Letters to the Editor

General Remarks

Allied War Crime and Catacomb Revisionists

Dear Mr. Rudolf!

It is always commendable to commemorate the victims of injustice. In this regard I may report about an incidence, which occurred parallel to the liberation, or better transfer (this event happened peacefully, as is known), of the concentration camp Mauthausen. On May 4, 1945, around 9 AM I witnessed an allied war crime – and I was fortunate to have been the only one to survive it without injuries. On that day I experienced as a little boy of 11½ years of age at Grossendorf (between Sattledt and Ried in the county of Traun of the then Gau Upper Danube), how three approaching U.S. fighter planes of the P51 type attacked a group of persons clearly marked as non-combatants with machine guns firing explosive ammunition from a short distance.

I commemorate those who died in that incident: Alfred v. Liebler-Ardelt (born March 25, 1919, residing at Neustiftgasse 150a, Vienna VII), Alfred Ptacek (born Dec. 9, 1899, residing, Reindorfgasse 42/2/8, Vienna V.), Hildegard Kraus (born April 27, 1924, residing Vienna X.), and Alfons Wannginsky (born Oct. 27, 1905, probably from East Prussia). Two women were seriously injured. One had a stomach wound, no bone hit, thus the bullet exploded outside her body, and another one was hit at her ankle. Still today I see the busted skulls of Mr. Ptacek and Miss Kraus in front of me. Their blood spilled over me like a fountain, so that helpers could not believe that I was the only one in that group that remained unhurt by this terrible war crime.

I got away only because first of all I knew this type of airplane and secondly because I knew the old soldier wisdom due to my pre-military training: “an approaching fighter will shoot,” which is why I sought cover right away.

Sometimes today I still see the brains of the victims gushing out of their skulls: I had to cope with that without psycho-therapy! Ever since I asked myself: where was the Nuremberg trial of the others? Why are these pilots not prosecuted as war criminals? They even praise their deeds in their memoirs (Chuck Yeager, Yeager, Bantam Books, New York: “We ‘switched off’ civilians.”), but remark as an excuse, that they had been ordered to do this. The instigators and masterminds of these murders against civilians could certainly still be located today.

And by the way: I still can hear in my head those screams of the women of the peaceful village of Selzthal, who were raped in May 1945 by invading Soviet Soldiers.

I have to think about this now that we are reminded to commemorate the victims on occasion of the 59th anniversary of the pleasing event of the liberation of the Mauthausen camp, while simultaneously huge allied war crimes unfolded.

When will official Austria also commemorate these victims? I, for my part, will keep Liebler, Ptacek, Kraus, and Wannginsky in my memories. According to my research, they now rest in peace as war victims on the war cemetery in Jahnsbachtal near Freistadt. My swift reaction prevented me to from lying there as a “war victim” as well.

And besides, why is it that the suffering of victims of the Second World War is divided in two groups? Nowadays there is one group, who is to be pitied in a special way, and there are others, who appear to have been murdered by the wrong side. Is such an unequal judgment not unjust if viewed from the victims’ perspective?

I was very intrigued by HM’s letter to the editor in the last issue of this magazine “Walter Lüftl defeats Pavlov”. There you can see how we can create proselyte revisionists, or how they come into being, and be it by pure coincidence! I call them “catacomb revisionists,” because like the early Christians in Rome, they, too, can survive only in catacombs, but due to their example, spread by a chain letter system, they constantly created new proselytes. HM is such a catacomb revisionists as well, an anonymous one, who became a revisionist due to my writings on cremations.

You will not believe how many people I already have converted into catacomb revisionists over a nice glass of wine. But when they want to spread the knowledge they gained after they started to learn more following their conversion, they all subsequently encounter problems in their families and social circles, because most people cannot distinguish between “belief and facts.” This is why I chose that title back in 1991 (The Journal of Historical Review 12(4) (Winter 1992-93) pp. 391-420). I was well aware of this. For example, during the three years 2001-2004 I managed to “turn around” a member of the Austrian parliament of the Green Party (Architect Sauermilch). I also “turned around” Prof. Dr. Ernst Nolte. Initially Prof. Nolte wrote for example that he cannot imagine that a German officer would make false confessions. After corresponding with me he changed his view, and in his book Der kausale Nexus he finally wrote some clear words about the field of tension between exact sciences and the humanities.

Cordially

Dipl.-Ing. Walter Lüftl

Secret Speech by Heinrich Himmlers of Oct. 4, 1943

Dear Mr. Rudolf!

The so-called Posen speech of RFSS Heinrich Himmler from Oct. 4, 1943, is often regarded as a forgery by revisionist. I may add a technical aspect to this discussion not mentioned so far, which I would like to present for further discussion.

