Archive for the ‘Ernst Zundel’ Category

Smoking Mirrors | Ernst Zundel, a Man of Truth, Conviction …

Dog Poet Transmitting…….

I can’t let pass an important passing of a truly great man; Ernst Zundel who was a tireless fighter for truth and responsible for a large amount of fantasy refutation, like the alleged gas chambers at Auschwitz that never existed.

During his bullshit show trial in Germany I was in the country and followed the charade closely. I communicated with his wife, Ingrid, who sent me a video of his life and work. The Sleaze Patrol in Germany was so powerful that they even gave Zundel’s lawyer five years in prison too, for defending him. I don’t think that was the charge but they came up with something.

As time marches on and the apocalypse accelerates, the truth is being exposed in greater and greater detail. It is astounding that this robust and pernicious lie about the murder of 6 million Jews is allowed to continue and even more amazing that the vast army of cinder-block heads, dunderheads and Nimrods continue to be programmed to believe this fantasy construct. Their own almanac shows an increase in their population over the war years. Given this, how can their claims be at all credible? Of course, they are not. Halfway down this following page is a list of the same hoaxing effort before and during the first World War that is entitled; read every word and prepare to be mesmerized.

The thing is… if you are ignorant, or a coward, it is easy to be convinced of anything. It is something else to be so indifferent and obsessed with personal pursuits that the truth is unimportant and only useful when it serves your ends. If you are an honest person and not a coward and you know how the power of lies can pervert the minds of the populations that you have to move among, then… then you probably know about this monstrous lie and those who suffered because of it and you’re not shy about saying so… Still, in time to come, this lie is going to be exposed for the lie that it is and oh my… that is going to be something.

In any case, I wanted to call attention to that fine and noble soul, Ernst Zundel, who had the courage of his certitude and convictions to bear all the censure, injury, harassment and confinement that they brought into his life. Speaking truth to power never comes at a small cost and that is why there is such a small number of us who are capable of it. Ernst Zundel was such a man.

Here is the truth about the so called Holocaust; it is a lie fabricated to cover a far more monstrous Holocaust, performed by these same self proclaimed victims. (who assert that they have been so egregiously injured in an extended event that never happened). I speak of the Russian Holocaust, where tens of millions were tortured and executed by these so called victims. These are the same people who today, torment the Palestinians and seek to replace them in the annals of history, because the Palestinians are the true residents of the so-called Holy Land. Their DNA convincingly proves this. On the other hand, the interloper Ashkenazi Jew has no ancestral claim on this region whatsoever. This is hard, cold and clinical scientific fact.

Lies, enormous lies, lacking in even the most basic substance of validity, are made possible by the control of nearly every large media organ in operation. This is further bolstered by the control of most of the publishing houses, as well as the distribution agencies and social media constructs from Amazon to Facebook. It is further assured by the control of the international banking system. The culture is malformed and misshapen into monstrous abortions of twisted and demented expression by the control of the art galleries, which control the character of modern art. This is even further enhanced by control of the entertainment industries. Here is a classic example of the latter as it relates to the Satanic medium of Rap and Hip Hop. They are like some invasive species that has burrowed into every area of human expression, in order to assist in the downward spiral of devolution, presently in operation. Typhon is one of the mega devils who are operational in the psyche of this tiny demon-graphic, along with Mammon, Baal and a host of others.

When you study the landscape of contemporary existence and omit the invisible presence and influence of the ineffable, it can be crushing and disheartening and certain of dovetailing one’s spirits into the pit of despair. This is the manifest power of shadows and appearances, which cause us to be unaware of the brilliant light of the all pervasive and eternal author of existence, which is the divine. The divine shines forever behind every mask of darkness and is in absolute control of the destiny of all things, be they of the supernal or infernal realms. The supernal realm exists for the housing of every being of light, which serves the ineffable without question or argument at all times and the infernal exists for those who war against the natural harmonies of life …and for the souls of those convinced into the service of infernal designs and agendas.

Those of us that aspire to the light and who, in our own, often less than capable ways, seek to serve the light, can take comfort from the FACT that the ineffable is always in control of everything, no matter what appearances might say. Do not despair, ever! Let your light shine; this little light of mine, I’m gonna let it shine Do not hide it under a bushel. ‘Put on the whole armor of God’. Let us think that the greatest expression of the ineffable is Love and the highest expression of Love is Sacrifice. Let us imagine Love being the white light that is shot through a prism and which creates all the other qualities of God, which constitute the armor of God. Let Love suffuse, enthuse and maintain you at all times and in all places. Let it grow. Love is like a plant; water it with the attention of your focus upon it and it will grow. However fragile it may appear at its inception, it will become a Sequoia redwood if you cultivate and express it. Love increases with every effort of expression.

You can mull about and agonize over appearances. You can be startled by shadows that bear no resemblance in size to the image casting them. Shadows are without substance. Our fear crystallizes them into manifestation but they are not real. For once in this life, cast all fear aside. Fear can only exist in the absence of Love and cannot exist where Love is resident. They displace one another and those who prey upon our fear require our participation in the charades that they create in order for Fear to have any power at all.

I receive so many emails from people who tell me about what they struggle with and ask what it is that they can do. It could be troubling if I took it seriously; neither should you. {I am much gladdened by those who are perfectly content to receive daily postings from this source and who are dismayed when they stop appearing but you must understand that if I don’t hear from you in the comments section I have no way of knowing that you are appreciating them as you say you do. My sites are presently in transition and a state of turmoil. I have no counter on my pages anymore. I don’t know who’s coming around. The search engine function is gone. We’re working on it but it is slow going.} For myself, the level of pedestrian frustrations is at an all time high. I could take these seriously. I do not. The waters will clear. I do not know when but they will. Remember what has often been said here, the degree of difficulty accounts for the greater possibilities that are before us. Rise to the occasion!

