Action Report no. 9
Published by Focal Point
for David Irving's world-wide legal Fighting Fund (DIFF)
Update AR #9 – March 5, 1996
Highlights of This Issue
- Traditional Enemy's Ugly Hint to Media: “Irving Supplied Oklahoma Detonator!”
- AJC Hate: Those Who Can Only Hate – A Coincidence
- “A Radical's Diary”
- German Government Baffled as Zündelsites Multiply in Cyberspace
- Simon Wiesenthal sees Reputation Ruined in Jewish in-fighting on German peak-time TV Programme
- Law Report: Germar Rudolf sentenced to jail — General Remer free to live out his days in Spain…
- Important New Documents Found by Revisionists in Moscow Archives
Traditional Enemy's Ugly Hint to Media:
“David Irving Supplied Oklahoma Detonator!”
TULSA– In the ugliest attempt yet to blacken the name of historian David Irving, newspapers in the USA and Britain are reporting that the defence attorney for Timothy McVeigh, accused of bombing the Alfred P Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City on Apr.19 last year, has asked for subpoenas to be served on Mr Irving and two other British citizens in connection with the bombing.
The Oklahoma outrage shocked the world and cost the lives of 168 men, women, and children and injured five hundred others. It is believed that a huge ammonium-nitrate bomb stacked in a Ryder rental truck parked outside the building caused the blast. McVeigh, 27, and an associate, Terry Nichols, 40, have been indicted in the bombing and are to stand trial in Denver, Colorado, later this year.
Reached by Newsweek magazine at his Key West winter writing headquarters, Mr Irving said he was “shocked and embarrassed” at being gratuitously drawn into the tragedy.
In a three-page article published two days later, the news magazine made plain that it regards the allegations as totally unfounded and as a smoke screen devised by defence attorney Stephen Jones and unnamed third parties to distract attention from the true culprits.
The mischief-making subpoena is said to demand that Irving provide information on “his contacts with American neo-Nazis.”
“I can write all that information on the back of a postage stamp,” says Mr Irving, “and still have room for the envelope. There are no such contacts.”
He has never been in Oklahoma, and has never had any dealings with either of the accused. His first reaction on hearing of the alleged right-wing associations of McVeigh and Nichols, was probably the same as any other person in the same position-to check his files for any data which he could place at the disposal of the authorities.
When Nichols' wife Brigite turned up mysteriously on a list of names submitted to action report in November, Mr Irving turned it over within minutes to the FBI attaché in the American embassy in London as being of likely interest to the authorities investigating the outrage.
The Newsweek report was duplicated and echoed in USA Today, the New York Times, and other newspapers across the nation. As anticipated, it was immediately picked up in Britain. Although the libel laws in Britain are much stricter than in the United States, London editors gleefully seized on the fact that Newsweek magazine had published a major story linking Mr Irving with the Oklahoma bombings.
The mass-circulation Sunday Times, still smarting from wounds inflicted on it by the historian in September, headlined its story oklahoma to hear irving's evidence, but was careful to add that there was “no suggestion” that Mr Irving was “in any way involved in the bombing.”
The Guardian and other newspapers followed suit.
Forced to contemplate fresh libel action against the Sunday Times, Mr Irving at once sent them a letter in which, while avoiding getting dragged down into details, he made his beliefs quite clear:
“Your headline OKLAHOMA TO HEAR IRVING'S EVIDENCE, with all its innuendoes, will have lit a little candle in the hearts of the people who put Timothy McVeigh's attorney up to it. They are floating their fund-raising campaigns in the United States on the tears of a tragedy which tore at the hearts of everybody.”
The newspaper refused to publish the letter. The words “lit a little candle” might have upset its bankers-this was the famous phrase used by a senior politician when the Daily Express published a horrifying photograph of a British army sergeant being lynched by Stern Gang terrorists in Palestine in 1948: he said he “lit a little candle in his heart” each time a British soldier was killed in Palestine.
The reference to fund-raising in America was because the scandal-plagued Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles has started figuring Mr Irving as its most dangerous enemy in fund-raising appeals.
One week previously the Sunday Times had reported theories that the Oklahoma bombing was intended to avenge the execution of a leading American neo-Nazi, Richard Snell, and that key components for the bombing might have been obtained in Britain.
Twelve hours after the Oklahoma bombing, says the Sunday Times, Snell was executed in Arkansas for the murder of a black trooper and a Jewish businessman. In that article too, the newspaper dragged in Mr Irving's name.
Reckless Damage
After Mr Irving threatened further action against the Sunday newspaper, in the light of its refusal to correct the reckless damage it has inflicted on his name, they agreed to publish the letter in its edition of Feb. 25.
In the United States the First Amendment protects libellers from risk of legal action. After visiting London in mid January to investigate British far-right activists-says the Sunday Times-Stephen Jones, speaking on KJRH-TV in Tulsa, said that he “wants to know” if Mr Irving and two other Englishmen supplied the detonator used in the bombing.
At US taxpayer expense, Jones has hired London's most expensive law firm Kingsley Napley to pursue these leads suggesting “international connections in the bombing.”
Learning this, Mr Irving at once informed the law firm: “I have not the faintest idea how I could help, but let me assure you that I shall do so freely and there is no need to issue a subpoena.”
“Who is behind the story?” asks Mr Irving. His investigators have now run computer searches of every newspaper in the United States and Britain that carried the story. The Associated Press chief editor, exculpating his agency in a letter faxed to Key West, washed his hands off the story as printed in several newspapers, stating that, although the by-line was AP, his agency had not supplied the extra embellishments which contained the smears.
A HAPPY FAMILY – British historian David Irving,under world-wide attack by the traditional enemy of thetruth, plays with his little daughter Jessica. Her motherBente hails from Denmark, has been 10 years in the U.K.
One clue to the originators appeared in the main story published by the Sacramento daily newspaper, the Bee.
Listing the countries from which “the neo-Nazi journalist” Mr Irving is currently banned at the behest of the international Jewish community, the newspaper correctly omitted South Africa (Nelson Mandela has ordered that ban on the historian lifted, as it was imposed by the discredited outgoing apartheid regime).
So whoever fed that story to the Bee was up-to-date with the most recent developments, of which only a few people, including those whose names are on the mailing list of Mr Irving's Fighting Fund, are aware.
The Bee also described Mr Irving as a member of the British National Party, an extreme right-wing organisation: this is another favourite falsehood used by the international Jewish community. “Irving's pro-Nazi writings, speeches, involvement with the BNP and other radical right-wing groups have resulted in several investigations into his ties to suspected terrorist groups,” continued the Bee.
Lies like these are protected under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, says Mr Irving.
Those Who Can Only Hate – A Coincidence
Author Kenneth Stern
NEW YORK– On the same day as the American press published the vile allegations against David Irving, The New York Times announced the publication of Kenneth S Stern's new book A Force Upon the Plain. The American Militia Movement and the Politics of Hate.
Stern, an expert on hate groups employed by the American Jewish Committee, alleges that the FBI siege against the “white separatist” Randy Weaver in August 1992, the ATF assault on the Waco compound of the Branch Davidians on Apr.19, 1993, and the passage that summer of the Brady bill imposing a waiting period on the purchase of handguns, convinced dissident groups including, he writes, the neo-Nazis, Ku Klux Klan, anti-abortionists and others that the federal Government was conspiring to usurp their rights.
Stern criticises the FBI and Congress for being too slow to recognise the danger of the militia, “presumably because of their being white,” as veteran NYT reviewer Christopher Lehmann-Haupt points out.
Stern's conclusion is however clear: that white separatist right-wing extremists were behind the bombing of the Murrah building at Oklahoma City.
A Radical's Diary
All day at the Max Militaria Exhibition in Pittsburgh. Mark Bando, a Japanese-American from Detroit, offers me a box of papers that an American GI took from Eva Braun's home in Munich in 1945.
Among them are her visiting cards, a school exercise book containing, in what I identify for him as her handwriting, Italian lessons and a manuscript for a colour motion picture to be titled “Eva Braun,” with her mother Franziska Braun as director; also a Taifun cigarette lighter (I mistakenly read the word at first as Taiwan), a painted wooden cigarette box, an envelope with her name and her Wasserburgstrasse address on it.
Bando is the historian of the US 101st Airborne Division. He gives me his history of the 101st to read, and it leave me with nightmares-the vivid descriptions of killing and being killed. I accidentally leave it on the table and somebody buys it.
Wieland K. phones from Germany, confirms he has shipped off the 1938 Goebbels diaries to the American addresses I requested.
He says that Radio Hamburg reports today that six masked thugs with baseball bats attacked Jürgen Rieger, the lawyer defending some revisionists in Hamburg, as he left the courthouse.
The judge at the lower level had acquitted the defendants, as they had spoken of the Auschwitz Mythos: the judge said this was different from Lüge. The prosecution appealed, and the six street gentlemen with clubs also evidently disagreed. Rieger is undergoing intensive surgery in a hospital.
WASHINGTON– I dine and speak at the Cosmos Club in Massachusetts Avenue at 5 p.m. Andrew Gray is there: very Evelyn Waugh-ish and rotund. Among our guests I find Sir Alan Walters, Mrs Thatcher's monetarist adviser (over whom Neil Lawson resigned as Chancellor); tax lawyers Edward Maguire and Paul DeLaney; Fred Smith, founder of the Competitive Enterprise Institute; William Nicolson, a real estate lawyer and deputy mayor of Reston, Va.; Thad Holt, a historian; Natalie Baumer, pretty daughter of a US general who was at Bletchley in 1944; etc.
I begin on a note of levity: the problems of speaking Bavarian beerhalls (never, ever, visit the restroom in the interval). After twenty minutes I touch, at Andrew's request, on the historiographical problems with the legends of the Holocaust. Unfortunately my table partner to the left, Nanette Herrick, a mid-fiftiesh female nattily dressed in an expensive red woolly power-suit with yard-wide padded shoulders (and even wider shoulders, as she later invites me to test) has imbibed two champagnes too many and interrupts with hostile comments which gradually freeze the company solid.
How embarrassing. She tries to make up for it in the bar, but I do not drink. I later learn that she imbibes much of her history from her close friend Oliver Stone, and as a member of New York café society she has been on even closer terms over the years with the Jewish haute volée.
Says that her first husband (of three) died years ago; her second, a wealthy Jew, died too, leaving his fortune to her son and daughters (she had abandoned him suddenly without alimony); her present husband is there, George Herrick, president of the American Balliol Society, a rather large ex-CIA type, who speaks of life at Maclean.
Then she mentions that her long-time bosom friend “Edgar, a leading Jew, d'you know him?” once affirmed to her son Justin that the real number of Jews who died in the Holocaust is now put at 3.2 millions; the rest were non-Jews, gipsies, homosexuals, etc.
Edgar-he turns out to be none other than that nice Mr Bronfmann, president of the World Jewish Congress-is Justin's sadek, or the Jewish equivalent of godfather (in the non Al-Pacino sense, I am sure).
The other guests are enraged by her; one passes a note to mein host asking, “Who is this loudmouth?” She herself is in public relations, commuting between Maine and Washington DC: specialises in brushing up the image of authors. That blows my chance of getting an image brush-up.
LONDON– A phone call from Karl P. He and his henchmen have now tested with TÜV [government auto-test] officials present, the effects of diesel exhaust gases on two chickens and two rabbits.
After sixty minutes the animals “crawled forth with delighted grins!” “Da lachen die Hühner,” I comment: it's enough to make a chicken laugh. He's sending me the tests on video. A lawyer was present throughout.
My plane lands at Miami International at 3:45 p.m. on the dot.
Struggle with the big green army trunk and a seventy-pound box of books, etc., onto the Avis shuttle bus. A man in grey looks at me oddly as I sit down next to him. On the other side of me a presentable blonde lady with a little boy in a grey track suit and sneakers, and a somewhat younger blonde girl (their au pair perhaps). The little boy is Jessica's age. I smile at him and ask how old he is. His mother begins, “Two-” but the man snaps, “I'd prefer it if you didn't speak to the boy. Or to any of us.”
Oh-oh. My face shows surprise, and the man snarls again: “I went to Brentwood School with you. You're David Irving, aren't you! And you made my life a living hell. As a boy of 11 or 12, my life was a living hell because you taunted me as a 'dirty little Jew.' There were two of us Jewish boys and you made our life hell.”
The other Avis customers listen, their faces a polite mask.
I tell him: “I have never seen you in my life before, and I certainly never used such language.”
This is true. In fact I don't remember there being any Jews at Brentwood at all; I remember three Jews at Imperial College in London University-Jon Block, with whom I got on well; Peter Levin, who declared war on me and the rest of mankind; and Mike Gorb, who was one of my three best friends, shared digs next to mine at No. 37 Gloucester Road and was killed mountaineering in the Alps a few years later. I do recall that at Brentwood there was one boy who never went to chapel with us-his name was Murray, a red-head-but he was a Catholic and segregated from us Protestants. I always thought that the entire school apart from Murray was Protestant-no, wait, there was a wealthy Indian boy, Chaudhury, too.
The man next to me loudly repeats his charge, tears of rage in his eyes. The bus passengers now begin to look as though they have Adolf Eichmann in their midst. I quietly say, “That is an outright lie. I have never seen you in my life before, nor have I ever said any such thing to you or anybody else.”
He shouts, “You're a bloody liar. Even worse: A Denier!”
“I am not going to listen to these fantastic untruths,” say I and get up and walk to the front. The driver is as astonished as I am. At the Avis lot I get out first and stack my trunks on the ground. I murmur to the man: “I am very sorry to hear you say those things, but they are completely untrue. You are terribly mistaken. I have never seen you in my life before, and until you spoke I had not even known for fifty years that there were any Jews at Brentwood School.” I go inside the Avis office and he joins the line behind me. There is quite a wait, so I say: “Look, you're welcome to go ahead of me: you have a family waiting, and I am in no particular hurry.”
Without a word he steps in front of me. He has booked a Nissan, gives the Avis clerk his address as somewhere in Orlando, and asks if they can exchange pounds for dollars: they can not. The clerk, a Black woman, tells me after he leaves that his name is Franks. She and her colleagues roar with unkind laughter when I tell them what he said on the bus.
“They all got problems,” she explains. “They all want to have been suffering.”
After loading the little Ford Geo I drive out past the Franks' somewhat more opulent car.
“Allow me at least to wish you and your family a pleasant vacation,” I venture. Mr Franks grunts. I offer to ex-change some dollars for him, if he is in difficulty. He snarls. I say: “I wish you well, as a Christian gentleman,” and leave it at that.
THE EPISODE WORRIES ME all evening. I decide to contact the Old Brentwoods' association to ask if there was a Franks at school: if so, what his years were, and what forms he was in when I was there. I strongly suspect that Franks merely caught a whiff of the very public Jewish attacks on my name at the time of the Goebbels Diaries scandal in 1992: that he had read reports that I had been at Brentwood: and then-turning to his wife-had whinged that he remembered me only too well, and how I had taunted him and his fellow-Jew when he was there.
I must be prepared for monkey business: perhaps he was the “parent” who pressured Brentwood's headmaster into cancelling all future invitations to me to address their sixth formers, in the autumn of 1992.
Not a Holocaust survivor, but a Brentwood School survivor. Not much money in that. Or is there?
ANOTHER BAD NIGHT. A flu bug or something. I felt it coming on during the flight over: those 747s packed with unhealthy humans all breathing the same recycled air for ten hours, replete with the odours, wheezes, and sneezes of three or four hundred members of the profanum vulgus-they are a plague on humanity. Or has Franks put a curse on me?
I see that the New York Review of Books is quoted in an advertisement in the University of California Press catalogue for Gerald Fleming's book Hitler & the Final Solution (“with new documentation”) as saying, that Fleming's book “should finally lay to rest David Irving's provocative theory that Hitler neither ordered nor wished the destruction of the Jewish people.” (Does Deborah Lipstadt know of this, incidentally-that one of her brethren is breaking the international front of We Shall Never Debate with the Revisionists?)
I have known Gerald Fleming for eighteen years; I am not sure if that's his real name -he was born in Breslau. He is not a bore, but the kind of windbag where you warn all friends never to make a phone call to him at your own expense.
A very good researcher, particularly in Soviet-block archives, but of course with blinkers on his horizon. He wrote the above-praised book in an attempt to collect the $1,000 prize I have offered since 1977 to any historian who could provide wartime documentary proof that Hitler (a) knew of, or (b) ordered the Holocaust, whatever that was. Alas, as the illustrious Professor Gordon Craig, reviewing that same book in the New York Times, wrote: “Fleming has signally failed to disprove David Irving's theory”
Saturday morning: eleven a.m., a phone call from Paul O'Donnell of Newsweek. Timothy McVeigh's lawyers in Oklahoma City have asked for me to be subpoenaed about my relations with one Dennis Mahon. I say I am shocked and embarrassed to hear of that. I've never heard of Dennis Mahon, and I check the Fighting Fund list to make sure.
I ask who Mahon is, and the reporter says: “A former Grand Dragon for the White Knights of the Oklahoma Ku Klux Klan.” A nervous laugh escapes me and I say: “In that case I definitely don't know him!” I tell him I did find a relative of Terry Nichols on a list in November, and at once notified the FBI in London.
He sounds friendly, but with journalists that means Southall, as well we know.
At mid-day O'Donnell phones again: how old am I? I tell him I've reached that age when I have to work it out anew each time I'm asked. I recall now that he seemed suddenly interested to hear I was in Key West at time of the bombing. Hey, that's only about 2,000 miles from Oklahoma City.
Looks to me like a major Dirty Trick against me is brewing. British newspapers, I predict, will report: “Newsweek magazine links David Irving with alleged Oklahoma City bomber McVeigh” In which case John Lewis & Rubber Improvements Ltd vs. Daily Telegraph, in about 1960, provides a legal precedent, I think. La lotta continua.
The German Government is Baffled by the Outside World's Perverse Thirst for Free Inquiry
Zündelsites Multiply in Cyberspace
Ernst Zündel
BERLIN– German government officials and public prosecutors are said to be baffled by the motivations of scores of American computer experts who have thwarted their attempts to blank out Ernst Zündel's Toronto-originated computer page for German readers, even though they themselves do not share Zündel's rare beliefs.
In modern Germany free expression and freedom of opinion are only theoretically guaranteed by the Constitution-a wealthy and influential minority has managed to force the German supreme court to exclude all dissident opinions on the Holocaust expressly from the protections which all other freedom of speech enjoys under the Constitution.
Several scientists and historians who have challenged Germany's entrenched beliefs on the Holocaust have been committed to prison terms of up to two years and to massive fines.
Germany's eighty-four-year-old war hero Otto Ernst Remer has been forced into exile in Spain-which has granted him permanent asylum-for the same reason.
Space Invasion
While the German authorities were quietly nailing into place their old-fashioned, Thirties-look laws to suppress freedom of speech, Ernst Zündel was having a gay time invading them from the rear: from his Toronto headquarters he opened up a Web-page on the international, globe-spanning Internet system.
Such a web-page can be read by anybody, anywhere in the world, who owns a computer, a modem and the necessary software costing only a few dollars.
There is hardly a modern student world-wide who has not now made himself a citizen of Cyberspace, and these youngsters are the people whom Zündel has targeted with his writings.
Zündel, one of the many Germans who has been persecuted with prison sentences and fines for allowing himself politically incorrect thoughts, found that more and more computer-students were visiting his Web page–as they say in Cyberspace–each day.
Suddenly the traditional enemy, who had for years prided himself that he controls the media of the northern hemisphere, while simultaneously branding as an antisemite anybody who suggested such a fact, found that they had been outflanked: there was a growing new medium, a many-headed Hydra which sprouted fresh heads and even longer and more sinewy tentacles each time the old ones were hacked off; it was mushrooming around the world, like a Hollywood disaster-movie virus, running amok and out of control. Worse, they found that the new medium was being followed by millions of ordinary citizens: and worse still, that it was being believed.
First to recognise the threat to established and vested interests was the partially taxpayer-funded 425,000-member Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles (that name has become a serious liability, now that the Panorama television programme in Germany has exposed Mr S.W. himself as a liar and a fraudster).
The Center began an intensive effort to get what it calls “hate” banned from the Internet. (Since some say that the ADL and the Simon Wiesenthal Center are among the biggest and most bigoted promoters of hatred, they would be shooting themselves in both feet).
The Center sent letters to two thousand university presidents and other Internet providers, urging them to adopt a “code of ethics” which the Center would outline to them: failure to accept the code would evidently result in blanket accusations of antisemitism.
[The proposed code reads: “We consider it our civic duty to refuse or terminate service to any individual or group to exploit our services to promote an agenda of hate or violence.”]
Following the example set by the Los Angeles parent foundation, the Toronto-based Simon Wiesenthal Center, run by Sol Littman, announced that it had written to 1,200 Internet providers in the same vein. “Our aim is to make this material as unacceptable on the Internet as it is on television, radio and in newspapers,” he said.
“These are for-profit ventures,” explained the L.A. center's Rabbi Abraham Cooper. “We're saying set some standards.” In effect calling upon Internet providers to cast out the mote from their eyes, Cooper urged that they shut down World-Wide-Web sites on the Internet which allowed users to publish text, pictures, and sound and video challenging traditional views on the Holocaust, “but typically offer no forum for discussion or response.”
Cooper sadly compared the situation on the Internet, where anybody could speak, with the traditional media outlets such as radio and newspapers, which have typically declined to provide such groups with a platform. “The important gatekeepers of communication, like The [San Francisco] Chronicle, NBC and CNN have chosen to neither sell time nor space for mass marketing efforts of such individuals”-those who question details about the Nazi Holocaust-wrote Cooper in a self-congratulatory, if less than grammatical, article in the San Francisco Chronicle. But now the situation is slipping out of people's control.
Cooper's pressure group, the Simon Wiesenthal Center, sent what he termed “a modest proposal” to Washington for restraints to be imposed on the Internet: as though such a thing were possible.
Of course, while they spoke of restraining kiddie-porn, pedophilia, and smut, everybody knew that that was not what the Center wanted at all: in fact their mailbag must have bulged with letters from their friends protesting, since more than one of them has made his millions from producing filth.
“The first step,” warned Lori Fena, executive director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a Cyberspace civil-liberties group (aargh!), “is 'protecting children.' The next step is 'preventing people from hearing hate speech'. What comes after that?”
No, what the Center really wanted was to have Washington pressure the Internet hubs, the providers, into imposing “voluntary” restrictions on certain, ahem, politically incorrect debates: like the great Holocaust debate that has been raging through the northern and southern hemispheres ever since 1985, when they first put Mr Zündel on trial in Canada for spreading “false information”.
A few newspaper commentators actually spotted this, and commented. That is what commentators are for. They soon got the message however, and of late their commentaries have been commenting only on the kiddie-porn angle, in which the Wiesenthalers have developed such a belated and commendable interest.
THIS WAS WHEN the Germans blundered in–where no sane man previously had dared to tread. They decided to censor the Internet. If only they had taken some outside advice first (if only, for that matter, Adolf Hitler had taken some outside advice before embarking on his various adventures).
Censoring the Internet is like trying to photograph a dream: it is like trying to count the waves: it is like banning people from being called Smith (or Schmidt: Hans Schmidt, for example). It is King Canute: it is downright stupid: it is an idiocy of such crassness, that hundreds of ordinary people, who normally would not give Mr Zündel the time of day, decided to make their computer banks available to him, putting up reflectors on their own Web-sites to catch Mr Zündel's banned transmission, and reflecting it by “mirrors” into Germany from around corners and angles where the Germans never expected to see him.
They did it, perversely, in the name of freedom of speech-which, by the way, is probably what interests Mr Zündel far more than the Holocaust and all the other things he goes on about.
So who were these maniacs? Interestingly, it started with a news item in the Rhein-Neckar Zeitung, a leftwing German newspaper which has been bravely holding a torch for the traditional view of the Holocaust, and hounding into oblivion anybody who spoke otherwise.
This little horse-sh*t newspaper decided to surf the Internet, and found to its horror Zündel's web-page leering at it from Cyberspace: the page was shouting, or clicking, or whatever the Internet code does, unmentionable theories about history, and these radio or telephone waves were lapping right across from Cyberspace into the hallowed territory of the German Federal Republic, where such thoughts are forbidden on pain of two years prison (Günter Deckert, Germar Rudolph) or a $22,000 fine (Mr David Irving-for declaring that the gas chamber shown to tourists at Auschwitz is a post-war fake: which the Auschwitz museum authorities have now admitted is true).
Like an A.A. Milne children's poem (the King told the Chamberlain, the Chamberlain told the Parlourmaid), the buck was passed around the German bureaucracy: the newspaper complained to Herr Hans-Heiko Klein, the formidable Mannheim public prosecutor (who has only recently started a fresh prosecution of Mr Irving for having intended to say at a Weinheim meeting in 1991 that the Israelis had benefited from the fraudulent gas-chamber shown at Auschwitz: although he did not actually say it, as the transcript shows).
Herr Klein's crony Wolfgang Kneip complained to Deutsche Telekom AG, whose T-Online service provides on-line access to nearly one million German computer users to the Internet. Via the Internet, the Mannheim prosecutor whinged, straight-faced, Germans could download such subversive literature as “The Holocaust: Let's Hear Both Sides.” This was clearly a criminal act under the law.
“It is unclear yet,” reported the Los Angeles Times, equally straight-faced, “how such laws can be enforced in Cyberspace.”
[CompuServe, a subsidiary of H&R Block Inc., the American tax consultancy giant, with 220,000 users in Germany, was also approached by Klein, but refused to play along. They most likely won't, said Marielle Boreick, their Munich-based spokeswoman. Theoretically, the prosecutor could also spread his net to take in the German on-line operations of publishing giant C Bertelsmann AG and its subsidiary America Online Inc.; the latter has 40,000 users in Germany.]
The Wall Street Times reviewed the case on its Law page; it should have been under Entertainments. The scenario already deserved to be set to music as a Gilbert & Sullivan opera; but there was more.
Deutsche Telekom could have told the Lord High Executioner, Herr Klein, to b*gger off. Instead, it solemnly asked him to threaten them in writing with prosecution (for “slandering the memory of the dead”: that being the absurd German law under which innocent people with incorrect opinions are prosecuted).
Why should Telekom have asked for this? Well, one theory is connected with the fact that the Chief Mikardo of DT is Aaron (Ron) Sommer, an Israeli-born American citizen recently downsized to DT from being chief executive officer of the American Sony corporation.
Yes, the story gets more incredible as it proceeds: why should Germany, presumably a sovereign nation now, put in charge of DT, its most sensitive telecommunications position a man who is not once, but twice a foreign national?
It would be like putting that nice Mr Jonathan Pollard in charge of Britain's GCHQ; or making Muammar Al Ghaddafi boss of the National Security Agency.
Pleading force majeure, DT was now enabled to inform the little Web Communications company at Santa Cruz, California, on Jan.25-by computer link, how else-that it was pulling the plug on its connections to Germany because it maintained Zündel's disputed World Wide Web site along with those of 1,490 other clients.
DT's calculus was simple: if we threaten this, WebCom will turf the nasty Mr Zündel off its net. He will be silenced. The Holocaust story, traditional version, will once more rule the German waves.
The sum looked perfect; but things did not work out like that. Webcom's (Jewish) company president Chris Schefler put freedom of speech first. Although his grandmother died in a Nazi concentration camp, he refused to buckle under, giving DT no choice but to pull the plug on the Webcom server and all its other 1,490 Websites, which included financial services Deutsche Bank Securities Corp-it couldn't have happened to nicer people [see story on page 3], Santa Claus Online, and the Port Douglas Visitor's Bureau for Queensland, Australia.
This was when the other freedom crusaders, all unknown to Zündel, plugged him into their computers around the United States, by installing the “mirror pages”, where by a simple mouse-click anybody could without a nanosecond's delay pick up the Zündel site where he had left off, as though DT and Ron Sommer had never existed. Now that was force majeure.
First off was Rich Graves, a networking consultant (and staff member) at Stanford University, just over the Los Gatos mountains from Santa Cruz. He was determined to slay the dragon of Internet censorship before it could outgrow them all. His Website, still active, is called http://www.gsia.cmu.edu/andrew/ml3e/www/NotByMeNotMyViews.
Another site sprang up on the computer at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; this one, installed by student Declan McCullagh, bragged, “Start your own Zündelsite in five minutes or less!” and provided a quick guide to others on how to set up identical mirror-sites.
NOT EVERYBODY HAD THE same love of freedom. The site started by graduate student Lewis McCarthy at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst was ordered shut down by the panicky computer science department chairman. (His name? David Stempel, as in Gummistempel-rubber stamp; Stempelgehen-to be out of a job).
Within a matter of days Zündel's message was to be read everywhere, including giant university computers which Deutsche Telekom dared not switch off without enraging millions of Internet users.
The links to the Zündel site appeared at the Masschusetts Institute of Techology, the University of Pennsylvania, and a private provider at Berkeley, California. Christiane Hohmann, speaking from the beleaguered German embassy in Washington admitted that she did not know what Telekom would do next.
The Federal Ministry of Justice, hideously embarassed by Mannheim's blunder, disowned the step and said it was not involved.
A German spokesman quoted by the Independent in England stammered, baffled: “I don't understand I believe in free speech, but I really hate your attitude that you know what is right for Germany to do. We are a democracy and we have reasons why we did certain things.” (He did not give those reasons.)
Newspapers around the world like the San Jose Mercury in California, and Der Spiegel in Hamburg innocently printed pictures of Zündel's Web-page, and gave its computer address.
At the end of it all the Ottawa Citizen, not the friendliest of newspapers, headlined “Zündel a winner in internet fight”.
The loser: the German government and the people pulling the strings. They had egg all over their face, hands – and strings. The winner: Ernst Zündel? In a sense, yes, because thousands of outsiders suddenly became interested in what he had to tell them. Telekom's action was “every dissident's dream,” he said.
The outright winner: the truth, and Freedom of Speech.
What's in a Name? (Opinion)
In assassinating the character of Simon Wiesenthal, German TV has to all intents and purposes put an end to one of the most colourful figures opposed to our unstoppable world-wide movement for Real History.
IN A PRIME-TIME BROADCAST by the North German television channel NDR on Feb.8, Mr Wiesenthal's credibility was demolished by his critics. They (and the producer) were all Jews: He cannot plead “antisemitism” even though Eli Rosenbaum, head honcho of the Office of Special Information in the US Justice Department, called him “an egomaniacal spreader of false information” (ouch: a criminal offence in some countries).
Asked a Swiss newspaper, the Zürich Sonntagszeitung: “How is it possible that what Rosenbaum said has been known to Germans for three years but totally ignored?”
The answer, said NDR reporter Steinhoff, is that in Germany it is taboo to criticise Wiesenthal. If such data had got into the hands of right-wing extremists, “the democratic forces of public opinion would have found themselves in a defensive battle they could not win.”
NDR managed to film Mossad super-agents Rafi Eitan and Isser Harel, who boast that they-and not Wiesenthal-deserve the credit for capturing Adolf Eichmann. (In fact: Wiesenthal upset them by challenging their fervour in persecuting former Austrian president Kurt Waldheim as a murderer, which he was not).
We ourselves once unkindly said of Mr Wiesenthal, now eighty-seven, that he had the kind of face that was only safe to take outside on Halloween.
This compared favourably with what he had been saying about us.
But it would be premature to gloat: those who crow the loudest may find themselves forced to eat it afterwards.
Wiesenthal, who claimed to have brought 1,100 fugitives to trial (though few were convicted), was a very high-profile enemy of the truth; those who replace him have learned to work unseen, using all the silent means of pressuring governments into accepting their agenda with which revisionists have become familiar.
Wiesenthal, for all his faults, had nothing personally to do with the terror currently stalking the courthouses of Germany, where historians, scientists, and schoolteachers are being fined, imprisoned, and robbed of pensions and careers merely because they dare to question the version of history rammed down their throats ever since Henry R Morgenthau Jr launched his Plan in September 1944.
It will be interesting to see what they do with the Simon Wiesenthal Center's name now.
Law Report
A GERMAN COURT HAS SENTENCED
Germar Rudolf, former Max Planck Institute scientist who authored a dissertation on the permanence of cyanide compounds in brickwork, to fourteen months in jail, accusing him of complicity in publishing the report to two thousand other academics [Editor's Note: Rudolf was a PhD student at the Stuttgart Max Planck Institute. His PhD dissertation had nothing to do with the analysis of cyanide compounds in brickwork; that was his private research]. The report demolished the lynchpin argument of exterminationist historians, that the total absence of cyanide compounds in the alleged former homicidal gas chambers at the Auschwitz site is explained by the effects of wind and rain. (They have not explained why massive quantities of cyanide are found by Leuchter and the Polish government laboratories in the fumigation chamber for clothing at the same site.)
BRANDENBURG'S INTERIOR MINISTER
Alwin Ziel stated to Der Spiegel that one condition imposed by the Allies for German reunification was that they curtail “neo-Nazi” activity. He admitted that this inevitably curtails freedom of expression, but while one could be critical of this before unification it is now completely justified.
AN IMPARTIAL AND SOVEREIGN BODY,
the German Association for Scientific Freedom, has announced in its newsletter its concerns at the recent tendency toward linking representatives of New History like the Berlin historian Ernst Nolte and other serious historians who have taken positions in the so-called Historians' Dispute with right wing extremists and deniers of the Holocaust.
The Association has particularly criticised the latest brochure issued by the Berlin Provincial Office for the Protection of the Constitution-Germany's semi-criminal and corrupt FBI. The brochure, entitled “The International Revionism Campaign”, has wholly identified itself with Nolte's opponents.
The Association has condemned the manner in which a public authority has taken sides in an intellectual dispute, giving its blessing for one line of argument against another without any justifying evidence, and has called on the Lord Mayor of Berlin, Eberhard Diepgen, to bring the Office for the Protection of the Constitution into line on this important matter-the freedom of historical research.
DEUTSCHE BANK AG,
one of Germany's biggest banks, which has a long and not always illustrious record of following the dictates of whichever political party is in power, has joined a number of other financial institutions in Germany harassing account-holders believed to be conservatives or right-wingers. Their Essen (Ruhr) head office wrote late in January to David Irving instructing him that they were going to close down his account at two weeks' notice and seize his life insurance policy, held as collateral. The historian has maintained an account in good order at that branch for thirty-seven years, ever since he was a steelworker there-the only Brit in the Ruhr. After a brief but firm exchange of letters from Mr Irving's German lawyers the bank abandoned its intention. The Fighting Fund requests however that in future contributors do not identify payments to this bank as a “Spende” (contribution).
THE SPANISH SUPREME COURT
has beaten down Bonn's demand for the extradition of war-hero General Otto-Ernst Remer, who single-handedly crushed the anti-Hitler putsch in Berlin on July 20, 1944. Remer left his fatherland after being convicted under Germany’s laws against Free Speech, and sought asylum in socialist Spain.
The judges have now ruled that he can stay permanently in the country, as the “thought crime” he is accused of in Germany does not exist in Spain.
Important New Documents Found by Revisionists in Moscow Archives
MOSCOW– Together with Swiss historian Jürgen Graf (author of Tätergeständnisse) the Italian expert Carlo Mattogno has paid a second visit to Moscow's once-secret archives, lasting one month, and has now circulated a report on his findings.
These far exceed the modest efforts of Professor Gerald Fleming and village pharmacist Jean-Claude Pressac, the chief blunderbusses of Holocaust propaganda.
Working in the Archives of the Russian Federation, Graf and Mattogno have found voluminous records of all the other concentration camps liberated by the Red Army as well as Auschwitz itself. Most of these documents-eye-witness reports and investigative documents-are in Russian. Mattogno is jealously guarding his findings, and has decided against co-opting Russian-language experts to translate the materials.
Poverty Stricken
Most interesting are the records housed in the poverty-stricken Central State Special Archives in Viborg Street, a distant suburb of the Russian capital (where David Irving located and extracted the handwritten diaries of Dr Joseph Goebbels for his new biography goebbels. mastermind of the third reich).
Here the two western researchers found and screened ninety thousand pages of original records relating to Auschwitz.
For skilled researchers, such screening proceeds relatively rapidly. Files on the erection of stables at Auschwitz and wage-payments for example need be given only the most cursory inspection.
Three Thousand Pages
Graf estimates that less than five percent of the Auschwitz files are of real interest. The much-fêted Pressac saw only fifty of the 650 files, as the signatures on the control-sheets testify. Graf and Mattogno purchased at one dollar per page over three thousand copies of documents.
Several key documents have been turned up by these revisionist sleuths. The most important so far is a document which makes specific reference to an Entlausungskammer für das Krematorium II (delousing chamber for Crematorium #2). How often the Holocaust experts have triumphantly brandished the document that refers to the construction of a Vergasungskeller (gassing chamber) in that crematorium, as the final “smoking gun”.
[David Irving, questioned about this document in the witness stand at the second Ernst Zündel Trial in 1988, pointed out straight away that the fact—overlooked by the prosecution—that there was no security classification whatever on the document containing the ominous term Vergasungskeller indicated that it had nothing whatever to do with the Final Solution, but was truly a document of janitorial level. The prosecution hurriedly moved on to other topics.]
The new Moscow document, which was overlooked by both Fleming and Pressac, provides proof that the ominous Vergasungskeller was installed to save life, by killing the typhus-bearing lice, not to take it.
Graf also reports:
“We now have the roster of sick and chronically sick people at [Auschwitz-]Birkenau for several periods. According to legend all these people should have been liquidated immediately as unfit for work. Other documents prove the strict prohibition on S.S. men maltreating the prisoners.”
This is not all. Mattogno and Graf have established that there was an astonishingly high number of prisoner releases from Auschwitz.
Hundreds Released
During a few days in June and July 1944, 186 short-term prisoners were set free. Over the whole period there must have been many thousands. Most of them were Poles, sentenced to “re-education by work” programmes at Birkenau for stretches of four to ten weeks for violating labour contracts.
After serving their sentences these prisoners were returned to their factories, says Graf, adding that up to now nobody has known anything of such mass releases.
Jewish historian Walter Lacqueur and the Auschwitz Kalendarium (a reconstructed “calendar” of events) mention only the release of Schindler Jews during 1944.
Just imagine, says Graf: these released prisoners could tell the whole world what they had seen of the extermination of the Hungarian Jews during those self-same weeks up to June-July 1944.
Unfortunately in two specific areas the two experts drew a blank: they visited the former Soviet military archives at Podolsk, but found no Soviet aerial reconnaissance photographs of the Auschwitz area.
And they have failed so far to turn up detailed figures on coke deliveries to the Auschwitz crematoria during 1944, which would finally nail down the maximum number of cadavers which could have been cremated in them.
Carlo Mattogno is planning to publish a work in Italian on the crematoria in 1996, and a specialised treatment of the “gas chambers” in 1997.
Bibliographic information about this document: Action Report no. 9, Focal Point, London, March 1996
Other contributors to this document: n/a
Editor’s comments: n/a