The speech played back to the audience at the Nuremberg Tribunal had been recorded with the so-called needle technology on a so-called shellac disc. Records made of PVC were introduced to the market only around 1950. A shellac disk had not more than 15 minutes of recording time. It appears that there was only one disk, which could, of course, only hold a small part of the entire speech.

During the years 1939-1940, the German electrical company AEG had perfected the magnet audio technique for market introduction, that is, a technology allowing the recording of spoken words or music on a plastic tape coated with ferro-magnetic particles. The decisive step was the invention of high frequency pre-magnetization by Braunmühl and Weber in 1940. This new method allowed a sound quality many dimensions superior to that of all prior methods. At the same time, the recording device was more robust, easier to handle and less sensitive. The new technology spread quickly. By the end of 1940 all German radio stations were equipped with it, and 70% to 80% of all German radio transmissions may well have been played back from such tapes. This figure rose to 90% around 1950. These high-value AEG tape recorders were also used as a supporting device to prepare verbal protocols during highly important conferences.

Nothing comparable existed during the war in England and the US. British radio stations had introduced the tape recording method by Blattner and Stille, which was vastly inferior to the AEG system. I do not know what was used during those years in the US. Perhaps another reader can help to find out.

Can one imagine in such a situation that a German sound technician in Posen, at that time a major German city, records a speech of an important National Socialist personality, after all the second most powerful man in the nation, with a technology that must have appeared prehistoric in his eyes? I cannot believe this.

The victorious powers, however, who played back Himmler’s alleged speech from a shellac disk, had no other choice. They could not handle the German tape technology yet; it was of course impossible to play an English sound tape. Thus, the shellac disk was the only option for them, since at that time it was still a mass product in Germany, because the consumers still had the playing devices for them. That the sound quality of the shellac disk was much inferior to the AEG tape, was very much welcome by the forgers. A voice imitator can simulate any person; only when it comes to the details, to the side frequencies, a forgery can be discovered. And these side frequencies can be established only from a high quality sound tape.

By the way: Despite its high sound quality, this AEG tape was not allowed as evidence in German courts of these days. Yet for the Nuremberg tribunal, the much inferior shellac disk sufficed.

Ch. Muller

Re.: Mohammed A. Hegazi, “Palm Trees Never Lie,” TR, 2(1) (2004), pp. 83f.

Hello G. Rudolf!

I would like to indicate that there is a possible explanation available for the fact that there might have been yellow dates on palm tress as late as December, the date of the alleged photo of Saddam Hussein’s capture. I found the following text on an internet site, which carries many interesting papers and links regarding the controversy surrounding Saddam’s capture (http://globalresearch.ca/articles/ATW312A.html):

The report that yellow dates are plentiful in Iraq in December was published in an Arabic newspaper located very close (a suburb?) to Washington D.C. in the USA: Asharq Al-Awsat 5252 Cherokee Avenue, Ste 105, Alexandria, VA 22312. However, the article did not show any photos of these alleged yellow dates. I have also not been able to find other pictures of yellow dates in Iraq in December.

Sincerely

Eric Harvey Richardson, Victoria, B.C., Canada

Re.: C. Mattogno, “On the Piper-Meyer-Controversy,” TR 2(2) (2003), pp. 131-139.

Dear Mr. Rudolf!

1. For quite a while now I have been visiting your website, and by now I know most of the files posted there, except for those files also available in English, of which I read the original German version, and for files written in other languages. In case you analyze your server’s access data, which I assume, you may have noticed that somebody gets access to your site sometimes several times a day from the university of […]. I am that person. The university’s computer center does not seem to bother, at least so far they put up with my “evil” doings. Just recently I finally ordered a trial copy of your magazine, and I am fascinated, to put it mildly. This really is a scholarly magazine and not one of those many gossiping newsletters. $9.50 per issue (for students) is appropriate in my eyes, since your magazine does not live from advertisements, as so many others, which gives a a great deal of independence. I find your letters to the editor particularly pleasing, which do not spare with criticism. This shows once more that you are interested in progress toward truth and better science, not in enforcing dogmas and ideologies. As Jürgen Graf stated correctly, Holocaust revisionism will evolve further, even if no big surprises are to be expected anymore, except perhaps regarding the problems of the Einsatzgruppen and the possible verification of Steffen Werner’s theses of the “Second Babylonian Captivity” (see https://armreg.co.uk/product/the-second-babylonian-captivity-the-fate-of-the-jews-in-eastern-europe-since-1941/).

2. The situation of Holocaust revisionism may not be perfect, but there are some encouraging signs. It appears that the exterminationists have to address our arguments after all, even if with some delay and if only half-heartedly and concealed as done by Fritjof Meyer. From his footnotes one can conclude that he is well aware that the established historical image is untenable and quite rotten. As Carlo Mattogno remarked correctly, with Meyer’s paper, which no longer deduces the Auschwitz victim number by way of witness account (witness of what?) but by way of crematory capacity, the first step was taken toward the demise of the established version. Those crematories simply did not have the capacity as assumed by Meyer.

Furthermore, the anti-revisionist persecutorial measures [in Europe] show that one takes revisionism extremely seriously, because if let loose freely, they know that it would quickly accomplish an overdue break-through.

For your Rudolf Report (www.vho.org/GB/Books/trr) you surely will be celebrated as a hero by the Germans one of these days, I am absolutely sure about this! You might not get the Nobel Prize for Chemistry for your Rudolf Report, but perhaps the Nobel Prize for Peace for your efforts on reconciliation between the nations and for defeating vile, hateful atrocity propaganda (together with Butz, Faurisson, and others more). I am already looking forward to the day when you can end your days of asylum abroad and come flying in to Frankfurt/Main! I sure will be coming to the airport, together with hundreds of thousands of other Germans, in order to celebrate this appropriately. Then only Prof. Benz will sit around in his Berlin Institute of Lies (Institute for Research on Anti-Semitism), looking rather glum.

By the way, the German Office for the Protection of the Constitution still celebrates Dr. Bailer’s counter-report as a refutation, really ridiculing itself by so doing! (See www.vho.org/GB/Books/cq/critique.html) All that is needed now is that they fall back onto the level of the Polish counter-report of the Cracow institute by claiming that iron blue could not have formed, which is why they did not bother looking for it in the first place (see vho.org/GB/Books/trr/8.html#8.4.2.). Particularly funny is the remark of the German State Protectors that already your German edition of Dissecting the Holocaust (Grundlagen zur Zeitgeschichte) proved that your analyses were incorrect. Why don’t they put a link to your book in their report? That those State Protectors try to support their claims with a book that has been banned and burned in Germany is more then strange.

I am dead certain that Holocaust revisionism will have a breakthrough, because it is not the likes of Deborah Lipstadt, suffering under severe and probably incurable monoperceptosis, who uphold the Holohoax, but it is mere force of arms that does it.

The war currently waged by the USA – or better by the forces that have high-jacked the government of this nation – are a sign of decay in my opinion. If it wouldn’t have been so desperately necessary to wage this war, they would have let some grass grow over the invasion of Afghanistan. But instead, they commenced the next campaign right away in this world war going on since 1914, and this in such a blatantly obvious way that the U.S. has lost all support everywhere in the world. The USA has over-expanded its sphere of influence and probably has already massive problems to keep its occupational territories on German soil under control. Anyway, I think that the end of the current U.S. power politics is in sight.

With the collapse of the USA as a super power, the Holohoax will collapse as well. It can also not be excluded that a revolution might take place in Germany in the near future. In the meantime, some 30 million people are running around in that country with their fists clenched. They might know what Heinrich Heine maintained long time ago: the German thunder might be slow in coming, but when finally unleashed, it can still be heard in the farthest corner of Africa.

All criticism against the United States aside, one has to give them credit that they allow you to stay in their country. The Americans won’t let anybody mess with their First Amendment, and heartland Americans are very sympathetic anyway, indigenously conservative. Measured by federal German standards, even left-wing Americans would be considered “right-wing extremists” in Germany.

DR, Germany

Re.: C.O. Nordling, “What happened to the Jews in Poland?”, TR, 2(2) (2004), pp. 155-158.

It is strange to note the amount of hyperbole associated with inflating the numbers of Jewish victims. If we follow Jewish author Stefan Szende, then only a single Jew survived the persecutions in Poland according to his book Den siste juden fran Polen (The last Jew from Poland).

By the way: According to statements by his publisher, Szende is one of the best informed persons on eastern Europe, and he is supposedly aptly suited to write a book on the extermination of the Jews in Poland. In this book, however, Szende did not write anything about gassings. And Auschwitz is mentioned by him only once – and only in passing.

It is thus noteworthy that “Lieutenant General Sir Frederick E. Morgan, Chief of the UNRA department Europe, reported that thousands of well-nourished und well-dressed Polish Jews poured into the American occupational zone [of Germany]. The trains are full of Jews from Lodz and other Polish Cities.” (Svenska Dagbladet, Jan. 3, 1946)

This report from the Svenska Dagbladet is confirmed by a similar one in the Munich newspaper Süddeutschen Zeitung from Nov. 13, 1948:

Georg Wiesholler, Ottobrunn by Munich

Re.: C.D. Provan, “The Blue Color of the Jewish Victims at Belzec Death Camp – and Carbon Monoxide Poisoning”, TR, 2(2) (2004), pp. 159-165.

Dear Germar,

What was your purpose for publishing that essay by Provan? Do you think there is any merit to what he has written? You dummy! You obviously still think there might be some merit to Provan’s horseshit. Go adjust your head. You should have seen through Provan’s drivel the moment you read it.

My answer to Provan is almost ready – but it is still too long. When it is ready, it will go out on the internet as fast as possible to try to undo the damage you have done to my credibility.

The Jews have never been so dumb as to publish Provan’s work before – and I doubt that they would have been dumb enough to publish it now. But, if they had – that would have been perfect. It would have been another chance to embarrass them. But now, it is you who will be most embarrassed indirectly – and from past experience, I know the confusion in our ranks, such as they are, will probably last for years.

As to giving my answer to you to publish. Never again. The unauthorized changes you made in my diesel text were just too, too much. Don’t call either!

Friedrich Paul Berg

Editor’s Remark

When first confronted with Provan’s paper earlier this year, Mr. Berg strongly suggested not to publish it, since in his eyes it was mere “rubbish.” This not being a scholarly answer to a challenge – also because from a toxicological point of view Mr. Provan is not completely wrong –, I asked Mr. Berg if he would write a refutation, which he refused to do. After several months of pondering over this issue, and after Mr. Provan indicated that he will have his paper published elsewhere with the remark that revisionists refused to discuss his theory, I decided to run the paper. However, at that time Mr. Berg could neither be reached be Email nor by phone, so the paper ran without his immediate response.

A true revisionist ought to be invigorated by the prospect of discussing and possibly refuting an exterminationist’s views. As soon as we learn about Fritz Berg’s refutation, we will inform you, and since I co-authored the most recent version of Fritz Berg’s paper on Diesel gas chambers and have some formal education in toxicology, I will also give my comments on this issue in the next issue.

Apart from this, the unauthorized changes made to Mr. Berg’s article on Diesel gas chambers in my anthology Dissecting the Holocaust (to which he frequently offered me to appear as co-author due to my considerable contributions) are restricted to the exchange of the term “Nazi gas chamber” by the term “National Socialist homicidal gas chamber,” an editorial last-minute decision to eradicate polemic terms in the book, like “Nazi,” and to clarify unclear terms like gas chamber (which could mean both delousing chamber as well as execution chamber). By so doing, Mr. Berg’s catchy phrase of “Nazi gas chambers did not exist” became somewhat bulky, losing some of its pedagogical impact. I apologized to Fritz Berg for this change quite a while ago and promised to reverse it in the upcoming third edition, which originally he had accepted.

Re.: R.H. Countess, “A Provocative History of the Aryan Race”, TR, 1(2) (2003), pp. 227-229.

Dear Mr. Rudolf!

Please allow me to make a few remarks in addition to the above mentioned article: The (in)famous H.F.K. Günther has written histories of various white people: Lebensgeschichte des Hellenischen Volkes (History of the life of the Greek people), Pähl 1956, and Lebensgeschichte des Römischen Volkes (History of the life of the Roman people), Pähl 1957. Both books investigate the racial changes of these peoples. They can be found only as second hand items nowadays.

Experts currently discuss the cultural leap which occurred when the Mediterranean Sea broke through the Bosporus. In this regard I am currently writing an essay on Atlantis:

In 2003, Jürgen Zimmermann wanted to merge several theories of various fields. The Black Sea was a freshwater lake with a water table some 120 meters below of its current level. The Mediterranean water broke through the Bosporus around 5600 to 5200 B.C. Subsequently the water level of the Back Sea rose some 15 cm every day, so that the current level was reached within two and a half years.

The residents of the lands on the bank of the Black Sea are said to have had a highly developed culture. After they had to leave their homes hurriedly, they reached Central Europe, China, Egypt, and Mesopotamia. The indigenous tribes in those areas lived in a state of cultural doze for thousands of years, but then suddenly rose to the top of civilization within a few years. This progress would be explicable due to the arrival of those former inhabitants of the Black Sea areas.

Maybe this theory will revive the discussion. But it is hard to imagine that the residents of the lands now covered by the Black Sea – forced to migrate by natural disaster – could have given such a tremendous cultural boost. Evidence for this should have been preserved underneath the water, whereas all the evidence on the shore could have been consumed by higher settlements of the descendants.

See Jürgen Zimmermann, “Die Besiedlung des vorgeschichtlichen Ägypten” (The Settlement of Prehistoric Egypt), Synesis 2003, no. 3.

Dr. Heinrich Wollsatz