Ernst Zundel was a great man. He still is a great man. A few will mention this. A few will speak to the accomplishments he was the author of. Mostly there will be silence if not outright opprobrium. He was slandered in life. He will surely be slandered in transition. I celebrate his fearless efforts on behalf of the German people and all right thinking members of the human race. He was a guidon in the march toward liberty in the heart and in the mind. He spoke the truth and he lived it at great personal cost. God bless him!

Much love to you, one and all, in your struggles here in this veil of tears. It shall not always be so that such travail and darkness shall assail us. It shall not always be so that we are burdened as we are. Hold fast to the Love and Truth that dwells within and the day will come when those who trouble us are no more. They will be exposed for what they are and there will be nowhere to run and nowhere to hide. They believe they are impervious and completely in command of events and appearances but they are not. They have revealed themselves because in their hubris they believe that no one and nothing can touch them. They are wrong and walking toward perdition, one step after another. Their time will come and so will ours. Let us hope that when that time comes we are found in a state of being that is pleasing to the author of us all.

Rest in Peace, Ernst Zundel.

End Transmission…….

Visit link:

Smoking Mirrors | Ernst Zundel, a Man of Truth, Conviction …

Fair Usage Law

July 17, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Ernst Zundel  Comments Closed

Mr. Death: The Rise and Fall of Fred A. Leuchter, Jr …

Edit Storyline

Documentary about Fred Leuchter, an engineer who became an expert on execution devices and was later hired by revisionist historian Ernst Zundel to “prove” that there were no gas chambers at Auschwitz. Leuchter published a controversial report confirming Zundel’s position, which ultimately ruined his own career. Most of the footage is of Leuchter, puttering around execution facilities or chipping away at the walls of Auschwitz, but Morris also interviews various historians, associates, and neighbors. Written byccampbell

Opening Weekend USA: $24,125,2 January 2000, Limited Release

Gross USA: $495,318, 26 March 2000

Runtime: 91 min

Aspect Ratio: 1.85 : 1

Originally posted here:

Mr. Death: The Rise and Fall of Fred A. Leuchter, Jr …

Fair Usage Law

May 16, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Ernst Zundel  Comments Closed

HOLOCAUST OR HOLOHOAX? YOU BE THE JUDGE! The Official …

In this article I am going to prove to you why amongst other things we have holocaust denial laws today, and what it was that caused those laws to be enacted.

But first lets start in 1919 when an early incarnation of the holocaust of 6 million Jews is reported by former Governor of New York, Martin H. Glynn in the American Hebrew magazine. This holocaust of six million Jews in Romania, Poland and the Ukraine clearly doesnt receive the publicity required and quietly disappears from history

However Martin H. Glynns unsubstantiated and abandoned claims certainly prove influential as ten separate holocausts of 6 million Jews are reported in various newspapers between 1915 and 1938. You can see the stories from each of these newspapers in the YouTube video below.

In light of the Nuremberg Trials in which Nazi confessions are reported worldwide, lets move swiftly forward to January 9th 1949 when in relation to alleged Nazi confessions at the Dachau trials, the Washington Daily News, gives an account of the American Judge, Edward L. Van Roden, in which he describes the methods via which investigators obtained confessions as,

Posturing as priests to hear confessions and give absolution; torture with burning matches driven under the prisoners finger-nails; knocking out of teeth and breaking jaws; solitary confinement and near starvation rationsThe statements which were admitted as evidence were obtained from men who had first been kept in solitary confinement for three, four and five monthsThe investigators would put a black hood over the accuseds head and then punch him in the face with brass knuckles, kick him and beat him with rubber hosesAll but two of the Germans, in the 139 cases we investigated, had been kicked in the testicles beyond repair. This was standard operating procedure with our American Investigators.

The names of some of these so called, American Investigators, is particularly interesting: Captain Raphael Shumacker; Lieutenant William R. Perl; Morris Ellowitz; Harry Thon; Joseph Kirschbaum; and the chief of the Dachau War Crimes Branch, Colonel A. H. Rosenfeld.

Arthur R. Butz in his 1976 seminal work on the alleged holocaust, The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, reports the following interesting extract of these trials,

One notable incident occurred when investigator Joseph Kirschbaum brought a certain Einstein into court to testify that the accused Menzel had murdered Einsteins brother. When the accused was able to point out that the brother was alive and well and, in fact, sitting in court, Kirschbaum was deeply embarrassed and scolded poor Einstein:

How can we bring this pig to the gallows, if you are so stupid as to bring your brother into court?

The U.S. Army authorities in charge admitted some of these things. When the chief of the Dachau War Crimes Branch, Colonel A. H. Rosenfeld, quit his post in 1948, he was asked by newspapermen if there was any truth to the stories about the mock trials, at which sham death sentences had been passed. He replied:

Yes, of course. We couldnt have made these birds talk otherwiseIt was a trick and it worked like a charm.

Now as we carry on looking at the work of historical revisionists, we move forward to 1974 when the original expose questioning the official holocaust narrative, Richard E. Harwoods, Did Six Million Really Die? is published, in which he states,

The question most pertinent to the extermination legend is, of course: how many of the 3 million European Jews under German control survived after 1945? The Jewish Joint Distribution Committee estimated the number of survivors in Europe to be only one and a half million, but such a figure is now totally unacceptable. This is proved by the growing number of Jews claiming compensation from the West German Government for having allegedly suffered between 1939 and 1945. By 1965 the number of these claimants registered with the West German Government had tripled in ten years and reached 3,375,000 (Aufbau, June 30, 1965).

Two years later in 1976 the South African Jewish Board of Deputies applies to get, Did Six Million Really Die? banned in South Africa. Whilst the local distributor SED Brown tried their best to fight this censorship, their funds were simply insufficient to mount an appeal against such a well-funded organisation.

Carrying on with holocaust revisionism, in his 1978 book, Auschwitz A Judge Looks At The Evidence, German Judge, Wilhelm Staglich, gives an account of his impressions of the Auschwitz Camp in 1944 based upon several visits there whilst he was stationed in the village of Osiek, nearby:

I was inside the camp three or four times altogether. On none of these visits did I see gassing installations, crematoria, instruments of torture, or similar horrorsOn none of my visits did I find that inmates at least the ones present in the camp, for example inmates employed in the various workshops or on clean-up details were badly, much less inhumanely, treated

Finally I can report that the German residents of Osiek were unaware of mass exterminations or other atrocities in the camp. At any rate, they never spoke to me of such things.

As an afterthought, I should like to mention the following: In the Dachau Concentration Camp Museum, there is a picture captioned Auschwitz cremation furnaces. They reminded me of the baking ovens shown to us by an inmate working in the camp bakery.

Moving onto 1982 in the Summer Edition of the, Journal of Historical Review, Professor Robert Faurisson states,

The truth obliges me to say that the Diary of Anne Frank is only a simple literary fraud.

He cites evidence in which the structure of the house the family allegedly hid in does not resemble the structure of the house in the diary and also that two forms of handwriting supposedly written by Anne Frank only four months apart, in no way resemble each other.

Interestingly, on the subject of handwriting there are parts of the diary that were written in a ballpoint pen which was not available on the market until long after the end of World War 2.

In 1984 in Toronto, Canada, German publisher, Ernst Zundel, distributes his own edition of, Did Six Million Really Die? and sends copies out to: Canadian Members of Parliament; members of the clergy; journalists; and broadcasters. A year later Ernst Zundel is subsequently put on trial and sentenced to 15 months imprisonment followed by automatic deportation, after a complaint under an obscure law prohibiting the publication of, false news, by a certain, Sabrina Citron, who ran an organisation called the, Holocaust Remembrance Association.

This sentence was passed even though both the defence and the prosecution agreed that the bulk of, Did Six Million Really Die? was correct and only small points were in dispute. Interestingly it is subsequently revealed that the law firm of the presiding judge, Hugh Loeke, did work for Mrs Citrons Holocaust Remembrance Association whilst he was a barrister there.

Moving forward to February 1988, the first forensic examination of the alleged execution gas chambers at Auschwitz, Birkenau, and Majdanek, is conducted by, Fred Leuchter, and subsequently published as, The Leuchter Report.

Fred Leuchter is an engineer who specialises in the design and fabrication of execution hardware used in prisons throughout the United States. Indeed one of his projects was the design of a new gas chamber at the Missouri State Penitentiary at Jefferson City.

In essence Fred Leuchter took samples from the walls of the alleged gas chambers and also from the walls of the de-lousing chambers so he could compare the claim that rather than Zyklon B being used to gas inmates of the various camps, it was actually used to de-louse the inmates clothing of lice in order to prevent outbreaks of typhus.

His results were overwhelming. He could find no trace of Zyklon B in the walls of the alleged gas chambers yet it was overwhelmingly prevalent in the walls of the de-lousing chambers where the inmates clothing was cleaned of lice.

I will leave the last word on this to Mr Leucter which I quote from the conclusion of his report,

After reviewing all the material and inspecting all of the sites at Auschwitz, Birkenau and Majdanek your author finds the evidence overwhelming:

There were no execution gas chambers at any of these locations.

It is the best engineering opinion of this author that the alleged gas chambers at the inspected sites could not have been, or now, be utilized or seriously considered to function as execution gas chambers.

The Leuchter report was actually commissioned by Ernst Zundel, to act in his defence, after his 1985 conviction was overturned by the Ontario Court of Appeal in 1987 and a retrial was ordered to commence in January 1988.

Even though Fred Leuchter did not question the official Holocaust narrative, Professor Robert Faurisson (who had taken an interest in the Zundel case and offered his assistance) was confident that an investigation on the basis of Leuchters skills in relation to poison gas and execution chambers would successfully serve as the core of Ernst Zundels defence.

Despite Fred Leuchters neutral position in questioning the official version of the holocaust and his evidence based upon the exact science of forensic chemistry, Ernst Zundel is once again found guilty albeit this time he is given a nine month sentence as opposed to the 15 month one he was given previously. Oh and interestingly he is granted bail after signing a, gag order, promising not to write or speak about the, Holocaust.

In 1989 in the former concentration camp of Auschwitz, a plaque claiming that four million people had been murdered there, mainly Jews, is replaced with a plaque stating that one and a half million had died there. Strangely, the figure of six million Jews dying in the holocaust is not reduced accordingly to reflect this two and a half million reduction of the stated death toll at Auschwitz. Furthermore, no reasons for this reduction in the death toll at Auschwitz, nor the fact the six million figure has not been reduced to reflect this reduction are ever given.

I will now quote from the 1990 entry in my 2012 book, The Synagogue Of Satan Updated, Expanded, And Uncensored,

Due to a mass panic among Jewish groups, regarding alleged discrepancies in the official version of the holocaust, they use their influence to ensure France introduces and passes the Gayssot law, making Holocaust denial a crime. The following European countries follow suit: Germany (who already had limited holocaust denial laws); Switzerland; Austria; Belgium; Romania; Czech Republic; Lithuania; Poland; and Slovakia. This is done to protect the Jews greatest weapon against those who criticise their criminal actions, the alleged slaughter of six million Jews during World War 2, a weapon which they use continually to make them appear the unfairly persecuted underdog, and thus justify their oppressive actions against other races. It is also done to protect their, holocaust industry, which generates billions of dollars for them every year in so called, reparations, which would no doubt have to be paid back if the actual facts were revealed regarding this alleged historical event. The Jews alleged holocaust is the only historical event that historians are sentenced to jailed for researching (in so-called free speech countries), which has led to the following unsatisfactory ring-fenced historical conclusions.

Elie Wiesels testimony in the 1966 book, The Jews of Silence, that the blood of Jews murdered by Nazis spurted in geysers out of the ground where they were buried for months afterward this cannot be questioned.

Or Martin Gilberts testimony in the 1981 book, Auschwitz and the Allies, that in the spring and summer of 1942 hundreds of thousands of Jews were being gassed everyday (which at 200,000 a day for 17 weeks would equal just under 24 million Jews, when figures indicate werent that many in the world at the time) this cannot be questioned.

Or Abraham Bombas testimony in the 1985 film, Shoah, that he worked in a 4 by 4 metre barber shop in Treblinka which somehow accommodated 15 other barbers and 70 to 80 women and children whose hair they cut in 8 minutes, before he and the barbers left the room for 5 minutes whilst the women and children were gassed and then re-entered with the barbers to repeat the process despite the fact the room would still be full of gas this cannot be questioned.

Or Arnold Friedmans 1985 testimony at the trial of Ernst Zundel, that one could tell what nationality of Jew was being burned in the ovens by the colour of the flames: green for a Polish Jew; blue for a Hungarian Jew, etc, that shot out of the crematorium chimney this cannot be questioned.

Or the claims that the Nazis made bars of soap out of their Jewish victims, that Jewish researchers Deborah Lipstadt and Yehuda Bauer have since admitted was false this cannot be questioned.

When I put this research together, I missed the vital point here. Why were these laws not introduced earlier? Or why were they introduced now? I think The Leuchter Report is the smoking gun answer to that. It is abundantly clear that as soon as a forensic study was undertaken showing the claims of poison gassings to be patently false, suddenly laws start popping up all over Europe threatening anyone who questioned the official holocaust narrative with imprisonment. Basically the Jews couldnt argue with scientific evidence, so they chose to make the alleged holocaust the only part of mainstream history you can be prosecuted and jailed for: researching; discussing; or disputing.

And now a quote from the 2005 entry in, The Synagogue Of Satan Updated, Expanded, And Uncensored,

On December 5th, following accusations from holocaust revisionists, that World War 2 leaders never mentioned the alleged holocaust of the Jews in gas chambers, Richard Lynn, Professor Emeritus at the University of Ulster, reports his research into this matter, as follows,

Ive checked out Churchills Second World War and the statement is quite correct not a single mention of Nazi, gas chambers, a, genocide of the Jews, or of, six million, Jewish victims of the war.

This is astonishing. How can it be explained? Eisenhowers, Crusade in Europe, is a book of 559 pages; the six volumes of Churchills, Second World War, total 4,448 pages; and de Gaulles three-volume, Memoires de guerre, is 2,054 pages.

In this mass of writing which altogether totals 7,061 pages (not including the introductory parts), published from 1948 to 1959, one will find no mention either of Nazi, gas chambers, a, genocide, of the Jews, or of, six million, Jewish victims of the war.

This should have come as no surprise to Professor Lynn, as even the most liberal of readers cannot explain why, as I have already mentioned, the two and a half million reduction of the four million dead to one and a half million at Auschwitz in 1989 is never deducted from the six million the Jews allege died in the holocaust. Here are some other facts the Jews have never explained regarding the holocaust they allege happened to six million of their brethren in World War 2:

The World Almanac and Book of Facts for 1945 estimated that in 1939 the population of Jews in the world was 15,688,259, which in 1945 had decreased to 15,192,089. That is a decrease of only 496,170, not 6 million, and by the way, the Almanacs source for these figures is the American Jewish Committee. Furthermore the number of Jews in Europe in 1939 are shown as 8,939,608 and in 1945, 9,372,666, which is a population increase of 422,058 after the alleged holocaust of 6 million.

Despite these official figures this did not stop nearly 4 million Jews applying for reparations from Germany after the war, which begs the question that if this many Jews suffered at the hands of the Germans during the war and survived, how many did the Germans actually kill? I cannot see how the Jews can have it both ways, but as pointed out by another prominent researcher into this intrigue, theres no business like Shoah Business!

If the Zyklon B gas was used to kill Jews in gas chambers, why were no traces of the chemical ever found within the walls of the gas chambers, when traces have been found in the walls of the delousing chambers, which records indicate the gas was used for: delousing the clothing of camp inmates. This may be why research chemist for 33 years with the Dupont Corporation, Dr. William B. Lindsey stated under oath in Canada in 1985, I have come to the conclusion that no one was willfully or purposefully killed with Zyklon B in this manner. I consider it absolutely impossible.

The claim that six million Jews gassed were then incinerated in ovens does not make sense when a number of crematoria experts have confirmed that it takes a minimum of 2 hours to burn one human body in an incinerator, yet the Jews claim the Nazis were burning 25,000 bodies a day at Auschwitz which had only two crematoria ovens. Furthermore the ashes generated by the cremation of 6 million would weigh in at a minimum of 6,000 tonnes (minimum 1 kilogram of ash per body), yet Allied aerial reconnaissance photographs revealed no piles of ash at the concentration camps. Why?

No autopsy on even one Jewish body found at the concentration camps has ever proved a Jew was killed by poison gas. Teams of pathologists followed the invasion forces into Europe and did autopsies on thousands of bodies found at the camps. Dr. Larson, pathologist with the Judge Advocate Generals Office led these teams and reported, Not one case of death by poison gas was found. Dr John E. Gordon who was with the United States forces stated, Most deaths in concentration camps were caused, not by starvation or maltreatment, but by typhus. Why are these professional medical accounts missing from the mainstream reporting on the holocaust?

If 6 million Jews died as the Jews claim, why is it that the impartial International Red Cross have claimed 271,504 prisoners (not just Jews) died in total throughout the war in the concentration camps, which they even break down in a camp by camp list. Furthermore the Red Cross Report of 1948 explains that most of these casualties were at the end of the war as the saturation bombing by the Allies paralysed the German transport system, and thus no food reached the camps resulting in many inmates dying of starvation. Could this explain the pictures of under-nourished inmates and emaciated corpses?

A, Holocaust Survivor, is deemed to be any Jew who lived in any country occupied or controlled by the Nazi regime or; who was forced to flee because of the Nazis. On that basis any Jew who left Europe from 1933 onwards and settled in another country is regarded as a holocaust survivor and thus can claim reparations, despite never so much as having gone near a prison camp. Why?

Ill leave the last word to Bobby Fischer, widely regarded as the greatest chess player of all time, who incidentally was Jewish,

I exposed the holocaust as never having happened. Totally made up. The Jews are liars. There is not a shred of truth to this holocaust.

In 2006, Ernst Zundel, now living in Germany after being deported by Canada is tried for, Holocaust Denial, and faces a maximum five year sentence. In the lead-up to this trial his original lawyer, Horst Mahler is barred from representing him and during the trial his replacement lawyer, Sylvia Stolz is also removed from the court and astonishingly jailed for three and a half years in 2008. She is furthermore stripped of her licence to practice law. So much for a fair judicial system in Germany when you consider lawyers can be jailed for representing their clients.

The outcome of this show trial is obviously a foregone conclusion and as expected Ernst Zundel is jailed for the full 5 year term.

Finally in 2015 the Fifth Edition of Peter Winters book, The Six Million: Fact or Fiction? is released. In it he states of the French historian, Professor Paul Rassinier,

French anti-Nazi and resistance fighter Paul Rassinier was arrested by the Gestapo and imprisoned in Buchenwald concentration camp. After the war, he was elected to the French National Assembly and awarded heroism medals. He was shocked to find that others claimed there were gas chambers at Buchenwald, something he knew was a lie because of his internment there. Rassinier spent the rest of his life exposing the lies behind the Holocaust and, as a result, his memoirs of internment at Buchenwald are ignored by the Holocaust storytellers.

In conclusion, rather than those Jew-controlled governments who tell you to believe the official holocaust narrative unless you want to face imprisonment, I present these findings to you and say, Holocaust Or Holohoax? YOU Be The Judge!

Andrew Carrington Hitchcock

08 October 2015

P.S. As reported in the mainstream media in August 2015, the Jew Rachel Yehuda, claims holocaust suffering is passed down through DNA, so I guess as the so-called holocaust survivors are dying off, those holocaust reparations are going to be the gift that keeps on giving!

Andrew Carrington Hitchcock. All Rights Reserved.

You can listen to me reading this article by left clicking the link below. You can download this audio by right clicking the link, then left clicking save link as and finally left clicking the save button.

Audio Book Of Holocaust Or Holohoax YOU BE THE JUDGE!

I did a Bloodlines show on this article with my guest co-host and Eurofolk Radios, Paul English.

You can listen to this show by left clicking the link. You can download this show by right clicking the link, then left clicking save link as and finally left clicking the save button.

Holocaust Or Holohaox? You Be The JUDGE!

You can download all the Bloodlines shows at the Bloodlines page here

Excerpt from:

HOLOCAUST OR HOLOHOAX? YOU BE THE JUDGE! The Official …

Fair Usage Law

January 18, 2018   Posted in: Ernst Zundel  Comments Closed

German lawyer for far-right activist Ernst Zundel charged …

German prosecutors on Tuesday charged the former lawyer for far-right activist Ernst Zundel with incitement, accusing her of denying the Holocaust and ending one of her legal filings with Heil Hitler.

Sylvia Stolz represented Zundel in his first trial, which collapsed after Stolz was banned on grounds she was trying to sabotage the proceedings.

Zundels second trial at the Mannheim state court ended last month with his conviction for incitement for denying the Holocaust. Zundel, 67, who was deported from Canada in 2005 and also once lived in Tennessee, was sentenced to the maximum five years in prison.

Mannheim prosecutors said in a statement that Stolz herself has now been charged with incitement, attempting to thwart a prosecution and using symbols of a banned organization.

During Zundels trial, Stolz repeatedly disputed the Nazis mass murder of Jews, called for hatred of the Jewish population and ended a legal document with the words Heil Hitler, the statement said. The document was freely accessible on the Internet, it added.

Stolz does not deny making the statements or writing Heil Hitler on the document. However, she told The Associated Press in a telephone interview that while she anticipated she might be charged, it was part of her fight against what she considers an illegitimate government built upon the postwar allied occupation of Germany.

We are under foreign occupation, and this foreign occupation has portrayed Adolf Hitler as a devil for 60 years, but that is not true, she said. But the real truth can only be told when someone attempts to break this taboo.

Stolz is also accused of trying to force an end to the proceedings with constant interventions and provocations that disturbed the conduct of the trial.

The presiding judge halted Zundels trial last March to ask for Stolzs removal after she denounced the court as a tool of foreign domination and described the Jews as an enemy people in earlier sessions.

In April, she was carried out of the court room, shouting Resistance! The German people are rising up, after defying an order for her removal.

Prosecutors said they are seeking a ban on Stolz working as a lawyer.

This foreign occupation seems threatened and insulted, Stolz said. So telling the truth is prosecuted for slander and the people who speak the truth are silenced, whether theyre attorneys, doctors, engineers or any other profession.http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/story.html?id=5054cd67-0288-4acc-97f8-030224c109c0&k=43333

Read this article:

German lawyer for far-right activist Ernst Zundel charged …

Fair Usage Law

December 18, 2017   Posted in: Ernst Zundel  Comments Closed

Ernst Zundel interviews Ingrid Rimland (1998) – YouTube

This interview was filmed in 1998 at the “Zundel-Haus” in Toronto, Canada. The ethnic novelist, Ingrid Rimland, discusses her trilogy of books named “Lebensraum” (roughly translated to the English language as “living-space”). It’s a three part epic narrative, spanning seven generations and 200 years !!

Here she shares her fascinating personal (and at times.., heart-wrenching !) experiences as a young child in World War II.

She also then.., describes her teenage years living in the jungles of Paraguay, South America.., and her personal struggles on the North-American continent as a first-generation immigrant…

The video interview is about 1 hour and 45 minutes long.., and is WELL worth the time to watch !!

After watching this incredibly well spoken and articulated interview.., do your best to then PASS IT ON.., in whatever way possible…

As always.., after watching.., do your best to “pass it on”…..

“Truth Does Not Fear Investigation”

AND…

“He who Wins the War.., also Writes the History”

See the original post:

Ernst Zundel interviews Ingrid Rimland (1998) – YouTube

Fair Usage Law

December 6, 2017   Posted in: Ernst Zundel  Comments Closed

Ernst Zundel, the man who destroyed the Holocaust industry …

Ernst Zundel, one of the great fighters against the Holocaust establishment in the Western world, has recently passed away. His wife put me in contact with him at the end of last month, and we had a very brief correspondence. But I never knew that he was dying.

Zundel stirred the ideological pot throughout his life. Long before Zundel passed away, Michael Shermer repeatedly said that Zundel was a very nice guy. But then Shermer ended up writing a book mischaracterizing and misconstruing virtually everything Zundel has said.[1]

Zundel was called a threat to national security. Canada once declared that Zndel is inadmissible on security grounds for being a danger to the security of Canada. Zundel was a threat to national security, but no one could judiciously pronounce the nature of his crime. Since Zundel was a threat to national security, his house was burned to the ground because he challenged the Khazaran Bansker Cult, the ideological force that has progressively become, in the words of Yuri Slezkine, The Jewish Century.[2]

On May 8, 1995, his Toronto residence at Carlton Street was the target of an arson attack resulting in $400,000 in damage. A group calling itself the Jewish Armed Resistance Movement claimed responsibility for the arson attack; according to the Toronto Sun, the group had ties to the Jewish Defense League and to the extremist group Kahane Chai.

The leader of the Toronto wing of the Jewish Defense League, Meir Weinstein, (known then as Meir Halevi) denied involvement in the attack; however, five days later, Weinstein and US JDL leader Irv Rubin were caught trying to break into the Zndel property, where he was apprehended by police.

No charges have ever been laid in the incident. Later the same month Zndel was the recipient of a parcel bomb that was detonated by the Toronto Police bomb squad. The investigation into the parcel bomb attack led to charges being laid against David Barbarash, an animal rights activist based in British Columbia, but they were eventually stayed.

You burn someones house to the ground and try to kill him, but no charges have ever been laid in the incident. This could only happen again in the Jewish Century, where no one is allowed to question or challenge the central aspect of what is now known as the Holocaust.

The media faulted Zundel because Samisdat Publishers, which was then owned by Zundel, released a pamphlet back in 1977 entitled, The Hitler We Love and Why. Zundel, we were told, was an anti-Semite for doing so.

Yet in 2011, noted military historian R. H. S. Stolfi of the U.S. Naval Post-graduate School published his study Hitler: Beyond Evil and Tyranny, in which cogently argued that Hitler was rational in making many of his decisions and that the Holocaust establishment has irresponsibly demonized him for ideological purposes.

Stolfi declares that he has weighted the great biographies [of Hitler] on the scales of historical reality and found them wanting[3] According to Stolfi, the great biographies do not ask deep questions and fail to address the serious issues surrounding the evolution of Hitler and Nazi Germany. He writes,

Virtually every literary piece written about Adolf Hitler in the more than half century since 1945 has been based on antipathy. In a seemingly boundless corpus of writing, every work from the mighty to the insignificant is fundamentally similar in its common revulsion for the man and his national movement.

In the most recent great biography, Professor Ian Kershaw begins and ends with detestation. His work is skilled and often brilliant, but he fails to inform the reader of certain characteristics indispensable for true comprehension of the man, and he underestimates the importance of the postwar conditions inflicted by the Allies on Germany, which contributed to Hitlers rise.

Bullock, Fest, and Kershaw ascribe criminal features to Hitlers foreign policy from 1933 through 1939, but they fail to correlate it realistically with the Allied imposition of the Versailles Treatythe ultimate manifestation of German defeat and Allied victory following World War I.

In the present situation, the reading public has been served only half a portrait of the great tyrant of the twentieth century.half a portrait of Hitler tells us little about the man as a human being and presents a distorted and incredible interpretation of his actions as creator of National Socialism and leader of Germany.

The great biographies take excessive liberties in denigrating his person, and, in doing so, they make it difficult to comprehend himEvery single one falls short of producing an adequate understanding of Hitler as a historical person. To this point in time, the biographers have lost the biographical war.[4]

In a review of Stolfis work, biographer Carl Rollyson writes in theStar Tribune,

Stolfi is no apologist for Hitler in the sense of minimizing his culpability for the Holocaust and the war, but the biographer wants to understand, even empathize, with the man.

He portrays Hitlers great personal courage during World War I as an intrepid combat soldier, and afterward as a man who personally waged war in the streets of Germany against Marxist street gangs. Stolfi quotes Thomas Manns reluctant admission that Hitler was an artist, and shows, in detail, Hitlers consummate understanding of opera and architecture and how those arts shaped his view of history and modern Germany.

Most important, however, Stolfi analyzes Hitler as a world leader of astonishing capability, a leader unlike any other politician of his time. Hitler was a messiah, wishing to create a new Germany unencumbered by the restrictions of the Versailles Treaty that crippled German politics and the countrys economy.[5]

I shook my head in dismay largely because David Irving has been saying almost the same thing inHitlers War. Zundel has also been punished for saying the same thing. Yet to this very day the Holocaust establishment charges both Irving and Zundel of being vicious anti-Semites!

I was even appalled by a statement made by Mimi Frank of the Jewish Book Council:

I personally found it difficult to readHitler: Beyond Evil and Tyranny, because I, like the other biographers, have a hard time overlooking the evil deeds of Hitler and concentrating instead upon his supposed genius. Stolfi characterizes Hitler as a rare world historical figure, compared with the likes of Alexander the Great, Napoleon, and Julius Caesar. He clearly presents an alternate view from all the other major biographers of Adolf Hitler, but not a view that I can share.[6]

What we are seeing here is that the so-called Holocaust has never been about establishing historically rigorous scholarship and criteria. At least for Frank, it boils down to personal opinion. Frank cannot share Stolfis views not because he has rigorous evidence to the contrary, but because Stolfis analysis does not line up with Franks ideological premises.

In any event, Stolfis study, like IrvingsHitlers War, is an important book and it will more than likely stand the test of time.

If Zundel was evil, what about Benjamin Netanyahu?

Let us assume for a moment that Zundel was wrong, that his then publisher should not have written the pamphlet praising Hitler. Let us further assume that Zundel was a vicious anti-Semite for doing so. Are we going to apply the same logic to Benjamin Netanyahu, who praised the Red Army which ended up killing more than twenty million innocent men, women, and children?[7] Is Netanyahus palace going to be razed to the ground any time soon for praising Bolshevism? Why the double standard?

Moreover, organized Jewry will not ban Hollywood, despite the fact that Hollywood collaborated with Hitler![8]David Mikics ofTablet Magazinecalls this a creepy love affair.[9] Mikics says that some of the Hollywood studio heads, nearly all of whom were Jewish, cast their lot with Hitler almost from the moment he took power, and that they did so eagerlynot reluctantly.[10]

Since Hollywood has largely and progressively become a Jewish town,[11]and since Zundel does not ally with that particular town, Zundel was ontologically an anti-Semite who deserved to be punished.

The simple fact is that Zundel never denied that Jews suffered and died at the hands of Nazi Germany. What he questioned was did six million really die? If we take a number of Jewish historians seriously (Bauer and Reitlinger), the answer is no.

The 1985 Trial

The gas chamber controversy again became an issue that refused to go away in 1985 when Raul Hilberg was summoned to testify at the trial of Zundel, who was also accused of spreading false news. (Keep in mind that Hilberg was the first Holocaust historian and many Holocaust historians and scholars had relied on his voluminous work, The Destruction of the European Jews, which was first published in 1961. It was reprinted intact in 1967 and 1979.)

All of that changed in 1985. Zundels attorney, Douglas Christie, pressed Hilberg to give historical evidence of an Hitler order to exterminate all Jews in Germany, a claim which Hilberg made in The Destruction of the European Jews. Hilberg eventually confessed that no such order existed. Then Christie on moved on to his next point: evidence for the gas chamber theory.

What do you mean by a scientific report?, asked Hilberg.

I dont usually have to define simple words, said Christie, but by scientific report I mean a report conducted by anyone who purported to be a scientist and who examined physical evidence. Name one report of such a kind that showed the existence of gas chambers anywhere in Nazioccupied territory.

I still dont quite understand the import of your question, said Hilberg.

Are you referring to a German, or a post-war

I dont care whoGerman, post-war, Allied, Sovietany source at all. Name one, said Christie.

To prove what?, asked Hilberg.

To conclude that they have physically seen a gas chamber. One scientific report, repeated Christie.

I am really at loss. I am very seldom at such a loss, but

Judge Locke interrupted: Doctordo you know of such a report?

No, replied Hilberg.[12]

The debate became interesting when Christie asked Hilberg about some of his sources, particularly Kurt Gerstein, who allegedly witnessed the gassing of some 3,000 Jews in camps such as Belzec and Treblinka.[13] Gerstein maintained that there were between 28 and 32 people per square meter in a room 1.8 meter high.

Moreover, he maintained before he committed suicide in a French prison that at least 20 million people were gassed. Hilberg used Gerstein as a testimony six times in his book.[14] Christie told Hilberg that a person like that would be either crazy or a liar, to which Hilberg responded:

Well, on this particular datum I would be very careful because Gerstein, apparently, was a very excitable person. He was capable of all kinds of statements

Christie produced the Gerstein statement and proceeded to ask Hilberg whether certain statements appeared in the statement. Hilberg agreed that in his statement, Gerstein alleged that 700-800 persons were crushed together in 25 square metres in 45 cubic metres; he also agreed that he had ignored this part of Gersteins statement in his book

And he refers to Hitler and Himmler witnessing gassings, right?, asked Christie.

Hilberg agreed that Gerstein had made this statement and that it was absolutely and totally false

Christie asked Hilberg whether he considered Gersteins statementthat at Belzec and Treblinka nobody bothered to make a count and that in fact about 25 million people, not only Jews, were actually killedwas credible?

Well, parts of it are true, and other parts of it are sheer exaggeration, manifest and obvious exaggeration. To me, the important point made in this statement is that there were no counting at the point at which people entered the gas chamber, said Hilberg.[15]

Hilberg eventually admitted that the evidence for mass murder in the eastern camps came directly from the Soviets.

The whole site, suggested Christie, was within the Soviet sphere of control, and nobody from the west was allowed into those camps to investigate, isnt that right?

Well, I dont know of any requests made to investigateWhen you say no one was allowed, it implies some request, said HilbergAll I could say is, I know of no Western investigators early on in Auschwitz, or any of

Treblinka?, asked Christie.

Well, there was no more Treblinka in 1945.

Sobibor?

That was no more.

Majdanek?

Majdanek is another matter.

Was there anybody from the West that went to Majdaneck?, asked

Christie.

Not to my knowledge.

Belzec?

Belzec was the first camp to have been obliterated.

Chelmno or Stuftthof?

No, sir.

Auschwitz or Birkenau?

No.[16]

Finally, Christie confronted Hilberg with another source which he had quoted as a witness for mass murderRudolf Franz Ferdinand Hoss, who was an SS lieutenant colonel from 1940 to 1943, and was one of the first commandants of Auschwitz. Hilberg cites Hoss as one of his authorities, but Christie asked Hilberg why he mentioned Wolzek, a non-existent camp, in his book:

Yes, I have seen that garbled reference, said Hilberg. It may have been Belzec. Its very hard, if the man did not write anything, if he said things, if he was tired, if he was misunderstood, if he misspoke himself

Christie pointed out that Hoss referred to Belzec as well as Wolzek.

I suggested to you, he said to Hilberg, that there is a reason to believe that this man was not only being obliged to sign a confession in a language he didnt understand, but things were being put into a statement for him that were patently absurd, like Gerstein.

There was obvious confusion in this one statement, said Hilberg.

Christie produced Nuremberg document 3868-PS, the Hoss affidavit. Hilberg agreed he had seen the document before and agreed he had seen the Wolzek reference. Yes, Ive seen that reference. Its terrible.

Its obvious that something wasnt quite right about that individual, would you agree?, asked Christie.

No, I wouldnt say that something wasnt quite right about the individual, said Hilberg. I would say that something wasnt quite right about the circumstances under which this was made as an affidavit.[17]

Hilbergs second edition of his voluminous work was ready to go to press that same year. Within weeks after the trial, Hilberg made sure thata Hitler order for the Final Solution, a point which he argued in the first edition, was removed completely, without an explanation.

Historian Christopher Browning, who believes that Hitlers 1941 speech to the Gauleiters may have alluded to a Hitler order and who also believes that the argument over whether Hitler gave an order or not is not commonly part of the issue of Holocaust denial because enough reputable historians like Hans Mommsen and Martin Broszat do not believe in it,[18] was quite surprised that Hilberg would make such a decision.[19]

Yet in an interview with journalist D. D. Guttenplan, Hilberg said that he made the change in the interest of precision about the evidence,[20] and never mentioned the trial during which he was asked to provide evidence for the assertion and could not. Deep down Hilberg believed a Hitler order still existed, even though he had no evidence.[21]

In 1988, Hilberg was asked to testify against Zundel by prosecutor John Pearson, but this time he refused. Here is a confidential letter, which Hilberg sent to Pearson, in which he laid the whole issue out:

I have grave doubts about testifying in the Zndel case again. Last time, I testified for a day under direct examination and for three days under cross-examination. Were I to be in the witness box for a second time, the defense would be asking not merely the relevant and irrelevant questions put to me during the first trial, but it would also make every attempt to entrap me by pointing to any seeming contradiction, however trivial the subject might be, between my earlier testimony and an answer that I might give in 1988.

The time and energy required to ward off such an assault would be great, and I am afraid that the investment of time alone would be too much, given all the commitments and deadlines I am facing now.[22]

The interesting thing is that Michael Shermer never even remotely mentioned the Zundel trial in his entire book!

It is now obvious that the Holocaust establishment is a package deal, and that package deal is riddled with unanswered questions. Once again we are forced to ask: how was the establishment able to persecute Zundel when he was simply asking for serious evidence for extraordinary claims?

Well, J. J. Goldberg and other Jewish writers and scholars have always had the freedom to brag about Jewish Power.[23] Its only the Goyim who cant talk about these issues without being called disgusting names.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CpBifRBbu8

[1] See Michael Shermer and Alex Grubman, Denying History: Who Says the Holocaust Never Happened and Why Do They Say It? (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002).

[2] Yuri Slezkine, The Jewish Century (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004).

[3] R. H. S. Stolfi,Hitler: Beyond Evil and Tyranny(New York: Prometheus Books, 2011), 11.

[4] Ibid., 11, 12, 17.

[5] Carl Rollyson, Biography Review: Hitler: Beyond Evil and Tyranny,Star Tribune, January 14, 2012.

[6] Mimi Frank, Hitler: Beyond Evil and Tyranny,Jewish Book Council,http://www.jewishbookcouncil.org/book/hitler-beyond-evil-and-tyranny.

[7] For similar studies, see for example Jean-Louis Pann and Andrzej Paczkowski, The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999); Norman M. Naimark, Stalins Genocide (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2010); Steven Rosefielde, Red Holocaust (New York: Routledge, 2010); Robert Conquest, The Harvest of Sorrow: Soviet Collectivization and the Terror-Famine (New York: Oxford University Press, 1987).

[8] See for example Ben Urwand, The Collaboration: Hollywoods Pact with Hitler (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2013); Thomas Doherty,Hollywood and Hitler, 1933-1939(New York: Columbia University Press, 2013).

[9] David Mikics, Hollywoods Creepy Love Affair With Adolf Hitler, in Explosive New Detail,Tablet Magazine, June 10, 2013.

[10] Ibid.

[11] See for example Neal Gabler,Empire of their Own: How the Jews Invented Hollywood(New York: Anchor Books, 1988).

[12] Jurgen Graf, The Giant with Feet of Clay (Chicago: Theses & Dissertations Press, 2001), 113-114.

Continued here:

Ernst Zundel, the man who destroyed the Holocaust industry …

Fair Usage Law

November 25, 2017   Posted in: Ernst Zundel  Comments Closed

Talk:Ernst Zndel – Wikipedia

Quote section[edit]

This quote section contains numerous cherry-picked quotes in what seems to me an attempt to paint the subject in a certain light. How necessary is this section? Shouldn’t this just be merged into the article? It seems to violate Wikipedia’s NPOV policy pretty badly to me. Some of these violate context pretty blatantly, for example – Zndel has presented himself delivering warnings to the Jews, not making threats to them as the holocaust quote would imply, for example. And how would you “balance” it? By just adding more quotes? What a mess, just merge them into the article if they are really that necessary.

I’ve deleted it once with this reasoning before, however it was simply restored. :bloodofox: 03:07, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

The quotations do not express the views of any editor or any source other than Zundel himself. I don’t see an NPOV issue. Gazpacho 07:47, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I changed the quote in the Ancestry section to something that actually presents Zundel’s opinion about his ancestry. The previous quote was of Zundel saying “No” to the question of whether he could be certain that he had no Jewish ancestry. This is really a meaningless statement, because Zundel was simply admitting a lack of certainty on a question about which nobody can be completely certain. Zundel was not expressing an opinion, merely conceding a possibility. Instead I put a different quote from the same source wherein Zundel says that in his opinion his maternal grandfather, