks to reckon that you, too, might be a flaming Nutzy.

That’s how it’s done. You literally twist yourself into a Boy Scouts’ knot to prove that you are not one of those horrid creatures of the past. You curse the Fuehrer loudly, for the entire neighborhood to hear. The Weasel is the Apple of Your Eye.

Caught in the fervor of your own self-righteousness, you even curse the White Supremacists, the Southern Radicals, the dubious Ron Paulites, the Hitlerites who have their brazen get-togethers in Iran. For good measure, you also curse Zundel, with spittle flying every which way.

You may not see it that way, but thanks to that ring in your nose, Abe deftly signed you up as an active member of his Blocksman Hate Campaign - and it doesn’t cost Abe a single stripped shekel! You fight his war for him. How’s that for ingenuity? _________________________________________
Hitler - circa WWI

Most people think of Hitler Bashing as a sport, or, better yet, a deferential social standard that earns you brownie points. It is not seen as groveling to Israel. It is as automatic as a response to an itch in your nostrils at allergy time. Bless you!

By contrast, Holocaust Denial - now, that is serious business. That calls for Moral Outrage. If you know what is good for your career, you up and kick the Fuehrer in the shin on cue - and presto: You are a Righteous Gentile. A tree is planted in your name in Israel. You are entitled to the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval.

That’s where we are today. An avaricious industry has managed to implant nose rings in myriads of Beings Sans Spines, which they cannot dislodge without bleeding.

Not all is lost, however. Every once in a while, resistance self-asserts. If you still have a conscience, you might sense there is something within you that doesn’t feel right.

You surmise you may have been had, but you don’t rightly know, and you’d like to find out. After all, you have been lied to in the past, more times than you can count - Pearl Harbor, JFK, the Golf of Tonkin, the USS Liberty, Oklahoma City, 9/11, the Dancing Israelis.

A tiny doubt pops into your brain: “Can it be? Was I also deceived about Auschwitz?” And there you are, a puny Righteous Gentile, half-heartedly trying to get to the bottom of who is really doing what to whom - and other politically incorrect passions.

And guess what? You are shocked right out of your socks. You find yourself in an undeclared war with a swarm of Abe’s swashbuckling nose rings wearers. Abe is a mega-man, believed to have unlimited resources, subservient friends in all the corridors of power - and you? You merely asked a few questions. Yet scores of nose ring wearing friends attack you with the fiercest, most filthiest abuse.

This used to be America, you argue. There used to be such a thing as Free Speech. Are you not a dues-paying member of the ACLU? Are not your closest friends Ö etcetera? The last thing in the world you wanted to become is to Ö is to Öbecome - “hutschoooo!” - a dreaded Holocaust Denier!

I say that hordes of BSSs with rings in noble noses are an impediment to social sanity.


I am not even arguing the merits versus the demerits of what Fred Leuchter unearthed decades ago in one of my husband’s Holocaust Trials.That has been done to countless scientists’ satisfaction - and any BSS can spend a weekend reading up on it or listening to DVDs, if he wants to get rid of that itch in his nose and stop sneezing.

Why not beef up a bit on not only Fred Leuchter’s forensic results but what others with flawless credentials have long since found out? No gassing. No budget. No Fuehrer genocidal plan. It’s all on the Net - for the asking.

You might yet conclude that Abe’s ring in your nose is not exactly an adornment. Some people have already. You wouldn’t be alone.

Ernst and Ingrid - Before his ërendition’ to Germany

I am a kiddie shrink by training. I realize that even grown-up people have odd psychological needs that can be satisfied with Hitler Bashing. I understand there’s applause to be had from fellow nose ring wearers.

All that! That’s not where Ernst and I are coming from, and why we so emphatically object.

For us and ever more of our Truth Batallion comrades, it’s painfully embarrassing to watch grown people we otherwise like and respect to dance to Abe’s tune for no reason.

We long for a small modicum of chivalry against a thoroughly defeated and long dead opponent of yore.

We don’t indulge in kicking a dead Stalin in the shin, though he deserves it plenty.

For me, specifically, this arbitrary Hitler Bashing Business is costly on a personal level - because the man I love and respect has paid a hefty price. Next to the long-dead Fuehrer, Ernst Zundel is probably the most reviled and persecuted dissident on earth. What hurts me most - a lot! - is when madcap disparagement comes from my friends.

And odd though it may seem, what with my Axis ancestry, I do have cherished friends on Veterans Today and elsewhere. That is why I decided to go on a public relations campaign against humbug.

What do you really know about Ernst? And what do you know about Hitler - except what Abe Blocksman has drilled into your brain?

If you can spare an hour of your life on a quiet Sunday afternoon, you might want to acquaint yourself with what unopposed political demonization can do - kidnap one-tenth of an moral man’s life in a futile attempt to quash truth-telling. Check out how Ernst defied his enemies - by refusing to let his spirit be broken.

Imperium - Then as Now

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on November 24, 2012

The words below were written in 1948 by a young man known to the dissident world as Francis Parker Yockey. A very brief bio sketch here from the Introduction of Imperium, written by Willis Carto of the American Free Press:

From earliest childhood, Yockey was recognized for his prodigious abilities, and resented for them by many. History may reveal that the combination of originality and high intelligence in rare individuals is essential for human progress, but we mortals find these qualities more admired in biographies than in classmates, friends, and underlings.

Yockey was a concert-level pianist; he was a gifted writer. He studied languages and became a linguist. As a lawyer, he never lost a case. He had an extraordinary grasp of the world of finance - and this is surprising, for we learn that in his philosophy, economics is relegated to a relatively unimportant position. And it is as a philosopher that Yockey reached the summit; it is this for which he will be remembered; he was a man of incredible vision. (Ö)

Like the great majority of Americans, Yockey opposed American intervention in the Second World War. Nevertheless, he joined the army and served until 1942 when he received a medical discharge (honorable).

The next few years were spent in the practice of law, first in Illinois and subsequently in Detroit, where he was appointed Assistant County Attorney for Wayne County, Michigan.

In 1946, Yockey was offered a job with the war crimes tribunal and went to Europe. He was assigned to Wiesbaden, where the “second string” Nazis were lined up for trial and punishment.

The Europe of 1946 was a war-ravaged continent, not the prosperous land we know today. Viewing the carnage, and seeing with his own eyes the visible effects of the unspeakable Morgenthau Plan which had at its purpose the starvation of 30 million Germans, and which was being put into effect at that time, he no doubt found ample reinforcement for his conviction that American involvement in the war had been a ghastly mistake. And feeling the might of the sinister power in the East, he might well have wondered whose interests were being served by such a victory.”

Does this sound familiar to what we see today? To make a tragic story short, let’s just repeat what hostle media reported: that Yockey committed suicide while still a young man in a San Franciso jail. In the opinion of many who knew him, it is far more likely that he was suicided by those who feared exposure.

Many view Yockey today as a political genius; not a few call him a seer. Imperium is his masterpiece.

Although more than six decades have passed, what Yockey wrote in 1948 - that fateful time when Europe lay in ruins and Israel ascended like an evil spirit from its ashes - fits even more today.

Here’s what Yockey tells us in his Epilog:

“Millions are starving in Europe as I write this, and no one in the outer world concerns itself with it. Other millions are living in a sub-human condition in gaols, those who have not yet been hanged. The power in Europe today is held by two kinds of men: Cultural aliens, and traitors.

Can a Civilization die thus? Will two formless powers be able to strangle a Culture, starve and dispense its population?

[Imperium] is an expression of my belief that they cannot, that the inscrutable force of Destiny will prevail over outer forces as well as against the inner obstacle of the past. Precisely at the moment when their victory seems full-blown and permanently secured, Europe begins to stir.

Widened and chastened by tragedy, defeat, and catastrophe, the Western soul is emerging from the ruins, unbroken in its will, and purer in its spiritual unity than ever before. The great dream and aim of Leibnitz, the uniting of all the States of Europe, is closer by virtue of Europe’s defeat, for in that defeat, it perceives its unity.”

I was a starving twelve-year-old in Germany when Yockey had these thoughts and, I believe, wrote part of Imperium already. In years past, when I was making a living as a convention keynoter, telling of the early post-war years when I was barefoot, hungry, ignorant, and largely illiterate, I always closed my speech by telling audiences: “America has been good to me. I am going to give something back.”

This is still America, and I am an American by choice. I, too, give thanks at Thanksgiving.  Here’s what I have done this past year. I have culled whatever I could from the voices of the past, here and there, friend and foe alike, and put those voices on the shelves of a small, private library, open only by request or invitation. I want you all to take a look - just so you know that such a place exists, that it is classy and inviting - and waiting just for those historical slowpokes who still think that World War II was the “good war” that needed to be fought to save the Jews from Auschwitz.

Yockey continues - and we ought to take his words and their meaning to heart:

The mission of this generation is the most difficult that has ever faced a generation. It must break the terror by which it is held in silence, it must look ahead, it must believe when there is apparently no hope, it must obey even if it means death, it must fight to the end rather than submit.

Fortifying it is the knowledge that against the spirit of Heroism no materialistic force can prevail. Like the men of Aragon and Castile who fought the Moor, like the Teutonic knights and Prussians who fought the Slav, the men of this generation must fight for the continued existence of the West. Ultimately nothing can defeat them except inner decadence. (Emphasis added)

The West has something to devote to the contest that neither the barbarian nor the parasite has: the force of the mightiest superpersonal Destiny that has ever appeared on this earthball. This superpersonal Idea has such tremendous force that no number of scaffold-trials or massacres, no heaps of starved or pyramids of skulls can touch it.

The West has two centuries and tens of millions of lives of the coming generations to give to the war against the barbarian and the distorter. It has a will which has not only emerged unbroken from the Second World War, but is now more articulate all over Europe, and is gaining in strength with every year, every decade. Merely material superiority will do them little good in a war whose duration will be measured, if necessary, in centuries. Napoleon knew, and the West still knows, the primacy of the spiritual in warfare.

The soil of Europe, rendered sacred by the streams of blood which have made it spiritually fertile for a millennium, will once again stream with blood until the barbarians and the distorters have been driven out and the Western banner waves on its home soil from Gibraltar to North Cape, and from the rocky promontories of Galway to the Urals.

This is promised, not by human resolves merely, but by a higher Destiny, which cares little whether it is 1950, 2000, or 2050. This Destiny does not tire, nor can it be broken, and its mantle of strength descends upon those in its service.

Chutzpah in Modern Germany

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on December 11, 2012

On Jan 2, 2013, a German citizen named Gunter (sometimes spelled Guenther) Deckert will once again report to the gates of yet another penitentiary to be disciplined for his incurable devotion to Truth in History.

Michael Hoffman II, a former Associated Press wire writer turned Historical Revisionist, (www.revisionisthistory.org) explains some of the details of this case:

In the World War II revisionist history movement in Germany, G¸nter Deckert is among the most hard-working and humble of its martyrs.

Gunter Deckert, former leader of Germany’s struggling political party, NPD

I say “martyr” because any resident of Germany who persists in actively and publicly doubting the existence of execution gas chambers in Auschwitz-Birkenau ó the holy relic of the West’s most sacred religion (Holocaustianity) ó will be fined and likely imprisoned.

G¸nter Deckert has been to prison before in Germany for this reason ñ five years’ imprisonment, 1995 to 2000 ñ and he is about to be imprisoned again.

His “crime”? Translating from Italian into German historian Carlo Mattogno’s treatise, “Auschwitz: The First Gassing” (¸berarbeiten, deutsche Endbearbeitung/ -fassung). http://revisionistreview.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/researcher-gunter-deckert-sentenced-to.html

Actually, “¸berarbeiten” means, in essence, only editing. Not translating or writing, much less agreeing! In fact, I double-checked, and G¸nter, a long-time friend of many noted European dissidents, who served as a note-taker and freelance reporter in my husband’s bizarre, drawn-out political show-trial in 2007 in Mannheim, explained:

By 1995, I had accumulated 11 years, This was reduced to five years, which I served to the last minute in JVS “Veste” Bruchsal, founded in 1948, a replica of a Pennsylvania prison model.

How did Deckert ran afoul repeatedly of “speech crimes” in ëthe free-est democracy that ever existed on German soil” ñ always held up as a bastion of “freedom of speech” to be emulated in countries like China and such? Here’s how:

*Having insulted entrenched mandarins of the establishment such as Foreign Minister Kinkel, several luminaries of the FDP, a political Party, and the illustrious Ignatz Bubis, the then Jewish leader of the Zentralrat der Juden in Deutschland, by accusing them in various ways of political hypocrisy.

*Having had the gall to call the Heidelberg Police Department “Stasi-West”.

*Having dispensed helpful advice to Michel Friedman, then Vice President of said Judenrat, former CDU politician and talk show host, yammerer par excellence and President of the European Jewish Congress ñ before he was convicted of illegal drug use and what is described on the Net as “forced prostitution” of very young girls from the Ukraine. Deckert to Friedman:

“If you don’t like it here, why don’t you pack your suitcase and join your compatriots in Israel? There you can lecture and complain.”

Arguably Deckert’s worst political sin was for an impromptu (verbal) translation of the forensic Leuchter Report, based on an investigative expedition to Auschwitz, which documented for the first time, ever, that Auschwitz could never have been the scene of an industrial-type, assembly-line, politically motivated genocide of utterly innocent bipeds through gassing. That alone, recalls Deckert, cost him two years.

(Actually, urban lore has it that ñ as he stood next to Fred Leuchter at a small gathering of fellow Germans, translating from English to German ñ he smirked!)

Deckert suggests that the current judgment ñ 5 months in prison ñ are likewise attributed to his recidivist ways, despite his carefully distancing himself explicitly on page 3 by stating that the author’s (Mattogno’s) theses and conclusions are not his (Deckert’s) own.

Paul Eisen, a free speech activist living in Britain, sent me the following comments:

“I’m glad to say I’ve had no experience of Germany’s ëIncitement of the Masses’ laws (Holocaust denial to you and me) and quite honestly, I found it all a bit hard to believe. Surely Mr Deckert must have done something worse than just translating a revisionist document into German to merit such a sentence.

Then, some days later, I received the following exchange which does clarify things a bit. It’s between a Mr William Henderson of Toronto, Canada and Georg J¸rgens, Minister-Counsellor and Deputy Head of Mission to the German Embassy in Canada.

Mr Henderson wrote:

Your Excellency:

I note from an RSS feed that I subscribe to that Gunther Deckert is due to report to prison for a five month term early in the new year.

Further inquiry reveals that his crime was to translate a document from Italian into German.

It seems to me that a jail sentence for the mere translation of a document is somewhat ridiculous.

Could you please advise me what harm a simple document could do and why the matter would even be of any interest to the German authorities?


William E. Henderson

And Mr Jurgens replied:

Dear Mr Henderson,

It exceeds the capacity of this Embassy to find out exactly what the notorious neo-nazi Deckert did this time.

To get an idea about this man you might want to check him out on Wikipedia:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%BCnter_Deckert

Just let me add that if you translate foreign documents to deny the Holocaust or to incite racial hatred you are punishable under German law.

Kind regards, Georg J¸rgens Minister-Counsellor and Deputy Head of Mission Embassy of the Federal Republic of Germany

So, it’s true. “If you translate foreign documents to deny the Holocaust or to incite racial hatred you are punishable under German law.”

Two questions remain:

1. Why is questioning the Holocaust “incitememt to racial hatred”?

2. In this globalised, internet age, when national boundaries mean nothing and English reigns supreme, what possible purpose can this serve other than to further cow a terrified population?

Show trials and vicious speech crime convictions are extremely painful for victims of the current political system involved, but they are one fine vehicle to illuminate said system’s corruption. When will the ever-so-obedient ñ because politically terrorized ñ German judiciary ever learn and rip the Jewish muzzle from their faces? It ought to dawn on them that doing so would be in their own interest ñ especially now that they have a legal directive from highest international quarters, which they gutlessly choose to ignore!

A recent United Nations document, titled “International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights”, dated July 11, 2011 contains some marvelously gleaming paragraphs. Most cogent for dissident historians engaged in scuffle after scuffle with the insufferably pushy Holocaust Lobby are the following gems:

Freedom of opinion and freedom of expression are indispensable conditions for the full development of the person. They are essential for any society. They constitute the foundation stone for every free and democratic society. The two freedoms are closely related, with freedom of expression providing the vehicle for the exchange and development of opinions.

Freedom of expression is a necessary condition for the realization of the principles of transparency and accountability that are, in turn, essential for the promotion and protection of human rights. (Ö) The freedoms of opinion and expression form a basis for the full enjoyment of a wide range of other human rights.

The obligation to respect freedoms of opinion and expression is binding on every State party as a whole. All branches of the State (executive, legislative and judicial) and other public or governmental authorities, at whatever level ñ national, regional or local ñ are in a position to engage the responsibility of the State party. (Ö) The obligation requires States parties to ensure that persons are protected from any acts by private persons or entities that would impair the enjoyment of the freedoms of opinion and expression to the extent that these Covenant rights are amenable to application between private persons or entities.

Paragraph 1 of article 19 requires protection of the right to hold opinions without interference. This is a right to which the Covenant permits no exception or restriction. Freedom of opinion extends to the right to change an opinion whenever and for whatever reason a person so freely chooses. No person may be subject to the impairment of any rights under the Covenant on the basis of his or her actual, perceived or supposed opinions.

All forms of opinion are protected, including opinions of a political, scientific, historic, moral or religious nature. It is incompatible with paragraph 1 to criminalize the holding of an opinion. The harassment, intimidation or stigmatization of a person, including arrest, detention, trial or imprisonment for reasons of the opinions they may hold, constitutes a violation of article 19, paragraph 1.

Any form of effort to coerce the holding or not holding of any opinion is prohibited. Freedom to express one’s opinion necessarily includes freedom not to express one’s opinion.

Paragraph 2 requires States parties to guarantee the right to freedom of expression, including the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds regardless of frontiers. This right includes the expression and receipt of communications of every form of idea and opinion capable of transmission to others (Ö) It includes political discourse, commentary on one’s own and on public affairs, canvassing, discussion of human rights, journalism, cultural and artistic expression, teaching, and religious discourse. (Ö)

Paragraph 2 protects all forms of expression and the means of their dissemination. Such forms include spoken, written and sign language and such non-verbal expression as images and objects of art. Means of expression include books, newspapers, pamphlets, posters, banners, dress and legal submissions. They include all forms of audio-visual as well as electronic and internet-based modes of expression.

Defamation laws must be crafted with care to ensure that they comply with paragraph 3, and that they do not serve, in practice, to stifle freedom of expression. All such laws, in particular penal defamation laws, should include such defences as the defence of truth and they should not be applied with regard to those forms of expression that are not, of their nature, subject to verification. (Ö)

In any event, a public interest in the subject matter of the criticism should be recognized as a defence. Care should be taken by States parties to avoid excessively punitive measures and penalties. (Ö)

States parties should consider the decriminalization of defamation and, in any case, the application of the criminal law should only be countenanced in the most serious of cases and imprisonment is never an appropriate penalty. (Ö)

Laws that penalize the expression of opinions about historical facts are incompatible with the obligations that the Covenant imposes on States parties in relation to the respect for freedom of opinion and expression. The Covenant does not permit general prohibition of expressions of an erroneous opinion or an incorrect interpretation of past events. (Ö)

Might there be a lesson for the Minister-Counsellor and Deputy Head of Mission to the German Embassy in Canada ñ so that, next time, he won’t be embarrassing himself by resorting to name-calling ñ and even referencing his gutter behavior by citing Wikipedia?

On free-speech matters, or lack thereof in Germany, I have yet more to say. I came across a nifty little video showcasing Sylvia Stolz.

A small snippet of a girl, known affectionately by fellow European dissidents as “Germany’s Joan of Arc”, Sylvia is a young lawyer by trade. She acted as co-counsel at Ernst Zundel’s show trial in Mannheim. She volunteered as yet another German martyr for Truth in History.

Sylvia knew perfectly well that to offer a proper defense is now itself a crime in Germany in Holocaust-related trials. By offering scientific evidence on behalf of a “Denier” she would be implicitly guilty of being a “Denier” herself. Imagine a court stonewalling exculpatory evidence of, say, a murder case by accusing a lawyer defending a client accused of a murder that he, the lawyer, might be a murderer himself! And yet, in “Holocaust Denial” cases that is precisely what happens!

Sylvia decided to set an example. She engineered hilarious drama by chirping away about illegal tactics of Germany’s Zionist-beholden government and its judiciary, to the hysterical objections of Judge Meinerzhagen, ignoring his furious pounding and pontifications, insisting cheerfully that she had every right on earth to a legal defense of her client by submitting evidence for the scientific basis of his heretical beliefs! Even a Frankfurter Allgemeine reporter, Volker Zastrow, fell for her charms and wrote a tongue-in-cheek piece on Fr‰ulein Stolz’s repeated assaults on Meinerzhagen’s “limbic system” ñ that part of the brain that controls one’s emotions ñ to the point where the frustrated judge was forced to flee his own courtroom to hide out and cool off. That was petite Sylvia ñ goading him and goading him, to peels of laughter from the audience! It’s a classic!

In the end, Sylvia Stolz paid dearly for her gallant effort ñ as she knew from the start that she would. One merry morning, four sentinels in the employ of Germany’s own shadow government grabbed Fr‰ulein Stolz and bodily carried her out of the courtroom. In due course, she found herself sentenced for three-and-a-half years for insubordination against a judge’s orders ñ and bravely served all but three months of that sentence. As far as I know, she also lost her license to practice law in what Ernst Zundel calls a “Ö geographical piece of land that people still call Germany ñ where speaking the Truth is now a crime enshrined in law.”

I have two brief tapes for you I offer for comparison.

The first features Sylvia’s last words before she, too, reported to the Political Inquisition so as to be caged for three years of her life with the dregs of the Vaterland’s scum.

The second video clip is my definition of Chutzpah:


World War II Negative Stereotype has to be Stopped

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on December 29, 2012

Let us Put a Human Face on the Global War for Truth in History

The fake chimney built after WWII for the fake gas chamber at Auchwitz with an SS hospital right next door

Herewith I announce that I have set myself the worthy goal of shedding light on who we really are and what we really say. Iíll try to do this weekly.

Whoís “we”, you ask? We, whom our numerous detractors like to call all kinds of nasty names - among them, “Holocaust Deniers.”

Itís got to stop - and it wonít stop by our salutary efforts of heaping facts on top of facts and reason upon reason. For thirty-plus years, thatís what Revisionists have done.

We counted on people with brains, on people who understand fairness, people who would not close their eyes to overwhelming evidence that “Germans” didnít do what “Jews” proclaim they did.

We need to rethink our strategies. Facts are too dry - too unappealing and too boring. Facts by themselves will never win the battle. Spielberg understood that perfectly with his defamatory feature, Schindlerís List. Logic takes brains, and brains take a hike when b emotions are triggered. Name-calling costs nothing and works like a charm.

“Itís just a novel,” we pleaded. “Look at forensic evidence. Science does not lie, not even for a ëNazi.í”

Fat chance that argument would make the tiniest difference.

Put Schindlerís List and the Leuchter Report side by side, and not another word need to be said. You know the “truth.” You saw it in the movies and read it in the papers. Period.

I had a telling experience once when I was more politically naÔve than I am now. The year was 1995. I had just launched a website and had christened it the Zundelsite - and did I ever cause a global cyber-storm! This was a time, remember, when html coding was still done by hand? I had the feeling I was flying a jumbo-jet solo - with no idea about what kept it in the air.

Down came a huge, huge censorship attack. I felt like a mosquito being shot at with a cannon - what had I done that was so scandalous?

I soon found out. I had just met an interesting Swabian with the worldís thickest accent and thought that he needed some help, publicity-wise - a task at which I excelled.

Smack on the Zundelsite, I posted a fat trial transcript titled “Did Six Million Really Die?” and half a dozen essays from The Institute for Historical Review. Long story. I lived in San Diego at the time.

My introduction into Revisionist Purgatory went thusly:

I got a friendly call from a producer of a television series called “The Learning Channel”, broadcasting out of San Francisco. Did I mind doing a program on my Ö ahÖ controversial views?

I didnít know I had any.

He insisted gently I did. He would pay my airline. He would send a cab. He would make sure I had protective escort. No need for me to be nervous. Me, nervous? Whatever for?

I was a novelist of some acclaim, doing media all the time. By then, I was a pro at doing interviews. I didnít come unglued in front of a camera. I thought he was a bit too squirming and solicitous, but did not give the matter further thought.

I would be glad to do a show with him, I told him.

I wasnít really all that knowledgeable about what he referred to as “Ö the hoary issues between the Germans and the Jews,” but what was there to fear? This was America.

Itís hard to believe, but in the mid-ë90s I was a grass-green novice.

So far, so good. I flew to San Francisco. I was picked up by a young Jew, as friendly and engaging as they come.

It was an impressive studio, with all kinds of people smiling and smiling at me. Wall-to-wall smiles. Ear-to-ear smiles. The anchor, a young, very blond female, a Jane Pauley type - with a smile as radiant as the sun - simply outdid herself by making me feel welcome. She could not have been nicer - as smooth, polite, and polished as can be.

An assistant pinned the mike on me. My stunningly beautiful anchor leaned forward, pulled her face into the ugliest visage of hatred I have ever had the displeasure to see, and literally hissed at me:

“Are you a Nazi?”

I leaned forward, too. I said as calmly and as sweetly as I could: “Are you a Kike?”

I might as well have punched her in the nose. She reeled back. She was speechless.

I caught my breath and added:

“I just called you a name. You didnít like it, did you? You just called me a name. I didnít like it either.”

After that, as I remember this episode, we just stared at each other for a minute or so. There was the Great Divide. I stood right at the precipice. I know I didnít flinch. To my knowledge, that interview was never broadcast.

I have sometimes told this story to others, and I can always sense that, while people might agree with me and even sympathize, they think that wasnít very ladylike of me.

That in itself is telling. Itís perfectly okay to insult a German morning, noon, and night, right? Itís not okay to answer tit for tat?

Ernst Zundle - the man never waivered or blinked

I want to spend this coming year to do my part in diminishing the virulent, utterly unjustified hatred against Germans in general and my own love specifically.

Ernst is a kind and thoughtful activist who is not what his detractors shriek from the roof tops. Ernst Zundel doesnít hate. Ernst Zundel is an activist of rock-hard principles, however. Whatís fair is fair, he says.

Well, isnít he a “racist” and “White Supremacist” - and isnít racial hatred a byproduct of being biased and intolerant against non-Whites?

That argument is hardly ever made by all the numerous minorities his opponents like to recruit into their camp. Most minorities sense Ernstís good will and his abundant tolerance for others.

Itís not minorities of different skin hues who are the ones who will resort to innuendo.


Here is one such example, drawn straight from experience itself:

The year is 1984. Ernst has just been convicted in Canada for “spreading false news.” For the first time in his life, he finds himself in a cell awaiting sentencing. What now?

His feeding slot clicks. A female guard is on the other side of the heavy metal door.

He gets on his knees to peer out. On the other side is a pair of the most beautiful, expressive black eyes that he has ever seen.

“Mr. Z¸ndel? Mr. Z¸ndel? Can I do something for you? Can I get you something?”

He speaks with gallowsí humor: “A saw?”

Her large eyes fill with tears.

He is taken aback. “What did I say? How did I hurt you?”

She whispers, barely audible: “I am a Palestinian.”


Or picture this scenario:


America has just been treated to a mini-Holocaust called Waco. More than a dozen small children have been fried to a crisp on government orders for reasons never fully proven or explained.

Survivors are arrested by the U.S. government. Among them is a jet-black woman named Anita, David Koreshís nurse, who was by his side when he drew his last breath.

She is what the government calls a “material witness” - and her testimony, logic tells you, might well be feared by some who would like nothing better than to sweep the details of the U.S. mini-holocaust right under a convenient rug.

Anita is contacted by a dissident Southern attorney, Kirk Lyons, well-known in alternative political circles. Anita rightfully fears for her life. Kirk manages to get her released and asks Ernst to give Anita shelter at the Toronto Z¸ndel-Haus.

He did. She stayed. She lived there for seven months, washing Ernstís dishes and making herself otherwise useful until the danger passed.

When Ernst told me this story of Anita living at the Z¸ndel-Haus, I said: “For heavenís sakes! Why you?” and Ernst said dryly: “Well, isnít that the last place they would have looked for her?”

When Ernst was arrested in 2003 and deported back to Canada, Anita - who now lives quietly in the vicinity of Buffalo - offered to be a character witness for him.

As you will recall, Canadian officials did not allow exonerating character witnesses - or any other evidence - to prove that Ernst was not the “security risk” they had gone to great pains to capture in America and import back to Canada Ö so as to kick him out!


H.K. Edgerton - Former NAACP chapter president, Ashville, N.C.

There is a third vignette it is my pleasure sharing with my readers to make my point that Ernst does not deserve the “racist” slur his political enemies routinely hurl in his face.

This is the story of “His Excellency”, as we would call him fondly.

I donít even remember his real name, but I do remember that this little, dainty Black was - perhaps still is! - the representative of the Asheville branch of the national NAACP.

His Excellency was as delicately graceful as can be - impeccably dressed, perfectly groomed, proudly sporting a political attitude you would never have expected, if you are sold on stereotypes, from a spokesperson of the NAACP.

Politically, His Excellency was stoutly on the side of various Southern Confederacy organizations and had carved himself a niche as a much-sought-after speaker at their political events and even demonstrations.

It was only natural that he and Southern Activist Attorney Kirk Lyons would strike up a friendship. On occasion His Excellency would double up as Kirkís driver because Kirk has a vision problem and does not like to drive, especially at night.

Thatís how we met His Excellency sometime in 2002, prior to Ernstís arrest and kidnapping.

One sunny morning an FBI Special Agent named Scott Nowinski showed up at our door and said to Ernst, who was puttering around with some flower beds in front of our home: “Your friends in Canada sent us your file.”

(Scott, who was tasked to sniff out yet another “White Supremacist”, as we found out via FOIA, later denied that he said that, but that statement is in our notesÖ”)

Would Ernst agree to a friendly little chat?

Ernst said he would be glad to, but not without a lawyer present. He added he would call Kirk Lyons and meet with Nowinski at FBI quarters in Knoxville.

And thus it came to pass that one late afternoon Kirk and His Excellency appeared at our door to spend the night with the Z¸ndels. And since the Zundel couple was short on beds but long on hospitality, His Excellency slept on my couch.

When the next morning the threesome arrived at FBI quarters, special Agent Scott Nowinski threw up his hands in surprise behind His Excellencyís back and asked with raised eybrows: “ErnstÖ? “ Ernst isnít sure if he added, “Ö what gives?” or if a big fat question mark just stood by itself in the air.

Both Ernst and I remember His Excellency with real affection. He is the one who rose, his dignity intact, from our couch to settle down for breakfast, unfolded his napkin, put it on his lap, and spoke with understated elegance: “I like my toast with honey.”

This article shall be my launching pad. I want you to get to know the flesh-and-blood people behind the nasty stories - the “Holocaust Deniers” and other sundry activists who have spearheaded science and scientific scholarship at great costs to themselves. Above all else, I want you to draw a mental picture in your head about the man who kick-started it all by sending Fred Leuchter to Auschwitz.

Below, I introduce a clip that shows yet one more side of Ernst that might solicit some respect and perhaps even a lump in the throat. It describes what happened right after he was arrested in Tennessee - almost ten years ago to the day. We are still waiting that he be allowed to return:

YouTube - Veterans Today - - Ernst Art

Ingridís brand new on-line store can be visited here at Soaring Eagles Studios and Gallery.

It offers DVDs in English and German, as well as many books. Zundel Prison Art items will be raffled off later to help support sound scholarship for Truth in History.

Editing:  Jim W. Dean


Historical Revisionism - the Irreversible Contagion

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on January 6, 2013 Doug Collins at the Zundel-Haus

[Editors Note: Dear readers, we are looking forward to Ingrid's series on going down the yellow brick road of Historical Revisionism to revisit not only some of the main events, but those on the front lines at the time. We hope to be having a mystery contributor later in the Spring-Jim W. Dean]

The famous WWII Vet - Doug Collins

As I have lamented many times, the problem with historical revisionists has always been that they have tried to be so scrupulously "neutral" for fear of being smeared that they have undermined their own effectiveness.

Power goes to him who seeks it - and revisionist never sought power. They merely sought respect for their forensically based arguments. Their efforts were impeccably scholastic, but a vivacious human element was missing.

Holocaustianity, the temporal religion of the world, is not about respect. Itís hard to get respect for constant yammering. It is about power anchored firmly to belief, not proof. Guilt-tripping is one handy tactic that pays off.

Political censorship aims for control. Censors expect unquestioning surrender to dogma. This is not readily admitted, but historical revisionism has been profoundly threatening to those politically entrenched brainwashing experts - a threat unlike most any other threat in that their doctrine must not be perceived as a means of carefully targeted mass manipulation. Once that self-serving aspect stands out in relief, the game for the censorship hucksters is over.

In revisionist ranks, there have been some exceptions to the political detachment rule in that flamboyant personalities rose here and there from the lackluster scholarly dust. In his younger years, Ernst Zundel was one such exception. You will meet him in the clip below that was filmed at the Zundel-Haus almost three decades ago.

I did not know Ernst then - I wish I did. I ache to have been part of those exhilarating days when it all started with just a handful of motley supporters against the mightiest moneyed power in the world. What was unleashed at Zundel-Haus became a spiritual avalanche that is still gathering momentum. Itís awesome to behold! Doug Christie

Another one who used his magnetism was Ernst's dynamic attorney, Doug Christie, whom you shall get to know in due time. A third was Doug Collins, a feisty Canadian reporter who early joined the uneven struggle and thus upset the apple cart with his inimitable style and raw professional guts.

The clip below comes from a documentary I stitched together in 2005 after Ernst had already been kidnapped and deported to the Vaterland, courtesy of what David Irving christened "the non-members of the High Church of Scotland" - for fear of calling them "the Jews". It certainly wasnít the Eskimos or Hottentots who did it!

I am a bit apologetic for that tape because it was my first attempt at using film to spread a vivid message, and I was technically unskilled. Yet I knew what I wanted ñ I wanted a documentary with a b human interest storyline that summarized what all this persecution and prosecution of Ernst Zundel was really all about.

It was meant to be played in the Court in Mannheim - and in fact portions of it were introduced and even written up in Germanyís paper of record, the widely read Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. Right on Page Three - almost full page!

It would have cost us tens of thousands of Euros, had we been asked to pay for the space. Proof that a human interest story gets more attention and more mileage, publicity-wise, than all the scholarly arguments by an otherwise brilliant defense inside a court. Emotions in the service of a Cause!

The song at the beginning of this tape fit my mood in those days because I seriously feared for Ernstís life in captivity - if life there was to be at all. In those scary weeks that dragged into months, I really feared the worst.

Ernst Zundel leaving prison in Germany

At the very least I assumed Ernst would never see freedom again - that the very "Germans" whom he had tried to free from their shackles had conspired to put lifelong shackles on him.

To paraphrase a saying from the Bible - easier might it be to pass a camel through a needle's ear than to get a brainwashed German with his thumb in his mouth to let go of his lollypop guilt!

I am planning a series of brief video vignettes to show that there was flesh and blood and pain and tears behind this monumental struggle for Truth in History.

Not only that - there was also often poignancy and out-and-out hilarity because so much of this trial, and subsequent trials, was wacky to the point of being utterly bizarre.

Now that I have "set up the clip", as they say in Hollywood, it gives me great pleasure to introduce Doug Collins, a top notch journalist who started as your average media dupe but soon became a trusted Zundel friend and comrade for Truth in History.


A bit of background on Doug to frame this story properly. Hereís Wikipedia's bio, condensed:

At the start of World War II he joined the British Army. He was captured in the Battle of Dunkirk in 1940, later being awarded the Military Medal for bravery during this campaign.

During his four years as a prisoner of war, he made no fewer than ten escape attempts. I've been told he succeeded with seven we used to refer to Doug as "the one who got away"! He was able to escape from a German POW camp in Silesia and stealthily made his way to Hungary.

After being captured there, he made another daring escape, this time making his way to Romania. There he was imprisoned once again, but when Romania capitulated in 1944, he was freed and returned to Britain, serving in combat with British forces in northwest Europe to the end of the war.

Doug Collins - Ten escape attempts

From 1946-1950, Collins worked as a political intelligence officer with the British Control Commissionís de-nazification department in Germany.

Collins immigrated to Canada in 1952 and worked for several decades as a reporter or columnist for several Western Canadian newspapers, including the Calgary Herald, Vancouver Sun and Vancouver Province.

In 1960 eight trade unions sued Collins for libel when he was the Vancouver Sun's labour reporter. The same year, the newspaperís managing editor, Erwin Swangard, fired Collins for doing outside freelance work.

Collins successfully sued for wrongful dismissal. He was reinstated and returned to work after four months. He collected his back pay, walked into the editorís office and quit - and then went to personnel to demand holiday pay.

In 1963, he sued Readerís Digest for libel - and won.

Collins returned to the Sun in the 1970s. He quit for the last time when then-publisher Clark Davey tried to restrict his freelancing.

Collins worked as an interviewer/editorialist for CBC Television in Vancouver from 1958 to 1968. From 1981 to 1985 he was the news director/talk show host for CJOR radio in Vancouver.

Collins was the recipient of two awards for journalism. He received the National Newspaper Award (1953). He received the MacMillan Bloedel Award (1975) for reports on alleged corruption at UBC.

In 1993 he was awarded the 125th Anniversary of the Confederation of Canada Medal, given to approximately 42,000 Canadians "who have made a significant contribution to their fellow citizens, their community, or to Canada."

Between 1983 and 1997, Collins wrote a column for the North Shore News, a small weekly community paper in North Vancouver, B.C.

No mean media maven, that one! Doug Collins was a man of principles and a journalist and anchor of distinction. When he first met Ernst Zundel in 1985, he did not care for him.

Like most in his profession who take their marching orders from what are now called Zionists who serve a non-Western agenda, Doug had absorbed the Canadian media venom, and as a former British soldier and later intelligence officer in a defeated, bombed-out Germany, he had to overcome some built-in biases. It is to his credit that he did.

Here's Doug, going to bat for Truth in Reporting if not for the "Nazi on Carlton Street" yet. Itís one of my favorite moments: 

YouTube - Veterans Today -

Fairly recently, Ernst filled me in on how Doug shed his prejudice against a so-called "Holocaust Denier" and joined the Ranks of the Damned. Conversion happened on the roof of the notorious Zundel-Haus where Ernst had built himself a private little nook for those few hours of the day when he needed to escape the frenzy of his ever-present friends and foes below.

The Pow who would not accept prison, Collins did not accept ideological boundaries either

With two bottles of wine and a sausage between them, those two re-fought World War II, with Dougís nose getting redder and redder. That's where, incidentally, Doug shared with Ernst the true fate of the infamous Heinrich Himmler, the Chief of the F¸hrerís SS. You might want to know. Tread with caution.

You may have read that Himmler bit into a cyanide capsule the Hitler government provided for high echelon officials if worst should come to worst. I did. That is the orthodox story, widely believed.

Now Doug told Ernst that in his capacity as intelligence officer in the employ of vengeful Allies, he was an eye witness to a different scenario. Himmler had been beaten to death, and Doug was shown the body.

I found this story shocking and asked: "Who did it? The Brits?" and Ernst replied, "no - those who worked for them."

See? You have just experienced an important revisionist moment. Truth in History can and will surface in the most unlikely times and places, if only you'll give it a chance.

Anyway, the salutary lesson of this story is that, at the end of a deprogramming session, a renowned newspaperman climbed down from the Zundel-Haus roof top a seriously contemplative man - and subsequently penned many a column where he talked boldly of "Swindlerís List" and other politically incorrect stuff, spreading revisionism every which way for the rest of his life with real gusto.

Here are some authentic Doug Collins gems, as taken from a little paperback, published 1998 ñ ìHere We Go Again!î:

"Swindler's List" will hit the Academy bell because Hollywood is Hollywood and what happened to the Jews during the Second World War is not only the longest lasting but also the most effective propaganda exercise ever - Dr. Goebbels himself couldnít have done it any better. (..) Hardly a day goes by but that press, radio and television donít mention something about the six million. That figure is nonsense but media go on parroting what everyone knows. "I used to do the same."

"[Holocaut propaganda] is so effective that the mere mention of Auschwitz makes even babes feel guilty."

"Your man Doug is in trouble for saying that the ëholocaust's" six million story is nonsense, that the biggest influence in Hollywood is the Jewish influence, and that the whole thing has become a business"

"It brings a blush to my battle-hardened hide, but frankness forces me to confess that in 1997 I became the most discussed columnist in the country, thanks to the Canadian Jewish Congress and other would-be censors. But it still puzzles me that my harmless offerings could create a national furore and, in British Columbia, a media feeding frenzy."

"Such are the joys of political incorrectness. Only a few years ago, when men were men and liberals, homosexuals and feminists did not rule the roost like so many squawking chickens, the columns in question would never have raised an eyebrow."

"For such critics I was the serpent in the Garden of the Politically Correct Eden. Sleepwalkers in the major media nodded their heads like clockwork Barbie dolls as your correspondent was put through the grinder, describing me as an anti-Semite, a racist, a dork, and other terms with people who profess to hate hate."

"Free speech has always had a bad name. It had a bad name when Luther nailed his theses to the door of Wittenberg Cathedral. It had a bad name when John Milton wrote that Truth and Falsehood should grapple freely, and when John Tyndale was burned at the stake for translating the Bible into English. The peasants couldnít be trusted with it. Who knows what ideas they might get? The Spanish Inquisition had no time for free speech either - oh, there was one other chap who got bad headlines for speaking out. I think his name was Jesus."

"Stick with me,"î Doug Collins counseled, "and I will educate thee. Difficult but not impossible."

"It ainít easy, being me. The rage of the politically correct and the journalistically gutless knows no bounds. So they denounce ìhate literatureî while writing it."

Doug was not shy about dropping names either. Here are a few such nuggets:

"About a fellow named Foth who apparently gave Doug a hard time in some publication:

"On reading all this, I cried with joy and went into the attack mode. To suckle fools and chronicle small beer was a waste of time, I wrote, but [these] inanities had to be dealt with. I felt sorry for Foth, I sobbed, but that would not prevent me from kicking him in the gonads. We of the lower classes are like that."

"About Lisa Mrozinski, a lawyer representing the government side [who] stated that the need for proof makes it difficult to get anywhere with such complaints in the courts."

"About Roger McConchie, legal counsel for the B.C. Press Council, who put it perfectly when he said that the purpose of the [Hate Laws] was to ëstifle speech that is not criminal."

"Wasn't it Elie Wiesel, a major holocaust propagandistî asked Doug, who said the world should never stop hating the Germans?"


And here comes my all-time favorite punch line where Doug speaks of "Sol Littman, a propagandist from the Simon Wiesenthal Institute who dines out on the holocaust."

In our self-chosen revisionist battles where verbal sorties fly every which way, it doesnít get any better than that!

Toward the end of his life, Doug was sued twice by Jewish spokesmen for his irreverence - and, true to his colors, he kept swinging like the true champion he was, lambasting them for suing him, under the terms of the B.C. Human Rights Act, which should be renamed the Kill Collins Act or the Never Call a Spade a Spade Act."

And elsewhere, many times in various venues:

"Under the vicious B.C. Human Rights Code truth is no defense, fair comment is no defense, which it is in libel and slander, and within the framework of the code there is no right to appeal."

That was a lesson that Canada learned, largely thanks to Dougís columns and subsequent defeat. He and his publisher, a fellow named Speck of the North Shore News, ended up ordered by court edict to line the pockets of Canadaís censors to the tune of $200,000 for their politically incorrect ways. Wikipedia, that lying outfit in the service of said censors, claims it was a puny $2,000.

Doug Collins passed away about a dozen years ago, but he is not forgotten. I miss him very much. He and I fought many cyber wars together when the Zundelsite was under global siege and I needed all the help that I could get. I met him only once in person - on the barge to Vancouver Island sometime in 1998. I believe it was on that occasion that he told me: "Ernst Zundel is a man in a nation of wimps."

Just count yourself in, Doug! That makes two of you. Might there be three? Four? Five? Never underestimate the clout and muscle of steadfast dissidents for Truth in History to "Set the Record Straight!" - so we can all relax! Editing:  Jim W. Dean


Ingrid's brand new on-line store can be visited here at Soaring Eagles Studios and Gallery. It offers DVDs in English and German, as well as many books. Zundel Prison Art items will be raffled off later to help support sound scholarship for Truth in History.

UFOs and Antarctic Bases - A Realistic Appraisal

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on February 24, 2013

by  Ernst Zundel

This article was written more than ten years ago - before Ernst Zundel's political kidnapping and subsequent incarcerations in six prisons in three countries on two continents for his politically incorrect ways.

Those who know my husband personally know that he has many interests and talents beyond the one for which he was abducted and for which he is internationally known - the one that cannot now be mentioned on fear of life and limb in Europe!

Iíll let you guess what that is.

Instead, let's talk of esoteric Zundel hobbies.

For one, Ernst kept a vivid interest in World War II technology inside the Third Reich - including "Flying Saucers". When I showed him the pravda.ru write-up which I had pulled from the Net, we both had a good laugh, and Ernst, in a flamboyant mood, dashed off the following while sitting on our deck, enjoying the Tennessee sunshine:

I consider this a garbled account about the Third Reich's best-kept secret weapons research and development - circular flying craft, commonly called UFOs.

YouTube - Veterans Today

The article gives one an insight into the state of the mind of at least a segment of the Russian reading public, when one sees newspaper stories of this type, which mix pure speculation, propaganda tales of World War II and weird, far-fetched occult themes with the serious side of cutting edge technology.

There is also the usual misspelling of names, incomplete titles etc., and one wonders what original sources the authors consulted for this rather incredible tale.

Nonetheless, the goofy essay merits comment.

I believe I can claim at least some familiarity with the UFO topic, having authored and published some small booklets on Nazi UFOs in the late '60s and early '70s - before I was forced by Germany's enemies to tackle [a politically sensitive topic] , which put an end to my youthful fascination and explorations of the esoteric.

This political derailing of my life caused me to become a serious activist and made me dedicate my life to the clearing of my people's and country's reputation by debunking an untrue accusation. Had my enemies left me alone, who knows what flights of fancy might I have indulged in instead?

YouTube - Veterans Today -

Seriously, I personally corresponded with and interviewed some of the German UFO researchers in the 1960s still alive then, including Rudolf Lusar, post-war Germanyís most famous author on German secret weapons in World War II.

Nobody ever told me about a secret project code-named "Base 211", although some, who were aircraft engineers - one attached to Hermann Goring's Reichs-Luftfahrtministerium, was personally present when one of those circular crafts, being tethered to a concrete floor of a large aircraft hangar and propulsion-tested in Wiener Neustadt, Austria, broke its moorings and shot through the ceiling, damaging it and the aircraft severely.

I can say with certainty that advanced research, production and flight testing were definitely going on during World War II of these circular flying craft, some which could reach incredible heights very quickly and obtain high speeds in horizontal flight - well in excess of the speed of sound.

Some of the sanest descriptions of German secret weapons can be found in the bestselling books of Lusar, who was an aircraft engineer and whose books went through several printings in the 1950s and 1960s. The German title was ìDeutsche Geheimwaffen des II. Weltkrieges und ihre Weiterentwicklung.î (German Secret Weapons And Their Continuing Development) At least one English translation was published in London at the time.

In a similar vein, the American Air Force's Air Technical Intelligence Chief, a general named Simon, published a hardcover book about Nazi Secret Weapons he and his team had inspected and tested in the 1960s with a small publishing house called WE Inc., based in Connecticut. It is full of astonishing photos and rich in technical details.

When I spoke to the publisher, who had ordered some of the UFO books published by me, he said: "Very interesting, Zundel, but you have only scratched the surface!"

One more very interesting source was a mass-circulation book published in England and America, titled "Intercept But Don't Shoot!" by Renato Vesco, who is alleged to have been Benito Mussolini's Air Technical Intelligence Chief during World War II. Vesco lists an incredible number of sources, among them whole sets of declassified British intelligence and engineering assessments of German research projects, including weird alloys, completely new metals and Rube Goldberg-like contraptions, all tried and tested by the Germans. In the 1970s, it was obtainable from the Queenís Printer in London.

As to German Antarctic explorations - there was at least one publicly known German Antarctic expedition undertaken by the Third Reich in 1938 before the war broke out. The documentation is replete with lots of maps, flying courses, black-and-white photographs and even a color photo section.

The title is "Die deutsche antarktische Expedition 1938", published by the Safari Verlag. The book itself is long out of print - at least since 1945. However, the negatives of the aerial photos taken by the expedition and some newsreel film footage survived World War II and can be seen at Hamburgís famous Hydrographic Institute.

The serious British publisher, W.R.D. McLaughlin, published a book after the war called German Antarctic Raiders, which is about German naval activity in the Antarctic in World War II.

In the 1970s, a film documentary appeared about the German Antarctica expedition on prime time German TV, which included filmed interviews of some of the actual participants of that expedition. This expedition team surveyed and mapped large areas and took soil, water and ice samples. It charted the Antarctic waters and air currents. It left behind hundreds of Swastika flags driven into the Antarctic snow and more hundreds of flags air-dropped to lay proper explorersí rights of possession to that terrain. All of this is documented in the above mentioned book.

This expedition claimed officially for Germany a clearly defined geographic area of the Antarctic Continent and named warm water lakes and mountain ranges they discovered you can read about and find on any map put out by the National Geographic Society, for instance. This claim is presently recorded in the Antarctica Gazetteer No. 14, available from the United States Board on Geographic Names.

There even exists a German Antarctic Foundation which, through its various chapters around the world, keeps alive Germany's rightful claim to the area, known as Neu-Schwabenland ñ and trust me, I had nothing to do with the selection of that name, even though I am a proud, full-blooded Swabian. I was born in 1939!

Thus, Germany is far larger than the chopped-up, politically truncated, demonically maligned little piece of real estate in the very heart of Europe the Allies left behind after their defeat of Hitler. Germany's Antarctic claim, never challenged, is three times the size of pre-World War II Germany. Many of its highest, Alp-like mountains as well as lakes and glaciers are named after those wicked Nazi crew and expedition members. Horrors!

In the 1990s I interviewed an American publisher and author from Florida who publishes a magazine, called Sharkhunters, devoted largely to WWII submarines with lots of famous U-Boat aces as contributors. He told a fascinating story, which I broadcast on my satellite show, The Voice of Freedom. He claims that he had, indeed, come across maps and photographs of German Antarctic bases in World War II in the Chilean and Argentine naval archives, one based in Tierra del Fuego, accommodating approximately 8,000 men.

One Japanese national TV program invited me to Princeton University in the middle 1990s where I was interviewed for hours and where some of my unpublished material was filmed. This television program was then enhanced with computer-generated, brilliantly done Nazi flying saucers, being shielded by icebergs at first, gracefully rising out from Antarctic ocean bases and glaciers.

They are some sight to see ñ what with the Swastika strikingly adorning these incredibly maneuverable, exotic flying craft wobbling out of the choppy, iceberg-strewn ocean, shaking off pieces of ice and trailing cascading water, as they elegantly zoom away at very high speed!

There is immense worldwide interest in this alleged German Antarctic UFO activity, borne out by the fact that large-circulation Japanese newspapers, magazines and TV programs devote a lot of space, money and time to this story.

One even came to interview me in Toronto and ended up hiring one of my own "Zundel-Haus Lieutenants", a volunteer who helped around the office, but who had lived in Argentina many years and spoke several languages. This man had personal knowledge of the people and places involved. That expedition is as well a fascinating one - but too long to recount here. Perhaps another time!

Even in America, the topic is a sizzling one. Right after World War II, Admiral Byrd, the famous American Arctic Explorer, was sent to Antarctica by President Truman in 1947 with a military task force, equipped with the latest military hardware including air craft carriers, submarines, helicopters, even tanks.

What was he looking for - in, of all places, Antarctica? There are all kinds of articles, serious and otherwise, suggesting that he was sent to smoke out Hitlerís last bhold there. National Geographic Magazine covered that Task Force in over 40 pages of photographs and texts in 1947.

Lt. Cmdr.Richard Byrd - early exploration years

When I was younger than I am today and learned about all these things in the 1970s, I tried to raise public awareness with my little easy-to-read books, which turned quickly into controversial bestsellers, going through numerous printings before I myself pulled the plug on the ìSecret Nazi UFO Projectî by not reprinting and not writing new material on this topic.

My Jewish detractors made me change course, but I want to touch briefly on a widely misreported story of my UFO exploits. It had to do with my last UFO project, a planned Antarctic overflight via a leased, extra-large, fuel tank equipped, long range Boeing 747 from South African Airways.

For political reasons, this airline had to fly non-stop from Europe to South Africa, not being allowed to land and refuel anywhere in Black Africa at the time, courtesy of apartheid. I had a lead on the plane and had tentatively found a crew of Australian and New Zealanders with 747 flying skills and training and also Antarctic overflight experience.

The idea itself was a bit of a publicity lark - we were going to toast each other with champagne over the South Pole and drop a Hitler flag onto some glaciers from the plane to send a greeting to whoever might have been holed up down below. It caused lots of media interest. I had already close to ten media and TV programs lined up whose executives had pledged the $9,999.- fee to send their staff writers and photographers along ñ to see for themselves what was down there!

I was young, rich and adventurous then - and we were all roaring to go. I had lots of fun and did up to three and four talk shows a week on that "Nazi-Antarctic-UFO-Find-the Fuhrer's Bases" story and sold lots of UFO booklets to boot - when tragedy struck! An Air New Zealand passenger plane crashed into Mt. Erebus, killing all passengers and crew members.

The subsequent, painstaking investigation came to no firm conclusions on why the plane crashed. The United Nations, in conjunction with the Big Powers - Russia, America, England etc. - got involved and declared the Antarctic Continent off limits to all civilian overflights.

Coincidence? It put an end to the Zundel UFO Adventure for good.

The last person to raise my "UFO past" and grill me intensely on it was the famous Mike Wallace of ìSixty Minutesî in the 1990s. Wallace seemed to be fascinated and not a little freaked out by the topic. What did he have to fear?

In the summer of 2000, Ingrid Rimland, my new wife, and I visited the famous, much-visited Roswell, New Mexico UFO Museum. Many will recall that a UFO allegedly crashed there in 1947 only two years after World War II - with little "aliens" on board etc. etc.

While there, I bought a nicely produced hardcover book by U.S. Col. Philip J. Corso, (Ret.), who worked deep within the Pentagon hierarchy on a secret UFO Project in the 1950s-60s. On the dust jacket it says this: "With unprecedented detail, Corso divulges how he spearheaded the (U.S.) Army's reverse engineering project that seeded Alien technology at American companies such as IBM, Hughes Aircraft, Bell Labs and Dow Corning."

We toured the museum for several hours and talked with employees and tour guides there, and what do you know? Nicely protected by glass I spotted some diaramas - life-like models reduced to scale: "Nazi Saucers", Swastikas, Balkenkreuze, Luftwaffe insignias and all - being refueled by tankers on the ground with Luftwaffe - and SS-uniformed and armed German soldiers guarding the "Nazi UFO base." I thought I could not trust my eyes!
Colonel Philip Corso

Allow me this thought as a German who has refused throughout a lifetime to make myself a slave to the Pavlovian Reflex and kick a long-dead Adolf Hitler in the shin:

The Americans captured and shipped thousands of German rocket, aircraft and other weapons specialists to the US immediately after World War II to "seed" exactly the same projects that Col. Corso described as their advanced weapons research.

While in Roswell, Ingrid and I also went to the American rocket pioneer Stoddard's workshop/museum and looked at the tools and scientific gear displayed there - a shockingly primitively equipped place, compared to what Wernher von Braun had had to work with Hitlerís test facilities at Peenem¸nde at the end of World War II.

On that hot summer afternoon I wondered to myself if what had really crashed in Roswell might not have been one of the German Flying Saucers, keeping an eye on what the competition was up to at Mr. Stoddardís lab and test site - and that the ìlittle green menî story was a false road flare, planted by US authorities at the time!

Why so? Would it not have been painfully embarrassing to admit to the American and world public that "here we were, having clubbed the Germans to a pulp in massive bombing raids, monkeying around at Mr. Stoddard's lab and other places with that outdated, old-fashioned, glorified fire cracker rocketry the departing Hitler regime left behind, along with Wernher von Braun - while a still-undefeated bunch of high-tech Nazis are hot-rodding it around the globe and maybe even through the universe, snugly ensconced in their never-captured, Antarctic based UFOs?"

A man can speculate, can't he? After all, this is America, isn't it? And red-blooded Americans don"t fear - or do they? - that they will faint or turn into some frogs if they discover that a real live "Nazi" called Ernst Zundel - according to the ADL, the JDL, the Wiesenthalers and other some such outfits that specialize in smears - turned out to be a human being after all who has just given them a publicly little-known piece of his mind. [End]


Ingrid's comment: Much of the information on Antarctica and German UFOs are in Ernst Zundel's various UFO booklets, some a bit tattered and grimy after the 1995 arson of the renowned, world-famous Zundel-Haus in Toronto, set ablaze by Germany's enemies 50 years to the day after Germany surrendered to the Allies, May 8, 1945.

They still sell, believe it or not! They need to be updated badly!

Visit www.soaringeaglesgallery.com and check them out yourself!

Colonia Dignidad: A Trading Post for Nazi UFOs?

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on February 28, 2013

Written by Ernst Zundel in 2004 while he was incarcerated in Canada after having been abducted in Tennessee by his political opponents. I always loved this story for its veiled mystery. Have you ever heard of Hacienda Dignidad? My Spanish is a bit rusty, but I believe the name translates into "Ranch of Honor" or "Plantation of Pride." Hacienda Dignidad is a mysterious place, deep in the Chilean mountains. Allegedly, it is a trading post for Nazi UFOs.
Ernst Zundle on his release from prison

Remember, I am writing this totally from my faulty memory without any access to any notes I may still have in my files, at least in fragments. This is the rough story by no means complete. The Hacienda Dignidad myth is only a small piece of a puzzle that is much larger, much more mysterious, encompassing people all over the globe for at least 60, maybe even 70 or 75 years.

When I was young, I stumbled upon it because of my interest in space exploration and space journeys to the near planets ñ to the Moon, to Mars, Venus and, beyond, to Orion and Sirius. It did not take long for me to make all kinds of interesting contacts in Canada, America, Germany, Austria, Spain and, especially, South America and, strange as it may seem, Japan of all places.

My first encounter with Japanese interests in space came in 1967 when I met the CEO of what was then a sizeable conglomerate of Japanese corporations worth well over US$250 million, all involved in the most diverse business fields. That man, letís call him the Chairman, was a Japanese Naval AttachÈ in Germany during World War II.

He was ultimately taken to Japan by German submarine in late 1943 with a secret cargo apparently involving jet planes. The Germans were far ahead of the Japanese, even the British and the US in that field, having had operational jets, several different kinds, by different manufacturers and designers since 1938. There is a story of just such a submarine which carried nothing but mercury, which the Japanese apparently needed in war production.


A German submarine caught on the surface

Incidentally, I corresponded with some of the crew of Captain Schefer's sub which landed in Argentina long after Germany's surrender in Europe - there is also the story of a German sub using an uninhabited island in the Falklands/Antarctic/South Atlantic region. That island could still not be visited in the 1970s because it seems the Germans used a mine barrier at the lagoon entrance to prevent the Allied ships from landing there.

Anyway, the Chairman was thrilled to meet me, and I was wined and dined, had a Japanese driver/translator assigned to me, who was dressed formally, including gray gloves at all times. He did a lot of bowing. Wherever he guided me, I was showered with gifts from shops located on the most famous shopping streets in Tokyo.

He took me to large art supply stores near the University of Tokyo and to the National gallery of Japan, where I was introduced as though I were a V.I.P., receiving fine collections in gift boxes of rice paper, seals and sealing wax - a very big deal in Japan! Evidently the Chairman thought that I was someone special because, as he said in his accented German, î Herr Z¸ndel, Sie sind der erste Deutsche, der denkt wie meine Kameraden in Deutschland im Kriege.î [You are the first German who thinks as my comrades did in the war].

WWII German Sub - View from the bridge

The Chairman was the one who told me over a slow meal of many courses that Japan was at war with America. He pointed to an attachÈ case and said, "This time we will defeat them with this (meaning commerce) and not with tanks, ships, or planes."

He said in parting that Japan would never forgive the Americans for dropping the atomic bomb and for making Japan lose face before other Asians, especially the Koreans and Chinese.

That was a big deal with him, as were the humiliations and executions by hanging of Japanese leaders via the Tokyo war crimes trials and tribunals. He was far less forgiving than the Germans!

I donít know if this Chairmanís hand was involved in what followed, but in the middle 70s I was contacted by a man who claimed to be a Japanese reporter/writer. He was very interested in my UFO books, ordered several of them, kept calling me for details and basically pestering me because, by then, I was phasing out this rather frivolous line of books. I would imagine that it must have been in '78 or '79 when this reporter finally made arrangements to come over from Japan to interview me at length.

Money seemed no object with this Japanese reporter, who arrived with a photographer/sound man with state of the art tape recorders in tow. They parked their stretch limousine, chauffeur and all, in a no parking, no stopping zone outside my house. The bored white driver would sit there for hours, pulling away once in a while because Toronto police told him to move on.

Meanwhile, we talked and looked through my UFO/Nazi Secret Weapon/Antarctica file, only interrupted by lunch, tape changes, coffee breaks. Later on, we went out to the CN Tower where I was treated to one of the most expensive dinners in my life.

The two came back the next day, and this time they seemed quite interested in talking to one of my male secretaries, Sepp. We used to horse around a lot, talking of olden times, and I used to call him my "Adjutant", for Sepp had an illustrious past. He had served as an aide de camp and interpreter for Field Marshall Kesselring in Italy during the latter part of the war.

We were young and brazen then. We thought we would supply some visual aids for our Japanese guests, so for the occasion we dressed Sepp up in a spiffy Nazi uniform of an officer of the communications section - visorís officerís cap, the works! The photographer just loved that man and his uniform! I could see why - it would lend authenticity to the story being told for a magazine or television special.

Then my Japanese guests left, loaded with UFO literature. They said they would be in touch, and mentioned that if they could raise the funds, they might be tempted to go and visit some of the places in Europe and Latin America. Especially submarine bases and underground installations left over from World War II really interested them. They were like children with a new toy.


In the months that followed, I helped them gain entry to some circles and installations, such as the former German submarine base and bunkers in Bergen, Norway, which operated undamaged until after surrender in May 11th 1945 - not May 8th! The Norwegians used those facilities, along with the most modern German subs, into the 1970s.

My guests also visited the Hydrographic Institute in Hamburg and looked into the thousands of air photos taken over Antarctica and its German bases, established by the Ritscher Expedition under the protection of Hermann Gˆring, with Rudolf Hess as the liaison for the project.

They went to Camp Dora in the Harz Mountains and to the bunker complexes in the Alpine Redoubt, which figured large in the Allied propaganda in '44 and '45. They sent me many postcards from those places. Unfortunately, the 1985 arson claimed all of those files.

In the wake of those visits, UFO orders for books, spotter charts and investigator passes began to pour in from Japan. We even sold Frisbees resembling UFOs. The first articles appeared, and we did a brisk business for a while with Japan in that period.

Then one day, I received a call from our Japanese writer. He was in the US, in Los Angeles. Could he drop by? He wanted to make me a proposal about a research trip.

Sure, said I. Come on up.

He arrived within a week and suggested that I accompany him to Latin America, together with another Japanese tape recorder man and photographer, using my trusty German aide - minus Nazi uniform, I insisted! - on the trail of the Nazi UFOs. The expedition was to last from 4 to 7 weeks. Ernst in his earlier publishing days

I was still a hands-on graphic artist at that time. I ran a lucrative graphic arts studio, along with my publishing house, and I had important contracts with some of Canada's largest corporations.

There was no way I could stay away that long without losing my business. So we made a compromise. I would not go, but I would lend him my German AttachÈ.

Of course, Sepp liked the idea of researching Hacienda Dignidad, somehow connected to Nazi UFOs, because he could get a free first class trip out of this deal and see his friends in Chile and Argentina, where he also had family.

He was happy to go along. I was excited for him, even paid him his salary, bonuses, insurance, the works ñ for which the Japanese researchers reimbursed me generously. For me, it was a good deal, because my trusted Adjutant would be in fact my eyes and ears and report back to me. The Japanese had no problems with that. Everybody was satisfied.

Sepp took off for Los Angeles where he would meet the rest of the team. The first stop was a special effects studio in Hollywood, which mightily impressed my World War II staff officer turned volunteer. That educational experience behind them, the team flew off into the wild blue yonder and landed in Santiago, Chile to meet up with my co-author of my first German UFO book, titled ìUnbekanntes Flugobject? Letzte Geheimwaffe des Dritten Reiches. The man's last name was Mattern.

Mr. Mattern was a German who had emigrated to Chile in the 1920s as a professional photographer. In time, he became the official photographer for all the presidents and most of the military big wigs in Chile in the early 1930s and thereafter. He was in and out of the Presidential Palace, the military academies, the Parliament ñ he simply knew everybody!

Chileís military was thoroughly Prussian, having adopted Prussian drills, ethos, code of honor, WWII German uniforms, and helmets ñ even the goose steps! - which, by the way, they have kept to this day. The Chilean army under Pinochet was like an extension of the World War II German Army in looks, behavior and feel as well as in outward appearance. Exclusively German marching bands and German marches were, and are, still played to this day by that time warp Chilean army!

Mr. Mattern was to be in charge of the Chilean part of the trip, especially since he had once personally visited the area upon which the Japanese seemed to be totally fixated ñ the fabled Shangri-la called Hacienda Dignidad in a remote interior mountain range. As the story went, during his one and only visit to Hacienda Dignidad, Mr. Mattern was picked up at the train station or air field ñ I canít recall which ñ by someone and driven to the Hacienda, and when his visit was over, he was driven back to his point of arrival in the South Central part of Chile. I believe the town was called Parral.

Mattern was, by then, already a man well into his 80s, but his correspondence was absolutely lucid. He assured the Japanese team plus Sepp that they would be met at the airport by a representative of Mr. Richter who would then take them to the Hacienda for a reception and interview with Mr. Richter personally. Security and secrecy were given as the reasons for this somewhat out of the ordinary arrangement.

The meeting with Mr. Mattern was cordial at his upper middle class home. The meals were served in the finest china, rare wines, candle light, very civilized. The team was on its way, being briefed by Mr. Mattern what he had observed during his visit many years ago, such as the brand new Mercedes Benz ambulances which were used by German emergency services, Mercedes Diesel mini-buses, sheet metal workshops with the latest German metal bending machines, punch presses, all of them equipped with the most modern tools and machines.

Mattern spoke of extensive vehicle repair facilities, motor reconditioning shops, modern communal kitchens and learning/meeting facilities, a state of the art hospital with a surgery and an outpatient clinic for Indians in the area and a maternity ward where local people, mostly Indios or Mestizos, were treated by the medical staff of the Hacienda Dignidad, completely free of charge.

The nurses, said Mattern, wore typical German nursesí uniforms with Red Cross and Christian insignia on their gowns and habits. There was also a dairy farm, he recalled, as well as sheep, flocks of chickens, geese etc. In fact, it seemed that the Hacienda was based on what in National Socialist Germanyís time would have been called a ìMusterbetriebî ñ an ideal, self-contained community, run like a perfectly integrated prototype enterprise.

Mattern also saw a neat little Christian chapel. He said he was taken for long rides on magnificent horses along well-kept trails, accompanied by Richter, who would stop and talk to Indio laborers, male and female, in Spanish.

Although their outings would often last several hours, said Mattern, they never seemed to come to a fence or the edge of the property. It was rolling hills and dales, fields of potatoes, wheat, rye, and corn. Every once in a while he would hear the sounds in the distance ñ the whine of jet engines or turbines being accelerated, and then the sounds would die down again, and silence would prevail.

Only a few times, he told his guests, did he think that he saw strange aerial activity going on by even stranger craft. He was never told what was it was, and it was clear to him that the host was unwilling or perhaps under orders not to expand on those strange noises and those odd goings-on.

During his stay, there were communal suppers and lectures on different topics by different people, said Mattern. There were German and Austrian folk dance performances and even some by Indian dancers accompanied by rather primitive local instruments. He was not allowed to take any pictures or make any drawings and notes. Camera, note pad, pens were politely taken from him and returned at the end of the visit. Some of these Mattern recollections, by no means all, found their way into the initial German books and my subsequent far more Mickey-Mouse English language books on UFOs, titled UFOs: Nazi Secret Weapons.

This, then, was a little preview of what the Japanese investigative reporter, the sound man photographer, and my own secretary/translator hoped to find at the mysterious Hacienda. Remember, this was long before faxes, satellite phones, much less cell phones, the Internet and e-mail came onto the scene. Letters from and to Chile would normally take 9-12 days one-way, which is still good and fast by todayís standards.

The team left Santiago, the capital, full of anticipation and arrived in Parral, hoping to be met by Mr. Richter or by one of his staff members, as Mr. Mattern said he was assured via his usually well-connected channels.

The team arrived. Parral is a regional, administrative center with military and federal police bases as well as airports and rail center.

No Mr. Richter. No one else either! Now what?

Mr. Mattern, back in Santiago, could not get any explanations from his highly placed sources either, which shocked him visibly. All his inquiries hit dead ends.

My man on the scene spoke five languages. As a German military officer on Field Marshall Kesselringís staff, Sepp had served as a liaison to Benito Mussoliniís government, and as such he had participated in all the high level meetings, including the ones concerning Mussoliniís liberation by German commando leader Otto Skorzeny at the Gran Sasso.

Anyway, Sepp was a resourceful man because of his background and training. He decided to do the logical thing ñ he went to see the postmaster of the town and asked for the address of the Hacienda Dignidad.

There he was met with evasive answers. Security considerations. Obscure laws. Shrugs. Blank stares. I should also mention that Chile was then under martial law since Allende had been overthrown. Martial law can bring out very strange behavior.

When he could not shake loose the address, Sepp went to see the mayor, Japanese crew in tow. At city hall, he was at first cordially received by the staff and was shown into the mayorís spacious office. There, behind the mayorís desk were several large maps of the area ñ one of the town, another of the whole region with oddly colored patches towards areas heading to the foothills of the mountains. While they chatted with the mayor, asking for Mr. Richter and the way to the Hacienda Dignidad, it became quickly clear that security did not permit the city official from giving them the information they sought either.

By now it was past lunch. After a meal, the team decided to rent a car - a Volkswagen Beetle - and do their exploration without Mr. Richter.

Sepp had memorized the map at the mayorís office. At the car rental place they obtained a similar scale map of the region, matched with what he had seen shaded in. A decision was made to head out into the general direction of those colored/shaded areas. Sepp was certain it had to be the Haciendaís location, going by the description of the landscape Mattern had given them in his briefings. Sepp was confident that he could find the Hacienda by asking local people in the foothills.

By now it had begun to rain, and as they were climbing steadily, it was getting colder and darker. Quickly, they left civilization behind. Telegraph poles and electric wires ended. Farmersí fields gave way to bush land, poor soil, and the odd Indio shack made of corrugated metal roofs, old leftover wooden pallets, crates etc. with run-down or broken down cars strewn in the fields. The road got progressively worse, and the asphalted surface had long given way to potholes and gravel, which made for a bouncy ride as they wound their way ever higher into the foothills.

It was a miserable afternoon drive. The Japanese wanted to turn back. Sepp wanted to press on, and since he was the driver and navigator, German stubbornness won out. With his cold and grumbling passengers getting more weary by the minute, things were heading for a crisis, when suddenly the rain stopped just as they came to an area of clearly man-planted, 25-year-old conifer trees on either side of the road. They could see a light flicker in some hut on a hillside in the distance.

They hit upon a paved road, and soon they found themselves on a driveway with a cut lawn on each side. They could see a white stucco gate, Latin American style, with a high wrought iron fence on either side, and then a long, heavy wire security fence, metal links with barbed wire continuing on into a distant, man-planted forest. They were, in fact, in a turn-around, circular driveway area, and there was even an electric bell.

By the street lamp they could see some metallic reflections in some high birch trees inside the fence behind the large gate, which had a smaller gate for pedestrians on the side of it. This road carried on behind the gate into a well-kept landscaped area, dotted by majestic 25-35 year old coniferous, German-type blue spruce, or Norwegian pine trees familiar to people in Central Europe, the Black Forest and the Alpine regions. There was a winding path up to the blinking light shack a few hundred meters up a steep bank.

It began to drizzle again. The Japanese were lightly clad, shivering and uncomfortable, sitting huddled in the car. Sepp had a waterproof ski jacket and offered to investigate the light, while the others waited. He decided to take a shortcut and climb straight up the hill. It was slippery and rough going ñ when, suddenly, a car horn sounded, and as he turned around and looked down, he saw several men in non-descript rain coats surrounding the Volkswagen Beetle.

Hastily, he slid down the hillside to get there faster, getting himself wet and muddy by the rain-covered high vegetation. The men had started questioning the Japanese who did not speak Spanish and were clearly at a loss as to what to do next. One of the strange men, to Seppís surprise, wore a forage cap used by German mountain troops in World War II, the famous Gebirgsj‰ger of Oberst Dietl in Narvik, Murmansk and later the Caucasus when they climbed the highest mountain, Mount Elberus, and planted the Swastika flag on the peak, creating a worldwide sensation at the time.

The German spread-eagle insignia and the Edelweifl had been neatly removed from the cap, but one could still see the outline in the sun-bleached material. This man was muscular, bronzed, blue-eyed and blond. More yet, he spoke heavily accented Spanish with a clear Bavarian twang, familiar to my south Tyrolian born Sepple! Sepp knew he was in the right place. He knew that was no local Indio or Chilean.

Sepp addressed him in German; however, the man refused steadfastly to answer in German. In Spanish, he asked the team what they wanted, denied knowing a Dr. Richter, and requested that they hand him their passports, airline tickets, cameras and tape recorders. He then motioned them inside the gate which opened electrically, although no wires or high poles were visible anywhere. He motioned them to drive down the driveway, while the rest of the ìreception committeeî followed them in their own, four-wheel drive military type vehicle.

After 300-400 meters, they came to a series of typically German type buildings - sturdy masonry with baked-tile roofs, stone and stucco Alpine style architecture. They were told to park their car. Politely, they were assisted with their luggage. They entered a large office/reception type room, tastefully decorated, again Alpine type, and were asked to make themselves comfortable. It was a building with all modern amenities, electric lights, flush toilets, wash basins, typewriters, office desks, office lamps, clothes racks etc. It had the feel of a military officerís quarters.

By now, it was pitch dark outside.

They were given sandwiches, hot herbal tea, some dessert, and then the interrogations began ñ at first, separately in different rooms by different people, some of whom spoke English with the Japanese. With Sepp they insisted on speaking Spanish, an odd situation. They could not be persuaded to speak German ñ even though they were clearly Germans.

No one answered any questions as to where they were, what the place was called. No one claimed to know a Mr. Richter. No one admitted that this was indeed Hacienda Dignidad.

The interrogations lasted several hours, and about 10 p.m. they were all brought together again. They were told that they had penetrated a restricted military area without authorization, and that this was a serious offense ñ that a military police escort was on its way from Parral to pick them up, and that it would be up to the military to decide what to do with them once they got there.

Their passports, cameras, tape recorders, films, and luggage would be turned over to the military. It was suggested that they could get some rest in a room that had some bunk beds and blankets, and they were warned not to try anything foolish. They could use the rest room but not leave the building for any reason.

The Japanese seemed pretty upset by all this and wondered what they had gotten into. Their ardor had considerably cooled by then, and they felt it was wiser not to press their luck und instead beat it back to Parral, get their passports back and get out of the jam they were in!

They were satisfied that out in nowhere, cut off from civilization, there obviously were people living with all the accoutrements of civilization, European no less, who had video surveillance cameras, electricity, flush toilets, heating systems, paved roads, tall metal wire fences, automatic electric door openers as well as a facility where there were multilingual people working in shifts, people connected somehow with the military or at least the federales, the police, who had the power to take peopleís passports.

Everybody was tired, and soon all were asleep, only to be wakened in the early morning hours by truck motors howling, doors being slammed, loud voices in Spanish. They were introduced to the head of their military escort ñ a whole convoy of trucks and jeeps! After a short breakfast, they headed out into more rain and fog, making visibility difficult. Even so, they could make out numerous European type buildings in the distance which looked like part of a community with neatly cut lawns, garden flowers, and all asphalt roads everywhere they looked!

The trip back to Parral was slow and rocky. The team was taken to an army or federal police compound where they were herded into a large room and, once again, separately interrogated. They were told what they already knew ñ that they had entered a restricted military area without authorization, for which they could be jailed for a substantial period, but seeing that they were foreigners, and that their press credentials and stories checked out, they were only going to lose their undeveloped film, same with the tape recordings.

They were told to take their rental car, drive it all the way to Santiago, check at the federalesí posts along the way, have their expulsion orders stamped at each place ñ and be out of the country in 72 hours! Pronto!

The Japanese did as they were told ñ they left Chile in a hurry. All were glad they got off easy. They were given their passports and cameras and tape recorders back and went on to points in Brazil and Argentina for other interviews on the trail of the mysterious Nazi UFOs. And our Sepp told us this story as he remembered it.

A decade later, I was invited to Princeton University for a lengthy series of Nazi UFO-related interviews, which were aired on prime time Japanese TV in a remarkable if sensationalized UFO special with superb computer animations of realistic Nazi UFOs. Mr. Mattern never did find out what had happened to Mr. Richter ñ or to Hacienda Dignidad for that matter. He died within a year, but as I said, he was well into his eighties by that time. Sepp passed away a few years later.

From other sources, such as El Mercurio, a left-leaning mass circulation Chilean newspaper, as well as from the German weekly, Der Stern, and the German news magazine, Der Spiegel, the following story emerges:

Hacienda Dignidad is a colony totally self-sufficient in everything, technologically equipped with the very latest amenities. The community has its own schools, teachers, hospital, medical staff, and technical people. It is claimed that mysterious testing of some sort is being carried on at the Hacienda for the Chilean military.

Even Chilean senators and parliamentarians find all their efforts blocked, usually by courts, the police, and the military. The German Embassy reports that numerous Germans receive their World War II army, air force, and other pension checks, which are sent to a collective address in the town of Parral, where they are deposited into a joint account.

The El Mercurio newspaper reported already in the late í40s and í50s that one of their reporters, in fact, did penetrate the Hacienda terrain via back roads through the mountains, using pack horses, and that he did observe strange flying craft taking off and landing in some remote area of a valley away from the actual community ñ which is what Mattern reported seeing during his one and only visit in the 1950s or 1960s ñ I donít remember now exactly just when his visit took place.

The latest report about Hacienda Dignidad I read in the late 1990s in Der Spiegel. There was talk that the community was run by an autocratic leader. It was described almost like a semi-religious cult, but that there were married couples with children there.

After his visit to what he certainly believed had been Hacienda Dignidad or a similar enterprise in the remote foothills of the Chilean mountains, Mattern was of the view that this place was a supply base for fresh fruit and vegetables picked up by ìflying saucersî. He also felt that the colony served as a rest/recuperation and medical facility for German-staffed UFO bases further to the South like Tierra del Fuego and even Antarctica proper.

The story of the El Mercurio reporter, except for Mattern the only other human being claimed to have visited Hacienda Dignidad, is in one of my booklets in excerpted form. It was a bestseller in its time and is still widely quoted, as is the hastily organized Admiral Byrd Expedition to the mysterious continent of Antarctica in 1947.

The most extensive photographic documentary is to be found in an exhaustive article in National Geographic magazine, replete with maps and flight paths of the Byrd overflights, leaving out the far more sensational revelations supposedly contained in Byrdís private diary, which was forbidden to be published by U.S. authorities - or so it is alleged. Its content was leaked by Admiral Byrdís son, who himself came to a rather bizarre and mysterious end.

Doug Christie - Rest in Peace

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on March 22, 2013

Holocaust Enforcers  vs  Holocaust Deniers

The First Trench Warfare Holocaust Court Case, 1985

Dr. Ingrid Rimland Zundel

Doug Christie was a veritable star in various Canadian court venues - the likes of which the Lobby that plagues us all with all their lies piled up on lies and yet more lies had never yet encountered.

Doug Christie was young, brilliant, fearless, smashingly handsome, determined, exceedingly quick on his feet - conventional descriptions will not do him justice. He was in a league by himself.

YouTube - Veterans Today -

His adversaries - in the courts, and in the streets? Iíll let you be the judge.

Somebody called Doug Christie “Ernst Zundelís Battling Barrister” - the moniker fit, and it stuck. Seven times he took the Zundel Case alone to the Supreme Court of Canada - I have been told, more often than any other Canadian lawyer with any other case before him or since. He was a class act, both feared and admired by many. Ernst and Ingrid - Before his secret trial

Two weeks ago, Doug Christie passed on. Ernst Zundel is still being held as a free speech hostage by political hacks who run the country of his birth right down into the ground.

Whole governments world-wide now know that the so-called “Holocaust” is a political weapon of mass deception in terms of holding huge nations in hock. Long story I wonít repeat here.

I took three days to stitch together from faded movie clips the essence of what “Holocaust Denial” is really all about - and who the actors were, and are, in a drama of near cosmic dimensions.

If you are ignorantly vomiting the media hype right back into the arena about the “gassings” of “six million”, please do yourself a favor and educate yourself at least at kindergarten level.

If you already know, as many do - as millions all around the globe now know! - that “Auschwitz” was a false flag operation before that term was even coined, I honestly believe you wonít forget the raw emotions in this short documentary that powered both sides of the battle. This morning, I give you Act I.

Doug was an intellectual warrior of true grit as well as warmth you seldom find in the legal profession. He was despised and demonized by many, as was and still is his ill-reputed client. Their battle took decades - and isnít yet done. On good days it simply rained media spitballs. On bad days it was wall-to-wall, blood-curdling death threats and worse - not just against them, but those who supported the battle of constitutionally guaranteed Freedom of Speech.

Today I give you Doug Christie, in life and in death. You will also meet beautiful Keltie, law researcher and comrade extraordinaire, Dougís partner of 32 years and mother of his children. You will meet a much younger Ernst Zundel, the tireless street action populist - by now a world-wide icon of the Movement, prevented from joining his wife.

You will get a glimpse of three or four dozen of Zundel supporters, simple folks like you and I. You will also meet a howling, shrieking mob of Zundel detractors whose behavior speaks for themselves.

In this Shakespearean play, there is your corrupt judge. Your hateful prosecutor who does a hatchet job.

A Defense of Hitler the Veteran?

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on June 22, 2013

War Veterans in Crisis:  Then as Now

Satanic Mass Murderer or Victim of Propagandized "History?"

By Dr. Ingrid Rimland Zundel

(Editor’s note:  VT was dared to print this.  We shy away from nothing, America has already given up too many rights, rights we have fought for and will fight for again.  Here, Dr. Zundel cites America’s Neocon traitors as Marxists.  For many of us here, our own separate "path of discovery" has led us inexorably to the same conclusion, that the "Bush revolution" was everything but "Reaganesque" or even conservative.

America, like Germany in the 20’s, has been overrun by Bolsheviks, repackaged as "neocons," as "Zionists" and even as "Christian evangelists."  They have been lovers of totalitarianism, of war, of "one world government" and of concentration camps and torture.

Increasingly, they control the current “anti-government” dialog of what purports itself to be the "anti-imperialist left."  As the phony left and phony right melded, the underlying heart of Bolshevism has been revealed.g)

When I was twelve years old, I had it out with the Mennonite Elders - I asked why the Devil was not given a fair hearing.  I knew he was a villain - everybody knew! - but nowhere in the Bible did I find a forum where the poor sob could argue his case. 

I was, in essence, pleading chivalry.

I had been raised to take it for granted that an accused be treated with fairness and not be dismissed out of hand.  As you can imagine, that argument fell on deaf ears.  As a matter of fact, I found myself under suspicion that Satan himself had infested my mind.  It was an experience I have never forgotten - my first introduction to the fury unleashed by conformist belief.

Reason did not enter into it at all.

More decades than I care to admit have turned me into a lady of decorum, but I still feel inside as I did then - defiant about unexamined dogma.  In my book, it’s just not fair to dump buckets of slime on a scoundrel without allowing him the slightest chance of defense.

I speak of obligatory Hitler Bashing.

Even at risk of losing my scalp, I intend to raise that principle of chivalry again.  Nowhere in the post-war era do I find a respectable forum where the Western world’s favorite villain can argue his case without rivers of spitballs and volleys of vilification.

Here goes:

After having listened to three generations worth of wall-to-wall disparagement I speak for one lone veteran who has been demonized like no other veteran on earth.  Ever.

Veterans know that any war of serious magnitude will write its own harsh rules.  Nonetheless, I take it for granted that my argument - even now - will fall on deaf ears.  I know that I will find myself under suspicion that the Fuhrer's jackboots are surreptitiously parked under my bed.

However, this is Veterans Today- not veterans three or four generations ago.  The time has come for balance.

More than a year ago, I was invited by Veterans Today's senior editor, Gordon Duff, to have my say my way.  When several months ago I asked Gordon if this topic or that one might be too hot, he wrote me back, "We ain't afraid of no one."

I take him up on it.  I take that chance to convey my uncensored opinion.

I will argue facts and conditions that were then, as they are now, on every veteran’s mind.  The German veterans of yore - those who fought World War I - could have been your brothers and might yet be, if soldierly gallantry ever be given a chance.

Here is what today's media tells me:  That US veterans today are being marginalized, neglected, arrested, abused, labeled as mentally ill - for speaking out against a corrupt government that has misused their youth and openheartedness  and  cares not one whit for its own.

"Is that how America honors its veterans?" they ask in disbelief.  I hear it everywhere.

For me, it's deja vu, although I was not yet alive when my own ancestors, so history records, learned that a nasty government at the behest of faceless traitors had stabbed them in the back.  Those were the times that brought forth Adolf Hitler - a young, impoverished veteran who had done his duty as best he knew how.

Now he and his comrades were homeless, hungry, unemployed, severely traumatized - battling  depression and thoughts of suicide,  their situation worse, much worse, than what it is today in a perplexed and traumatized America.

They, too, dealt with treason within.

They, too, saw their country betrayed, their values debauched, their parents in rags, their children’s future  compromised - in the clutches of banksters and crooks.

I ask for simple fairness for a young man of modest means whose bravery in war, if nothing else,  has never been in doubt.  Say what you will - what you feel that you must since you think you are dealing with Satan! -  but first know some pertinent facts before you condemn.

Fresh from the bloody battlefields and rat-infested trenches of a fratricidal war to benefit big banks, decorated with an iron cross for valor, now lying blinded by a poisoned gas attack in one of Germany’s dilapidated military hospitals - this young man, all by himself, decided that enough was enough.

He and his comrades would end the treason, betrayal and abuse by treacherous civilians as well as some of their own military leaders at the front.

The Versailles Treaty, with all its ghastly clauses and conditions that spelled the end of Germany, became the crux on which Adolf Hitler focused millions of Germany's veterans' fully justified rage.  This unknown former soldier molded a ragged army of defeated, hungry comrades into a formidable political fighting force, which through its battlefield-tested courage and its resourcefulness and manly self-assertion took back the towns and cities of their fatherland from Marxist revolutionaries.

Street by street.  City-block by city block.  Village by village.  Eventually whole regions.

Veterans marched.  Veterans acted.  And for the most part, without the use of guns.

How was that done?  By comradely unity at huge demonstrations - stark evidence of an indomitable patriotic will.

This will to survive, to save their fatherland from hunger, shame, and treason was the accomplishment of millions of German war vets, fresh from the front, having come back to a hell’s pit of depravity. The decent, honorable country they had loved was finished.  The banking system lay in ruins.  Inflation had ravaged all savings.  Pornography was king.  Raw hunger stalked the streets - until one lone, self-educated veteran stood up, rolled up his sleeves, and rallied what strength was still left!

History records the rest of the story, a truly epic tale.  The world should stand in awe.

Ah, but what of the SA?  And what of the SS?

What of it?  It’s cheap to be a Monday Morning Quarterback.

Those early supporters joining Hitler’s fledgling political party were not of the scum of the earth that had infested Germany’s cities.  They were decent Germans, the salt of the earth, highly decorated, battle-tested war vets like you and your disheveled comrades - among them Rudolf Hess and Hermann Goring, a celebrated ace, severely wounded in combat.

Next joined the volunteers of what was called the Freikorps, by the thousands - soldiers who, without pay, would rush to the assistance of the hard-pressed, demonized, inadequately funded Reichswehr, forming a home-grown militia in many of the border regions where aliens flooded in to fatten themselves on Germany’s defeat.

Those were no Sunday visitors.   They were the bloody Marxists and other foreign revolutionaries - thieves and murderers, all - seizing power over German towns, cities, entire regions - hell-bent on benefiting shamelessly from the ruin of Germany.  You call your Marxists “neocons”.   They called them Spartakists.  All blood-red commies, to the core - the alien vermin from the East.

Had Hitler not come, in no time at all Germany would have turned red - as would have all of Europe.

It was this highly disciplined force of disillusioned, furious war veterans that joined the equally emaciated, ill-equipped government forces on the Right.  These German veterans, led by their Fuhrer - meaning Leader - lept into the breach, time and again, to prevent the collapse of their homeland.

Thousands of German war veterans sacrificed limbs, careers, families, even their  lives by coming to the aid of what they called their Heimatland - the land which they called “home’ - which had fallen on desperate times.

It was the sacrifice of these thousands upon thousands of idealists that saved the mortally wounded German state and post-WWI society from utter collapse and threatening chaos.

These German war vets made the difference.  In those dark days, the Germany of yesterday had simply no one else.

You did not know that - did you?  I didn't.  I heard this story only recently.  I always assumed that Hitler, in the early years, collected some rambunctious skinheads from the dirty streets of Germany who rioted in taverns by swinging table legs.

When communist revolution had been checked and defeated, it was natural that many of the Freikorps volunteers joined Hitler’s National Socialist party and its uniformed political units - the SA and later the SS.   Those were their nation's best - their battle-tested vets.  It was these millions of veterans that followed Hitler's rallying cry - and in no time at all, by sheer necessity and iron discipline, subdued the Marxist scum.

Think what you will and say what's expected, but know that Hitler was a man of valor who did not shrink from duty in an emergency. He was the one who sent the Marxists packing.


I found a book review for you.  Please take to heart what one of your own highly valued military historians has to say:

"Hitler: Beyond Evil & Tyranny" - By R. H. Stolfi, Prometheus Books, 2011

 Reviewed by Gregory Johnson, Ph.D.  :

“No man is a hero to his valet, not because the hero is not a hero, but because the valet is a valet.” ó G. W. F. Hegel


Adolf Hitler was clearly the man of the 20th century, whose shadow grows taller as the sun of the West sinks ever lower. Sadly, though, there is no biography worthy of Hitler.

If great men are those who leave their stamp on history, then Hitler was a great man. But great men present great problems for biographers. Great men are not necessarily good men, and even good men, when they hold political power, often find it necessary to kill innocent people. Evil men do not find this difficult, but good men do. Thus a good man, if he is to be a great man, must also be a hard man. But it is difficult for biographers, who are ordinary men, to sympathize with great men, especially men who are unusually bad or hard.

But biographers must at least try to enter imaginatively into the minds of their subjects. They must feel their feelings and think their thoughts. They must feel sympathy or empathy for their subjects. Such sympathy is not a violation of objectivity but a tool of it. It is a necessary counter-weight to the antipathy and ressentiment that hardness, cruelty, and greatness often inspire. Sympathy is necessary so a biographer can discover and articulate the virtues of intellect and character necessary to achieve anything great in this world, for good or ill.

Of course, one’s ability to sympathize with great men depends in large part on one’s moral principles. A Nietzschean or Social Darwinist would, for instance, find it easier to sympathize with a human beast of prey than would a Christian or a liberal democrat. Even so, it has been possible for Christians and liberals to write biographies of such great conquerors as Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Mohammed, Genghis Khan, and Napoleon without whipping themselves into thousand-page paroxysms of self-righteous moralistic denigration.

Hitler, of course, provides even greater problems for biographers, because his demonization is a prop of contemporary Jewish hegemony, and there are consequences for any writer who challenges that consensus.

R. H. S. Stolfi’s Hitler: Beyond Evil and Tyranny [2]  is one of my favorite books on Hitler. It is not a biography of Hitler, although it is organized chronologically. It is, rather, a kind of “meta-biography,” an essay on the interpretation of Hitler’s life. Stolfi’s project has both positive and negative aspects: Stolfi critiques the existing interpretations of Hitler’s life as a whole and of specific episodes in Hitler’s life, and Stolfi sets forth his own interpretations.

Stolfi’s criticism of Hitler biographies focuses on the work of those he calls the four “great biographers”: John Toland (Adolf Hitler: The Definitive Biography [3]), Alan Bullock (Hitler: A Study in Tyranny [4] ), Joachim Fest (Hitler [5]), and Ian Kershaw (Hitler: 1889-1936, Hubris [6] and Hitler: 1936-1945, Nemesis [7] ). In Stolfi’s words, “the penchant of [Hitler's] biographers for gratuitous sarcasm, strained skepticism, and writing from preconceived heights of antipathy has left the world with a dangerously inaccurate portrait of Hitler” (p. 54). (Judging from the reception of David Irving’s Hitler’s War and The War Path, the existing establishment regards an accurate portrait of Hitler more dangerous than an inaccurate one.) Four examples of this bias will sufficice:

(1) Ian Kershaw claims that outside of politics, Hitler was an "unperson," a nullity, which completely ignores Hitler's voracious reading, serious engagement with and understanding of philosophers like Schopenhauer, love of painting and fine art, remarkable architectural knowledge and skill, and love of classical music, including a connoisseur’s knowledge of the operas of Richard Wagner that impressed the Wagner family and other highly discerning individuals.

(2) Hitler’s biographers invariably denigrate his humble, common origins, coming off like parodies of the worst forms of social snobbery. But of course the same authors would wax sodden in describing any other man’s rise from poverty and obscurity to fame and fortune. Jesse Owens, for instance.

(3) Stolfi rebuts one of Joachim Fest’s most outrageous liberties as follows: “The great biographers all debunk Nazi theories of racial differences, which they characterize as pseudoscientific and based on unredeemed prejudice, yet one of them [Fest] could claim confidently, without hint of countervailing possibility, that the subject of his biography had ëcriminal features’ set in a ëpsychopathic face’” (p. 268).

(4) The great biographers regularly slight Hitler's service as a soldier during the First World War, yet as Stolfi points out, Hitler won the Iron Cross First Class, the Iron Cross Second Class, and a regimental commendation for bravery. He was also seriously wounded twice. Hitler never spoke much about what he did to earn these commendations, partly out of his characteristic modesty and reserve, but also probably because he did not wish to relive painful experiences. But even this is twisted by his biographers to cast aspersions on Hitler’s bravery and character. Stolfi notes that with no other historical figure do biographers feel entitled to take such liberties.

Kershaw is the most tendentious of the great biographers, repeatedly characterizing Hitler as an “unperson,” a “nonentity,” a “mediocrity,” and a “failure.” These epithets must surely feel good to Kershaw and like-minded readers, but if they are true, then Hitler’s career is utterly incomprehensible. Stolfi is acerbic, witty, and tireless in skewering the great biographers ó although some of his readers might find it tiresome as well.

In addition to offering fascinating interpretations of particular events, Stolfi argues for three overriding theses about Hitler: (1) Hitler cannot be understood as a politician but as a prophet, specifically a prophet forced to take on the role of a messiah; (2) Hitler cannot be understood as an evil man, but as a good man who was forced by circumstances and his own ruthless logic and unemotional “hardness” to do terrible things; and (3) Hitler must be understood as one of the great men of history, indeed as a world-historical figure, who cannot be grasped with conventional moral concepts.

Surely by now you are thinking that our author must be some sort of “discredited,” “marginal,” outsider historian like David Irving, or even a dreaded “revisionist.” So who was Russell Stolfi?

Born in 1932, Stolfi is to all appearances an established, mainstream military historian. He was Professor at the US Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California and a Colonel in the US Marine Corps Reserve. He is the author of three other books: German Panzers on the Offensive: Russian Front-North Africa 1941-1942 [8] (Schiffer Publishing, 2003), Hitler’s Panzers East: World War II Reinterpreted [9] (University of Oklahoma, 1993), and NATO Under Attack: Why the Western Alliance Can Fight Outnumbered and Win in Central Europe Without Nuclear Weapons [10] (with F. W. von Mellenthin, Duke University Press, 1983). I first read Hitler: Beyond Evil and Tyranny in May of 2012, and I was so excited that I tried to contact Stolfi for an interview only to learn that he had just died in April.)

Politician or Prophet?

Adolf Hitler was a formidable political organizer who took over a minuscule Bavarian debating club and turned it into the largest political party in Germany. After being imprisoned for an abortive Putsch, Hitler decided to attain power legally, through electoral politics. To that end, he virtually created the modern political campaign, traveling tirelessly by automobile and airplane and masterfully employing the mass media of his time. When he became Chancellor, Hitler proved a formidable statesman, transforming Germany with a virtually bloodless revolution and recovering German lands and pride through a series of deft foreign policy triumphs until the British and French started a World War to stop him.

Yet for all that, Stolfi argues that Hitler’s personality, goals, and grand strategy were more like those of a religious prophet, specifically an armed prophet like Mohammed.

Politicians presuppose a common political system and climate of opinion. They generally avoid contesting fundamental principles and instead deal with essentially quantitative differences within the same political and ideological continuum, hence their ability to compromise and their susceptibility to corruption. Stolfi points out again and again that Hitler refused to behave like a politician.

Hitler never compromised on basic principles. He took dangerously unpopular stands (p. 225). He refused to soften the party’s message to appeal to squeamish and lukewarm people. He was no demagogue: “A demagogue tells his audience what it wants to hear. A messiah tells his audience what he wants it to hear” (p. 248). Hitler never worried that his radical views would “discredit” him in the eyes of the public, whose minds were mostly in the grip of his enemies anyway. Instead, Hitler was supremely confident of his ability to lend credit to his ideas through reason and rhetoric. He wanted to elevate public opinion toward truth rather than condescend to pander to ignorance and folly.

Hitler also refused to enter common fronts with enemy parties, especially the Social Democrats, even when they took patriotic stands.

Hitler was, moreover, utterly incorruptible. He refused to make special promises to businessmen and other interest groups. He just handed them the party’s platform. In the end, he was offered the Chancellorship simply because his opponents knew he could not be bought off with anything less.

Revolutionaries deal with fundamental issues of principle, which is why they seek to overthrow existing systems and begin anew. Hitler was, of course, a political revolutionary. But he was something more. He saw himself as the exponent of a whole philosophy of life, not just a political philosophy. He placed politics in a larger biological and historical perspective: the struggle of Aryan man against Jewry and its extended phenotypes Communism and Anglo-Saxon capitalism. He believed the stakes were global: nothing less than the survival of all life on Earth was in peril. And having miraculously survived four years of slaughter and two serious wounds in the trenches of World War I ó including an experience that can only be described as supernatural (p. 95) ó Hitler believed that he enjoyed the special protection of Providence.

Hitler had a number of heroic role models. As a child, he was transported by Germanic myths and sagas. As a teenager, he identified with the hero of Wagner’s opera Rienzi, based on the story of Cola di Rienzi, the 14th century popular dictator who sought to restore Rome to its Imperial glory but who was undone by the treachery of the aristocracy and church and finally murdered. Hitler prophesied that he would become a tribune of the people who would rise and fall like Rienzi, and he did. Hitler also identified with Wagner’s Lohengrin and Siegfried. Although Hitler himself had little use for the Bible, his later career as armed prophet brings to mind the Hebrew prophets and lawgivers as well. Stolfi’s analogy between Hitler and Mohammed is quite apposite and revealing.

Savior of Germany ó and Europe

Hitler, however, apparently did not think of himself as a messiah figure, but more as a John the Baptist, preparing the way for someone greater than him. But, as Stolfi documents, many of Hitler’s closest followers ó all of them intelligent men, ranging from mystics like Hess to consummate cynics like Goebbels ó as well as some of his more fair-minded enemies, did see him as a messiah figure, and in the end, he was forced to take on that role. Reading Stolfi makes Savitri Devi’s thesis in The Lightning and the Sun that Hitler was an avatar of the god Vishnu seem a little less eccentric. (Savitri did not originate that thesis. It was a view that she encountered widely among educated Hindus in the 1930s.) There was something messianic about Hitler’s aura and actions, and people around the world understood it in terms of their own cultural traditions.

Stolfi does not mention it, but there is a sense in which Hitler was the savior of Germany and all of Western Europe, although his accomplishments fell far short of his ambitions, consumed his life, and devastated his nation. When Hitler launched operation Barbarossa in 1941, the Soviets were poised to launch a massive invasion of all of Central and Western Europe. Hitler pre-empted that invasion, and although he failed to destroy the USSR, the Third Reich was destroyed instead, and Stalin conquered half of Europe, the outcome would have been much worse if Stalin had been able to launch his invasion. Stalin could have conquered all of Europe. At best he would have been repulsed after unimaginable devastation and bloodshed. Thus every Western European who has lived in freedom from want and terror since 1941 owes a debt of thanks to Adolf Hitler, the German people, and their Axis partners.

(See on this site Daniel Michaels, “Exposing Stalin’s Plan to Conquer Europe [11]” and the National Vanguard review [12] of Viktor Suvorov’s Icebreaker; for more recent literature on this subject, see Viktor Suvorov’s definitive statement of his research has been published as The Chief Culprit: Stalin’s Grand Design to Start World War II [13] [Annapolis, Md.: Naval Institute Press, 2008] and Joachim Hoffmann, Stalin’s War of Extermination, 1941-1945: Planning, Realization and Documentation [14] [Capshaw, Al.: Theses and Dissertations Press, 2001].)

The Question of Evil

In today’s climate of moral relativism and rot, Adolf Hitler is probably the only human being that even liberals will denounce as evil. Hitler is the modern world’s paradigm and embodiment of evil. But of course other people can be evil if they are “like Hitler.” Thus the most radical thesis of Stolfi’s book is that Adolf Hitler was not evil.

There are many dimensions to this argument.

(1) Stolfi points out that there is no evidence that Hitler had psychopathic or sociopathic personality traits as a child. He did not torture animals or steal, for instance. He was polite, serious, and reserved.

(2) Stolfi also points out that Hitler was not primarily motivated by hate or ressentiment. He arrived at his two great enmities, namely against Jewry and Bolshevism, based on personal experience, current events, and extensive research. But when he was rationally convinced of their enormity, he naturally hated them with appropriate magnitude and intensity. As Stolfi writes, “It is difficult to imagine Hitler either as messiah or otherwise and not hating the enemy. Did Jesus the Christ or Mohammed the Prophet hate Satan or merely disapprove of him?” (p. 233).

(3) Calling Hitler evil, like calling him “crazy,” is mentally lazy, because it exempts us from trying to understand the reasons for Hitler’s actions: both his thought processes and objective events that prompted him to act. Hitler had his reasons.

(4) Stolfi argues that Hitler’s character, goals, and actions were not evil. Hitler did what he thought was right, and he was hard enough to spill oceans of blood if he thought it was necessary to advance the greater good. A Socratic, of course, would claim that it is an empty claim, as nobody does evil as such but only under the guise of a perceived good. The evil of an act is in its outcome, not its motive. We all “mean well.”

(5) Stolfi hints that Hitler may have, in a sense, been beyond good and evil, because his goal was nothing less than the creation of a new order, including a new moral order, and it begs the question to subject such men to the moral laws they seek to overthrow. This points us back to Stolfi’s thesis that Hitler has to be seen more as a religious than a political figure and forward to his third major thesis, that Hitler was a world-historical individual.

Stolfi deals with a number of episodes in Hitler’s life that are adduced as evidence of evil. Stolfi argues that some of these acts are not evil at all. He others that others were necessary or mitigated evils.

And he claims that still others were no more evil than the actions of other great men of history who nevertheless manage to receive respectful treatment from biographers. Finally, Stolfi argues that all of these acts, even the evil ones, do not necessarily make Hitler an evil man, for even good men can commit horrific acts if they believe they are necessary to promote a greater good.

(1) Stolfi argues that Hitler’s Beer Hall Putsch and other violations of the laws of the Weimar Republic are somewhat softened by the fact that he believed that the Weimar Republic was an illegitimate and criminal regime. Hitler’s early attempts to defy it and replace it are not, therefore, “evil,” unless all acts of disobedience and revolution against governments as such are evil. In any case, after his release from prison, Hitler adopted a policy of strict legality: he pursued the Chancellorship through electoral politics, and he won.

(2) Stolfi argues that the creation of the Sturmabteilungen (Storm Troops) was not motivated by a desire to violently intimidate political opponents and seize power. Instead, the SA was formed in self-defense against organized Communist efforts to violently intimidate political opponents and seize power, violence that had effectively suppressed the ability of all Right-wing parties to assemble. The SA did not merely assure the NSDAP’s freedom to assemble and organize, it broke the Red terror and restored political freedom to all parties.

(3) Stolfi argues that the Rˆhm purge was necessary because there was ample evidence that Rˆhm himself was plotting a coup, and, true or not, Hindenburg, the leaders of the military, and Hitler’s top lieutenants all believed it to be true. Hindenburg threatened to declare martial law and have the army deal with Rˆhm if Hitler would not. Hitler had to act, because if he didn’t, he would be effectively deposed: he would be abdicating the sovereign function to decide and act for the good of the people to Hindenburg and the army. Even so, Hitler temporized to the last possible moment.


R. H. S. Stolfi, 1932-2012

Stolfi claims that Rˆhm’s death was a kind of apotheosis for Hitler: “By June 1934, Hitler stood poised to pass beyond friendship with any man into the realm of the lonely, distant Leader. But Hitler could never pass into that realm with Rˆhm alive and serving as a reminder of Hitler’s own historical mortality. Rˆhm had to die, and Hitler had to kill him” (p. 306). But this was not, of course, Hitler’s motive for killing him.

Ultimately, Stolfi judges Rˆhm’s death to be politically necessary and morally excusable. He describes it not as a cool, premeditated murder but as a “crime of passion” of a man faced with the infidelity of a sworn confidant (p. 309). Of course, the Rˆhm purge was the occasion for settling a number of other old scores, which complicates Stolfi’s moral picture considerably.

(4) Stolfi evidently thinks there was nothing evil at all about Hitler’s assumption of dictatorial powers ó through a provision in the Weimar constitution ó or his suppression of a political movement as destructive and implacable as Marxism. But he praises the relative bloodlessness of Hitler’s legal revolution.

(5) As for the concentration camps off to which Hitler packed the leaders of the Marxist parties and other subversive groups: in 1935, when the German population stood at 65 million, the concentration camp inmates numbered 3,500, most of them Communists and Social Democrats. The camp system and its mandate were expanded to house people in protective custody for being social nuisances, including beggars, drunks, homosexuals (homosexuality was criminalized under the Second Reich, remained criminalized under Weimar, and was criminalized in the liberal democracies too), gypsies, and habitual criminals ó by 1939 there were 10 camps with 25,000 inmates in a country of 80 million people. That doesn’t seem quite as evil as it was cracked up to be. Furthermore, since Himmler and Heydrich certainly did not lack persecuting zeal and organizational skill, we can conclude that the camp system was exactly as big as they thought it should be.

To give some context, according to Wikipedia [16] - where statistics about Soviet atrocities tend to be on the low end due to Marxist policing ó in March of 1940, the Soviet Gulag comprised 53 separate camps and 423 labor colonies in which approximately 1.3 million people were interned out of a population of 170 million. Whatever the real size, it was exactly as big as Stalin wanted it to be.

Although I have not been able to find records of similar forms of internment in liberal democracies for political dissidents and social nuisances, these surely did take place. But even in the absence of these numbers, it seems clear that Hitler’s camps were far more similar to the prisons of liberal democracies than the Soviet Gulag to which they are always likened.

Of course, these were peacetime numbers. Under the exigencies of war, Hitler’s camp system expanded dramatically to house hostile populations, prisoners of war, and conscript laborers, which is another topic.

(6) Hitler’s anti-Semitism is often put forward as evidence of evil. Hitler himself thought that certain forms of anti-Semitism were repugnant if not outright evil: religious anti-Semitism, anti-Semitism based on ressentiment, gutter populist scapegoating, etc. His repugnance for such phenomena prejudiced him against anti-Semitism as such. But his personal experiences in Vienna, combined with serious reading eventually led him to a dispassionate, scientifically based, and historically informed anti-Semitism.

When Hitler took power, Germany had a relatively small Jewish population. His basic policy was to prevent any further German-Jewish genetic admixture, remove Jews from positions of power and influence, and encourage Jews to emigrate. By the outbreak of the Polish war, Germany’s Jewish population had been dramatically reduced. But due to Hitler’s war gains, millions of new Jews fell into his remit. More about this anon. Stolfi is somewhat circumspect in passing judgment about Hitler’s peacetime Jewish policy. But we can safely say that it was no more evil than, say, the British treatment of Boer non-combatants or the American treatment of the Plains Indians.

(7) Regarding Hitler’s foreign policy exploits as Chancellor ó including rearmament, pulling out of the League of Nations, remilitarizing the Rhineland, the annexation of the Sudetenland and Austria, the annexation of Bohemia, and the war with Poland ó Stolfi writes, “every international crisis that involved Hitler in the 1930s stemmed from an iniquity on the part of the Allies in the Paris Peace Conference of 1919? (p. 316). According to Stolfi, in all of these crises, morality was on Hitler’s side, and he lauds Hitler for conducting them with restraint and relative bloodlessness ó at least up until the Polish war.

These were hardly the outrageous, unendurable moral provocations of Allied propaganda that justified Britain and France starting a World War because Hitler, having exhausted diplomatic negotiations, started a war with Poland to recover German lands and peoples subjected to horrific Polish oppression. The British and French simply could not grasp that, in Stolfi’s words, “a world-historical personality had marched, outraged, out of the desert of shattered Flanders fields, and the former Allies had not even superior morality to shield themselves from him” (p. 317).

(8) Stolfi interprets Operation Barbarossa against the USSR as a colonial war of conquest as well as a crusade to rid Europe of the scourge of Bolshevism. From an ethnonationalist perspective, of course, Hitler’s aim to reduce Slavs to colonized peoples was evil. Furthermore, it was more evil than British, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Belgian, American, and Russian imperialism directed at non-European peoples, because it is always worse to mistreat one’s own blood than foreigners. But it was certainly not uniquely evil in the annals of human history. If Genghis Khan and Timur the Lame can be the subjects of objective historical assessments, then Barbarossa does not disqualify Hitler.

Stolfi does not treat Barbarossa as a necessary war to preempt Stalin’s planned invasion of Europe. I wanted to ask Stolfi his thoughts about the thesis defended by Viktor Suvorov and Joachim Hoffmann in an interview, but that was not to be. If they are right, of course, than there was no evil at all in launching Barbarossa, although one can justly criticize the excesses of its execution.

(9) According to Stolfi, Hitler’s darkest deeds are the massacre of 3.1 million Soviet POWs captured in the opening months of Barbarossa and the killing of 4.5 million Jews in what is known as the Holocaust. Stolfi is certainly a Hitler revisionist, but I do not know whether he is a Holocaust revisionist or not, since I am unsure if it is legal for him to think that “only” 4.5 million Jews were killed by the Third Reich. I had not even heard of the 3.1 million Soviet POWs, which Stolfi mentions only a couple of times in passing. But of course I have heard of the Holocaust, to which Stolfi dedicates the last two paragraphs of the book (pp. 461-62). Such a brief treatment may itself constitute revisionism, at least in France, where Jean-Marie Le Pen was fined for saying that the Holocaust was only a footnote to the Second World War. Given that some footnotes are longer than the paragraphs in question, Stolfi might have gotten in trouble in the land of libertÈ. Stolfi’s treatment, however, is a welcome corrective to the Jewish tendency to treat World War II as merely the backdrop of the Holocaust.

Of course, just as Hitler is our age’s paradigm of an evil man, the Holocaust is the paradigm of an evil event. Stolfi does not dispute that the massacre of 7.6 million people is evil. But he does not think it is uniquely evil in World War II or the annals of history in general. Winston Churchill, for example, was responsible for the starvation of millions of Indians whose food was seized for the war effort. He was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of German non-combatants in strategically unnecessary terror bombings of German cities. He was responsible for the expulsion of 14 million Germans from their homes in Eastern and Central Europe, up to two million of whom died. Was Churchill evil? His apologists, of course, would argue that his actions were necessitated by the exigencies of war and the pursuit of the greater good. But Hitler’s apologists, if there were any, could argue the very same thing and be done with it. If Churchill, Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Julius Caesar, and other members of the Million Murder club can receive fair treatment in a biography, then why not Hitler?

Stolfi compares the Holocaust to Julius Caesar’s 10 year conquest of Gaul, in which he killed more than a million armed men and reduced another million to slavery. One million civilian non-combatants were also killed or reduced to slavery. Some particularly troublesome tribes were entirely exterminated because they were “irreconcilable, menacing, and useless either as allies or slaves” (p. 38). Stolfi points out, however, that Caesar’s acts “revealed harshness of almost incredible proportion,” but his acts were “based on realism and prudence in the face of perceived danger ó scarcely sadism and cruelty” (p. 38). Likewise, Stolfi argues that “Hitler took the action of pitiless massacre as a last resort in the face of a perceived irreconcilable enemy” and his actions “showed virtually nothing that can be interpreted as sadism, cruelty, or ingrained hate as opposed to temporary fury in the carrying out of the action” (p. 39).

Hitler’s massacres, terrible though they may be, do not prove that he is an evil man, since even good men might resort to such measures in direst extremity. Moreover, even if they were expressions of evil, they were not unique expressions of unique evil but all too common in the annals of history. But, again, only in Hitler’s case are they treated as insuperable objections to serious historical treatment.

In sum, Stolfi argues that Hitler cannot be seen as evil if that means that he was motivated by sadism, psychopathy, hatred, or a neurotic need for power and attention. Instead, Hitler was motivated, first and foremost, by love of his people, beyond which were wider but less pressing concerns with the larger Aryan race, European civilization, and the welfare of the world as a whole. Because Hitler believed that the things he loved were imperiled by Jewry, Bolshevism, and Anglo-Saxon capitalism, he fought them. And when the fight became a world conflagration, he fought them with a remarkable hardness and severity. But his essentially decent character and positive ends remained unchanged. Thus for Stolfi, Hitler is a good man who did some bad things as well as good things ó a good man who made many good decisions and some catastrophic mistakes.

A Dark World Historical Personality

But there is a sense in which Stolfi thinks that Hitler is beyond the very categories of good and evil, at least as far as historians should be concerned. Stolfi argues that Hitler was a great man, like such great conquerors as Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Mohammed, and Napoleon. (Stolfi makes scant mention of unarmed prophets like the Buddha or Jesus.) According to Stolfi, if one were to freeze Hitler’s life at the end of 1942, he would have to be considered one of history’s greatest statesmen and conquerors. And even if one plays the film all the way to the end, Stolfi argues that the Allies did not win World War II so much as Hitler lost it, which itself underscores his greatness and the relative nullity of his opponents.

Indeed, Stolfi argues that Hitler was more than just a great man but one of Hegel’s “world-historical individuals,” who inaugurates a new stage in human history and cannot be judged or comprehended by the standards of the previous stage. Stolfi, it seems, detaches this concept from Hegel’s overall view that world-historical individuals advance history toward the Providential goal of universal freedom, a goal that Hitler, of course, rejected in favor of particularisms of race and nation. Sadly, though, Hitler may have advanced the universalist agenda in defeat, through no intention of his own.

But, as another prophetic figure once said of World War II, “the war’s not over as far as I’m concerned,” meaning that history is still unfolding, including the consequences of Hitler’s actions. So it remains to be seen whether Hitler will contribute to the victory or defeat of universalism. If racial nationalism ó of which Hitler is an inexpungeable part ó defeats the drive toward a homogeneous global society, then Hitler would be a world historical figure of an entirely new order: not an agent of “progress,” but of its termination; the man who ended the “end of history” and started the world anew; the man who took the ascending line of progress and inscribed it within a cyclical view of history, whether interpreted in the widely variant Traditionalist or Spenglerian senses.

* * *

Hitler: Beyond Evil and Tyranny is a remarkable book that I recommend to all my readers. It is an audacious project executed with clarity and dry humor. Sometimes Stolfi seems to go a bit too far, perhaps just to test his dialectical skills. For instance, he even defends Hitler as a painter. He does a surprisingly good job, but I will still not budge from my conviction that Winston Churchill was Hitler’s superior in this ó and only this ó regard.

This book is even more remarkable because it is the work of a mainstream military historian. Let us hope that it clears the way for other genuinely historical studies of Hitler and the Third Reich. This really is an inevitable development as the generations that lived through the war die off. Furthermore, we are now living in a multipolar world with new rising powers ó Russia, China, India ó that are free of Jewish cultural and political hegemony and hungry for a genuine understanding of Hitler and the Second World War.

White Nationalism would, of course, still be true and good even if Hitler were every bit the monster and tyrant that his enemies claim. But White Nationalists should still welcome Stolfi’s book because reducing the cloud of moral hysteria and denigration that surrounds Hitler somewhat lowers the impediment we have to step over. Stolfi takes some of the sting out of the inevitable accusation that we are “just like Hitler” ó which, it turns out, is an undeserved compliment.

Book Review by Dr. Gregory Johnson, June 7, 2013,



By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on July 22, 2014

Ö by  Ingrid R. Zundel

The letter below, written by a Norwegian physician volunteer working in Gaza, needs no introduction - the heading I gave it says it all! A lifetime ago, I was a child who experienced first-hand the kind of carnage the Gaza civilians experience even as I write this. To call it “inhuman” does not do it justice. It is, in my opinion, satanic.

Please circulate this letter widely. It needs to go viral on the Net.


Mads Gilbert MD PhD?.

The last night was extreme. The “ground invasion” of Gaza resulted in scores and carloads with maimed, torn apart, bleeding, shivering, dying - all sorts of injured Palestinians, all ages, all civilians, all innocent.

The heroes in the ambulances and in all of Gazaís hospitals are working 12-24 hour shifts, grey from fatigue and inhuman workloads (without payment all in Shifa for the last 4 months), they care, triage, try to understand the incomprehensible chaos of bodies, sizes, limbs, walking, not walking, breathing, not breathing, bleeding, not bleeding humans. HUMANS!

Now, once more treated like animals by “the most moral army in the world” (sic!).

My respect for the wounded is endless, in their contained determination in the midst of pain, agony and shock; my admiration for the staff and volunteers is endless, my closeness to the Palestinian “sumud” gives me strength, although in glimpses I just want to scream, hold someone tight, cry, smell the skin and hair of the warm child, covered in blood, protect ourselves in an endless embrace - but we cannot afford that, nor can they.

Ashy grey faces - Oh NO! Not one more load of tens of maimed and bleeding, we still have lakes of blood on the floor in the ER, piles of dripping, blood-soaked bandages to clear out - oh - the cleaners, everywhere, swiftly shovelling the blood and discarded tissues, hair, clothes,cannulas - the leftovers from death - all taken away Ö to be prepared again, to be repeated all over.

More then 100 cases came to Shifa in the last 24 hrs. Enough for a large well trained hospital with everything, but here - almost nothing: no electricity, water, disposables, drugs, OR-tables, instruments, monitors - all rusted and as if taken from museums of yesterdayís hospitals. But they do not complain, these heroes. They get on with it, like warriors, head on, enormously resolute.

And as I write these words to you, alone, on a bed, my tears flow, the warm but useless tears of pain and grief, of anger and fear. This is not happening! An then, just now, the orchestra of the Israeli war-machine starts its gruesome symphony again, just now: salvos of artillery from the navy boats just down on the shores, the roaring F16, the sickening drones (Arabic ëZennanisí, the hummers), and the cluttering Apaches. So much made in and paid by the US.

Volunteers tend to the wounded of Gaza.

I invite you - spend one night - just one night - with us in Shifa. Disguised as a cleaner, maybe. I am convinced, 100%, it would change history.

Nobody with a heart AND power could ever walk away from a night in Shifa without being determined to end the slaughter of the Palestinian people. But the heartless and merciless have done their calculations and planned another “dahyia” onslaught on Gaza.

The rivers of blood will keep running the coming night. I can hear they have tuned their instruments of death.

Please. Do what you can. This, THIS cannot continue.

Mads Gilbert MD PhD?. Professor and Clinical Head Clinic of Emergency Medicine University Hospital of North Norway

Republican Party Animal: The Travails of a Jewish Holocaust Skeptic/ By David Cole

By Dr. Ingrid R. Zundel on August 28, 2014 Photo and caption as they appear in David Cole’s book.  "Jewpiter the Clown” Because who wouldn’t trust this guy as a Holocaust historian?

The "Bad Boy of Holocaust History” blows the lid off Hollywood’s secret right-wing underground

(Comments below  by Ingrid Zundel)

This controversial title is available on Amazon.   I read it a few days ago and discussed small parts of it with Ernst.  He hasn’t read it yet, and I am curious as to his response after he has read it.  For now, he only said:  “Since David has done us the favor and outed himself, we can afford to seize the opportunityÖ”

I assume that most supporters on my list who receive my Power Letter are familiar with the story of a young Jew named David Cole who played a brilliant role in early revisionism.  Ernst had befriended him and had taken him protectively under his wings because there were people in the nascent “Revisionist Movement for Truth in History” who instinctively disliked and distrusted David Cole Ö because he was a Jew. 

Ernst felt that David was a genuinely idealistic youngster, barely twenty years of age when they met, enamored with his role as a fiery “free speech advocate” who had started doing useful work in turning over Auschwitz’s shards of history. 

Ernst and I had barely met in 1994, and I was still a novice and learning “who was who and what was what.”  Ernst told me of his young Jewish friend of his who had been introduced to an alternative view of history by a young Irish revisionist scholar by the name of David McCalden.  The latter had been instrumental in founding and promoting the California-based Institute for Historical Review. 

One incident, particularly, impressed Ernst as to David Cole’s sincerity and courage, as David Cole told the story.  There had been an altercation between McCalden and Irv Rubin, then the head of an American-based terrorist group called the Jewish Defense League where McCalden was viciously beaten and thrown through a plate glass window - and David, still a teenager and slight of build, had heroically come to McCalden’s aid. 

It was a vivid, touching story, totally believable, as Ernst recounted it to me  - and as David retold it to me in every small detail when I got to meet him a decade or so later.  Imagine!  A little Jewish kid fighting for a besieged revisionist leader!  What a courageous deed!

Well, that was then, and now is now.  As David tells it in Republican Party Animal, here is what really happened:

The first time I had to face the possibility of my interest in revisionism becoming public was in 1989.  McCalden told me he was going to a debate at a Beverly Hills temple.  Irv Rubin, lovable and murderous head of the Jewish Defense league (JDL) was going to debate a Jewish leader who didn’t approve of killing people.  I’d seen Rubin on TV slapping around anti-Semites (the guy was built like a golem).  It sounded like a fun evening.

Sitting in the rear of the temple where some of my childhood friends had been bar-mizvah’d, I anxiously awaited the invigorating back-and-forth.  I saw McCalden enter the temple, quietly, from the lobby.  Within five seconds, a half-dozen JDL guys piled on him.  They dragged him into the lobby and put his head through a glass-plate window.  He was tossed onto the sidewalk.  Of course, I immediately stood up and said, “That was uncalled for!  This is a house of God!”  WellÖactually, no.  I just sat there in a meek, cowardly silence.  The debate went on as planned, but after Rubin told the crowd that the guy he just beat up was a “Nazi,” he won over the audience for the rest of the night.

The next day, McCalden called me.  He asked if I saw the fracas.  I didn’t call him back.

Then I saw reports on the incident in two local papers.  “Neo-Nazi David McCalden burst into a local temple during services and attempted to rip up the Torah, while shouting ëHeil Hitler!’  Security escorted him out.” 

Until I read this second version about two week ago, I still believed the first.  I called Ernst and asked him if he had ever heard this version.  He said it was all news to him. 

David further illustrates his early interaction with McCalden:

I read that McCalden was a militant atheist, an Irish nationalist, and a Holocaust revisionist (the term denier had not yet been coined, so revisionists were called revisionists, even by their foes.)  McCalden had co-founded the largest revisionist publishing house in North America, the Institute for Historical Review, in Orange County, California.

I found McCalden’s ideological mix fascinating, Atheist, Irish nationalist, Holocaust revisionist.  Racist?  Maybe, but he had a non-white wife.  And there were rumors that he was a closeted gay.  It was a mix I’d yet to encounter as I profiled ideologues.  I wrote to him.  I asked for some info, some literature.  Instead, I got a personal visit.  But he didn’t come to proselytize, he came to fight. 

He thought I was a “Jewish infiltrator” trying to cozy up to him for nefarious purposes.  He already had that suspicion when he drove to my house, and when he saw the mezuzah on my door, he went totally apeshit. I tried to convince him that I was not working with or for anybody.  I just wanted to know what motivated a guy like him.

I must have been convincing, because he believed me.  He gave me some literature and took off.  And I read it.  Incredibly amateur stuff.  I took everything and put it aside.  I had no interest in revisiting it. 

A little sidebar here, McCalden was an intellectual and a truly gifted writer, but it is possible that the revisionist material at that time was still amateurish.  Remember, revisionism still barely existed.  Only in 1985 and then 1988, after the two Great Holocaust trials, alternately known as the “Ernst Zundel False News Trials” galvanized the movement, was there solid, documented evidence available globally that not all was as claimed in the traditional Holocaust version.  David Cole acknowledges this as he describes his progression as a revisionist activist below: 

I went back to see McCalden, but just my luck, the poor bastard had upped and died of AIDS after giving it to his wife as well.  I guess those gay rumors must have had merit, not that there’s anything wrong with that (well, to be fair, I think the whole “giving AIDS to your wife” thing was pretty wrong.)

McCalden’s social circle consisted of his Holocaust revisionist buddies and his atheist buddies (there was a fair amount of crossover).  The atheist guys were a pretty decent bunch - not racist at all.  Plus, I used to self-identify as an atheist in my youth, (I don’t anymore), I fit in very well with them. 

One of the atheist guys, the man entrusted with dealing with McCalden’s massive collection of books and files (maybe three thousand books, and at least a hundred huge file boxes of papers), decided they should go to someone a bit more rational than some of the well-known names in the revisionist field. (Ö) So, overnight, I inherited one of the largest libraries of Holocaust books in L.A.  And lots and lots of correspondence - almost twenty years worth.  

I read through the revisionist literature.  It provided no answers, but it left me with several questions.  The problem was, mainstream historians would never address revisionist concerns and the revisionists, for the most part, were sloppy and (mostly) ideologically motivated.

I also happened to enter the Holocaust history field at just the right time.  Several things were in play.  The freedom of travel and research in Poland, not possible during the Cold War years.  And the amazingly inept, self-defeating criminal trials of Holocaust denier (yes, denier, not revisionist) Ernst Zundel in Canada, throughout the ë80s, which made a lot of people who would have otherwise ignored revisionism think twice about the reliability of the Auschwitz story.

Blame Canada! (Ö)

Here’s what I want to say:  As yet, no doctorate in revisionism exists.  I don’t know just how one earns one’s laurels as a “revisionist” - but there exists even today not one sole human being on the face of the earth who has done as much as Ernst Zundel responsibly revising history.  He and his trials have brought an entire alternative view of history under one hood and given it visibility and authenticity. 

I asked Ernst to write me a synopsis of his interaction with David:

In the early 1980s, Canada was still an Anglo-Saxon country adhering to the “majesty of law”.  There was still respectful decorum observed in the courtrooms.  It was true that I was under siege politically from many quarters even then.  For one, the post-war Germans, always willing to demonstrate subservient compliance to please the Allied Powers still ruling Germany, refused to extend my passport, and I was effectively “grounded” in Canada, not being able to travel anywhere.  I was in a Siberian Gulag-type situation, besieged by government-initiated criminal prosecutions for what was called “false news”. 

I was beaten, spat at, the target of arson and pipe and parcel bombs by terrorists of all stripes, including terror acts initiated by Irv Rubin and his hoodlums - yet I had become increasingly effective with my worldwide information outreach - its main message being that the guilt heaped on the German people for crimes alleged to have happened might not be warranted.  I pleaded for a neutral global debate - all facts, such as they were, on the table!

I was sending my monthly newsletter to 43 countries in German and in English.  I was broadcasting in both languages via shortwave radio stations from America, various stations in Africa, the Middle East, via Christian missionary shortwave stations in Israel’s South Lebanon-occupied area, and also broadcast eventually from Radio Moscow’s Kˆnigsberg/Kaliningrad AM station which could be heard all over Western and Eastern countries, loud and clear, without the usual distortions and customary poor reception of shortwave. 

Simultaneously, my supporters and I were rapidly expanding our Public Access outreach on 145 to 160 US TV stations with the help of thousands of volunteers.  The Zundel media juggernaut was awesome to behold.  This unnerved my detractors to the point that they set up a “flying squad” of Simon Wiesenthal/ADL-like pressure groups who were burning up the telephones to enforce the traditional Holocaust version across the USA by putting pressure on newspaper editors, station managers, advertisers etc.

That’s when David Cole entered the picture.

I had heard from the people at the IHR that a young Jew frequently visited them and borrowed and watched every videotape of the Zundel/Samisdat Publishers productions. Since I could not leave Canada for visits to the US or Europe to lecture, David came to Canada, and we became fast friends.  I presented him to the public via lectures, press conferences and private gatherings, making him also available to various political intelligence organizations with whom I had developed friendly working relationships. 

Thus, these police and intelligence officials could get first-hand information on what I did, said, and wrote.  I always shared our venues with my police and intelligence contacts.  I sought out attorney generals, justice ministry officials, and even parliamentarians from various provinces.  There was nothing clandestine about my political outreach.  This was my standard operating procedure for decades in every country I operated.  It paid good dividends for an alternative view of history the public was entitled to hear. 

I followed the same procedure with David Cole.  When he came to Canada, I toured the country with him.  He spoke in packed hotel ballrooms full of cheering crowds of not only Zundel supporters but also the public in general.

I am told that in his recently released book David portrays our outreach in a less than flattering manner.  That is his view now, but David Cole knows perfectly well that in his very young years he fully and enthusiastically participated in this outreach campaign for Truth in History.  He truly gave it his all.  He was young, good-looking, eloquent, well-mannered - no gutter language then!  We were on a roll, and he helped to legitimize the image we tried to project - that we were not some low-brow idiots who ran around with swastikas and hated Jews and Blacks.  It was a pleasure to work with him in private and in public at the time. 

The legal struggle around the Zundel outreach even then was fierce, but I won numerous important court cases in Canada and Germany.  I had been banned from the mail - and in an epic public tribunal hearing I won my mailing privileges back.  I could once again flood the world with my historical information material. 

I also won a court case in Germany against the infamous Paragraph 130.  The state had to give me my bank account back.  I used that money to go into information overdrive.  At the same time, my German attorney, J¸rgen Rieger, won an astonishing victory against the German Federal Authorities who were forced by court order to issue me a new passport - “forthwith!”

David Cole and I kept in close touch throughout the 1990s.  After my Supreme Court victory in 1992 he told me he was going to Auschwitz and other camps in Poland to make interviews for documentaries for use in the U.S.  As fate would have it, David was filming in Auschwitz exactly when I was issued my brand new German passport.  I immediately contacted him via phone at the Auschwitz Holiday Inn and flew to Europe at once, meeting him the next day on-site to make interviews with him there in the actual locations - a sensational opportunity! 

I took my own cameraman along, and David brought his own “camera woman.”  By the time I arrived, David had been there already several days interviewing Polish Auschwitz officials and touring the camps with them.  I decided to let David be my “tour guide.”  Two documentaries resulted - one in English and one in German.  They are still worth their weight in gold.

Ernst Zundel and David Cole at Auschwitz

 While still in Europe, I organized several talks and press conferences and meeting with German intelligence officers in Munich and elsewhere. 

David was a sensation, lionized by the Germans and even the police and mainstream media when he told them of the many irregularities in the official Holocaust tale.  My enemies were shell-shocked by it all!  This was in 1989; right after the Berlin Wall fell.

Since I could now travel again, I roamed the world to my heart’s content.  I met David several times in the US - where by that time, he himself was under assault quite literally by terrorist and arsonist thugs, and where eventually a US$20,000 fatwa/reward had been offered by the Jewish Defense League’s Irv Rubin for David Cole’s head - “dead or alive.” 

JDL’s leader Irv Rubin

Under such dire terrorist threat, David Cole issued his famous “recantation”.  During his travails, I kept in constant touch, privately - by telephone, fax, and in clandestine meetings in California, where he was always accompanied by huge, black bodyguards.  It looked like the terrorists had won.  I myself became the target of abuse and derision all over again because I had worked so closely with this young, brilliant Jew. 

It did not take long, and my life took several turns for the worse.  I was arrested and expelled from the US to the Gulag in Canada in isolation, treated by the Canadian spy services as a “danger to the security of Canada.”  I battled deportation for two years, wearing an orange, Guantanamo style uniform, handcuffs and leg irons. 

In my second year of detention, my wife Ingrid told me that David Cole, revisionist Bradley Smith, and some Mexican friend were going to make a documentary about my life.  I got permission from prison authorities to be filmed by them - a big surprise to me! - but when the so-called “film crew” arrived, it all fizzled out because they were a sorry bunch of incompetent, lying crooks. The whole unsavory episode is part of David’s book.  I haven’t read it yet, but Ingrid has told me enough for me to form an opinion. 

How do I feel about this mix of literary brilliance, pornographic sleaze - and truths, half-truths, and brazen, bald-faced lies that leave me simply speechless?  I understand he is a serious alcoholic.  God only knows what inner devils plague David Cole these days. 

As for myself, I feel detached.  I am sad for so much talent laid to waste by booze and lack of sexual restraint.  I also feel betrayed, because some twenty years ago I thought in all sincerity that David was my friend.  But this betrayal does not touch my inner core about what happened then and what is being said today. 

How does David Cole view his erstwhile friend and mentor today?

Ernst Z¸ndel was a German who immigrated to Canada in 1958.  Zundel loves Hitler.  I mean, he really loves Hitler. But, and this is the point I have a hell of a time communicating to people, he loves Hitler because he’s certain, he knows, that sweetie-pie Adolf was framed.  That mustached little munchkin couldn’t hurt a fly.  Zundel really, sincerely, believes that.  He’s nuts, but he’s not dangerous.

With gritted teeth, let me put it this way and leave it at that:  Cole certainly is right to say Ernst is not, and never has been, “dangerous” Ö but would three, possibly four Western governments have conspired to the tune of millions and millions of taxpayers dollars to run down, kidnap and furiously try to silence a “nut”? 

David knows better - that’s all that I can say!  Whatever else you might think about David, he is a very bright man.  He even sheepishly admits he knows what happened to Ernst Zundel as he expands his version in the following few paragraphs:

 Z¸ndel’s name would not be known if he hadn’t been subjected to two criminal prosecutions by the Canadian government. 

In Europe, if you’re arrested for being a Holocaust revisionist, you can’t mount a defense of “but I’m right.”  You can’t use “truth” as your defense.  You can’t argue your beliefs in court.  Essentially, you can only beg for mercy, plead guilty, or plead insanity.

But every time the Canadians put Z¸ndel on trial, they put no restrictions on his defense.  He was allowed to plead “not guilty because I’m right.”  And so, throughout the course of his trials his legal team was allowed to grill Holocaust historians, survivors, and “experts” of all kinds.

This is one of those moments in which I fear that I lack the language skills to properly express the completely self-defeating lunacy of what the Canadians did.  Their desire was to silence Holocaust revisionism.  To do that, they gave Z¸ndel the opportunity to do something that no one else had ever had - the ability to grill historians under penalty of perjury. (Ö)

In its attempt to silence revisionism, the Canadian government ended up putting it on the fÖing map.  Z¸ndel and his exceptionally able and well-funded legal team took the Canadian blunder and ran with it.  Thanks to the Canadians, it wasn’t Zundel on trial, but the Holocaust. (Ö) The story was that the respected experts and the survivors had to make humiliating admissions under oath.

The result of all this tumult was that Holocaust revisionism became “a thing.”  In its desire to destroy revisionism, the damn Canucks had put it on the map, with daily breathless headlines in every Canadian paper, carried by wire services around the world.  And I thought that as long as revisionism was going to be “a thing”, with or without my participation, the “thing” could probably benefit from having a guy with no ideological fanaticism enter the field to sort the wheat from the chaff and take the wheat out of the hands of people like Zundel.

My reaction?  Why, that sneaky little twerp!  Image the chutzpah!  And marvel at the ease with which a Jewish switcheroo is done.  David had a private plan that did not match the image he so carefully projected, and he proceeded to put it to use.  He put on his yarmulke and played the Jewish bonus to the hilt, allowing him enormous media leeway not open to serious revisionist scholars. 

And he is right in saying that Ernst was not a bean-counting revisionist in the conventional footnoting sense.  His role was that of what he himself has called a “radical revisionist” - a street-smart global populist for truth in history, arranging dozens of lectures for David, where David enlightened the masses on the discrepancies of the conventional Holocaust tale, as often as not to thundering audience applause. 

David seemed utterly credible then.  He wrote sharp, imaginative letters, trouncing the media, pleading with dignitaries on behalf of the revisionist cause. David and Ernst gave joint media interviews.  David and Ernst toured the ruins of Auschwitz, together. And, much to his amazement and surprise, the Jewish wunderkind called David Cole became a media star, invited to popular talk shows like 48 Hours, Montel Williams, Morton Downey Jr., and Phil Donahue, to name but a few out of many.

It must have been in 1994, at my very first revisionist convention put on by the Institute for Historical Review where David was one of the speakers, an opportunity for me to observe him first-hand.  I came to this scene without the slightest prejudice.  I knew of Ernst’s fondness for David, and I was prepared to be duly impressed.

As part of his lecture, which was quite good, David was showing a network media clip - it might have been The Phil Donahue Show - where either the host or the audience took umbrage at Ernst and David touring the Auschwitz in tandem, and where David defends himself thusly: 

“Zundel visited Auschwitz.  I visited Auschwitz.  We met.  What was I to do - kick him in the balls?” 

And David turned to Ernst, who sat in the back of the room, put on a rueful smile, and said, “Ernst, I’m sorryÖ” and Ernst replied in his gentle, grandfatherly way:  “It’s okay, David.  It’s okay.”

That’s not how I felt.  I felt nothing but rage at this two-faced little snit shamelessly playing both sides to reap favors from opposite camps.  At the break, I sat outside by myself in the hall on a small hotel settee, and David spotted me, plopped himself right next to me and looked at me expectantly.  I don’t know if he knew who I was, but by his facial expression I could tell he wanted me to say something to him - maybe a compliment for that off-color comment at his lecture? 

When it comes to smutty language, I am the biggest prude on earth, and no apologies.  I felt such an instinctive revulsion at his mendacious comment that I could not bring myself to say a single word.  Side by side, we sat there for maybe ten minutes, in silence.

 I asked Ernst later why he had been so calm with the slick liar on the stage, and Ernst said in his easy-going way:  “What do you expect?  He is of the tribe.  He could not help himself.” 

I know a useful fable to illustrate the above - and what followed.  A frog and a scorpion sit by a river, trying to get to the other side.  The scorpion says to the frog: 

“You know I don’t know how to swim.  Permit me to ride on your back?” 

The frog looks at the scorpion and says:  “No way.  Why would I do that?  You’d only sting me, and both of us would drown.”

“Why would I do a foolish thing like that?” argues the scorpion.  “That would not be in my interest.”

That argument makes perfect sense to the frog.  “Ok,” he says.  “Hop up!” 

Predictably, as they both reach the middle of the wildly raging river, the scorpion readies his stinger and rams it into the spine of the frog. 

“Why did you do a foolish thing like hat?” screams the frog, struggling against the treacherous current, in vain attempting to rid himself of the scorpion.

Whereof the scorpion replies, as both drown in the currents:  “I could not help myself.”

There’s great wisdom in folklore as cultural shorthand, explaining life’s absurdities that cause so much destruction and death.  The autobiographical story that David tells in this book is like a mirror image of the fable.

There was great tolerance for David Cole in our ranks in the beginning.  In those early Internet years, he was accepted as “one of us” who went along for a dangerous ride because, around us, political censorship was tightening its net - until, to everyone’s surprise and seemingly out of the blue, David recanted his entire involvement in an Open Letter to the JDL, sniveling and groveling, calling himself a “self-hating Jew”,  pleading for mercy and whining that he was guilty of the ultimate disgrace - disloyalty to Jews. 

We were shocked, naturally, but not really surprised.  All of us knew that this letter must have been written with Irv Rubin’s pistol on Cole’s head - who would not have caved in and sobbingly recanted, in his place?  We did not hold it against him, knowing what Irv Rubin’s beefy hoodlums might have threatened to do to frighten him out of his wits.  We were just grateful for the sterling revisionist work he had done up to then - and no one, to my knowledge, held any serious grudges. 

You can still watch the David Cole clips of those years on YouTube - how genuinely sincere they sound.  I put many of them there myself on my channel.  Millions have watched them by now.  Those clips have bought us more good will for our Cause than any of the dry, scholarly papers the IHR and more scholarly inclined revisionists put out. 

Murky gossip insisted that David was now on the run, hiding out from an avenging female.  We did not know that he had changed his name to David Stein.  As far as we knew, he existed underground somewhere for several years, allegedly working for a smutty sitcom television show called Seinfeld, not the kind of program on which we would have wasted our time.  There was even some loose talk that he was churning out pro-Holocaust films for ADL’s Abe Foxman.  Tsk.  Tsk.

David Cole appeared briefly at a beach party in the LA area, probably in 2002.  Ernst and I had been married by then, and we attended this private barbeque party together.  To everyone’s surprise and genuine delight, there, all of a sudden, was David - looking relaxed and content, as slim and as wiry as ever, an overweight mulatto girl at his side.  A lady of the night?  She did look coarse and cheap, long purple fingernails and all, but nobody raised an eyebrow.  After all, weren’t revisionist bending over backwards, over and over again, avoiding the label of “racist”? That was - still is - the generally expected attitude. 

Throughout the pages of Republican Party Animal, David slyly plants insinuations that practically all revisionists on earth are closet ideologues if not boot-stomping Nazis.  Not true.  On race, revisionists are neutral and accommodating to a fault.

Another little sidebar here that Ernst and I still savor. 

It happened at another IHR convention where the famed Jewish investigative journalist, John Sack, was one of the main speakers.  There, at breakfast, Sack, Ernst and I were sharing a table, finishing our scrambled eggs, when Anita Wilson, a black revisionist aficionado, well-known and heartily accepted by us all, sashayed up to our table in a revealing summer dress, bent over Ernst, spilled one of her bare breasts right over his nose, and gave that “Nazi Z¸ndel” a slobbering kiss smack on the lips.  I said to Ernst, “ Ö there goes your reputation as a fire breathing racist” and everybody laughed.  Anita plucked herself right next to Ernst, put both elbows on the table and leaned aggressively into John Sack:  “Now, John, will you explain something to me?  Why are you Jews always in everyone’s face?!  Why don’t you Jews get a life?!”  A scene right for the movies.

Cole opens one of his chapters with the following:

“There are two principles I live by when I decide I want to accomplish something successfully.  The first principle is, “just do the fÖing work.” (Ö)  The other principle by which I live is the old saw that “in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.”  I find it best to work in fields where I’m surrounded by ninety percent idiots, because I can accomplish more that way. 

The field of Holocaust history, as I found it in 1990, and politics, as I found it in 2008, were perfect for me.  My one eye beat most of the tin-cup-holding blindies who populated those fields.

I first realized that I was perfectly cut out for the Holocaust revisionism field when I discovered the obvious manhole in the floor of the supposed gas chamber at the Auschwitz main camp.  The manhole was typical of an underground or semi-underground air raid shelter.  If a cave-in occurred, if the doors were blocked, the manhole was an escape hatch to allow the soldiers in the shelter to make it to safety.  I was also the first person to note that the “gas chamber” locks were from the inside, not the outside.  Ever since Poland had freed itself from the Soviet yoke, revisionists and non-revisionists had gone there to study the campsite.  And no one had ever seen the manhole, or the door lock, as obvious as they were.  No one.

I was where I belonged.  A one-eyed king.

If you associated with revisionists, you would never be accepted into the “mainstream” camp.  But, frankly, there was no choice for an honest researcher but to associate with revisionists.  They’d been the ones collecting evidence during the Z¸ndel trials, only a portion of which was actually used.  I could read the “mainstream” views in a hundred books.  I needed to mix with the revisionists and deniers in order to win their trust.  Because they were the ones with vital pieces of evidence. 

I earned Zundel’s trust because I was willing to be seen with him publicly.  To this day, there are those who say, “but did you have to appear with Z¸ndel in public?”  Yeah, I did.  I never said anything in support of his views, but I supported his right to be free from prosecution for simply writing a book, and I still do.  On that subject, I’d stand with him again today. 

Once the revisionists came to trust me, I could start to go to work.  It wouldn’t be long before I’d clash with them.  But as I said at the beginning of this chapter, I was now able to “just do the fÖing work.”

By the fall of 2004, memories of [a romantic relationship gone sour] had faded, and I decided it was time to go back to L.A. and start working again.  El Segundo meant no longer having access to the trains and subways, which meant less self-sufficiency, as my well-known aversion to driving had become much ber now that I drank.  Fortunately, fate was more than willing to step in with a solution. 

At just about that time, political disaster had caught up with the Zundels.  I will skip the political kidnapping tale since it is known to my readers and freely dispersed and discussed on the Net.  By the fall of 2004, after Ernst was dragged in chains to Canada for an alleged “visa overstay”, he had already spent a horrid winter in isolation in an ice-cold cell in the Toronto West Detention Center, a notoriously brutal prison.  Throughout the two years Ernst was forced trying to survive in solitary confinement in Toronto, I had every reason to fear that he was in danger of being seriously hurt, maybe even poisoned or brutally killed in his sleep.  I was left fending for myself in Tennessee, likewise subjected to a lot of verbal abuse from invisible callers and anonymous Internet writers.  I was out of my wits with fear for Ernst’s safety if not his very life.  Repeatedly I would get nasty updates about how innovatively the prison guards were trying to break Ernst’s spirit - spitting in his food and maybe even worse, never turning off his light, forbidding him to talk to other inmates, refusing him the telephone for days at a time, strip-searching him hundreds of times, sometimes even after a telephone call to me, stealing his mail, once even calling me to tell me “Sorry to have to tell you, but your husband has died at 11 o’clock in the morningÖ”  For a few minutes, I actually believed it - I was that terrorized. During one telephone call, always monitored, Ernst told me quietly, referring to this non-stop harassment and abuse:  “Ö you don’t know the half of itÖ” and I don’t know to this day what he meant.  I can guess.

I read in an AP wire release that Israel was planning to ask for Ernst’s extradition - and I knew all too well what that meant.  I tried to talk to my congressman, Bill Jenkins, who refused to see me until I threatened a hunger strike in front of his door.  I tried to engage Senator Corker whose staff was insulting and rude and would not give me the time of the day.  Not one to give up, I flew Bruce Leichty, our US immigration attorney, to Washington to force Corker to familiarize himself with our case - no doing.  Despite thousands of dollars spent for this trip, Bruce and I were not allowed inside the senator’s office and had to talk to an underling in the cafeteria.  I tried to ambush the Canadian Consul General in Washington, who likewise did not let me come into his office but sat in the lobby with icy eyes and twitching cheeks, sweat forming on his forehead, as I relayed my woes.  He listened, did not say a single word, gave me his card and vanished.  To this very day, never a follow-up from any dignitary or representative I approached - for me, it was a time beyond frustration and despair.

Supporters who will read the following might object that I was far too gullible and should have been wise to a Jew who had, for all intents and purposes, abandoned the revisionist cause and was now doing pro-traditional version Holocaust films.  It is true I am, in general, a trusting individual.  In truth, I never had any doubts to suspect that David might be deceptive and even go so far as to exploiting our desperate situation for his ends. 

When Bradley Smith, an old-time revisionist and good buddy, called me and said that plans were being laid in Hollywood, where David Cole had important connections, to get some serious outreach going with a professional documentary about Ernst’s plight, it seemed like a godsend from heaven.

Here David tells his side of the story, introducing his readers to one of his friends:

“I need a car.”  Fat Frank was always very direct.  I liked that about him.  “My car just got booted and impounded, and it’s too much of a junket to excuse what it would cost to get it back.  I need a new one.”

With Frank, like me, it was always about playing an angle.  Frank again showed his talent for being direct.  “If you get me a car, I’ll drive you everywhere you ever need to be.  It will be like having a personal chauffer for life.”

Well, I’m not about to pass that up.  But I’m also not about to spend a dime of my own money on a guy like Fat Frank.  He was a scavenger, still living the life of an illegal alien with no Social Security number who grew up in Vegas learning to get by through begging, borrowing, and stealing.  I liked him a lot, but I’d never turn my back on him. 

But he had a very sincere desire to make films.  He had a good eye for directing, and had already done several films that sold like hotcakes in the rapidly growing bilingual market.  And me?  What else am I going to do but make films?  I was intrigued by the idea of finally churning out a few things that had absolutely nothing to do with the Holocaust.  No more “safe” Holocaust films, no more revisionist Holocaust films.  It was time to move on and leave the Holocaust behind. 

But fate said, “not so fast there, aÖhole!”  Because truth be told, if I wanted to get Fat Frank a car without spending my own dough, it was time to revisit the revisionist trough.

There was and is no “revisionist trough.”  Unlike our political opponents, we have no sponsors with deep pockets.  Over the decades, the revisionist outreach has been held afloat with the help of thousands of little old ladies in running shoes and well-meaning old gentlemen with heart of pure gold and overflowing affection for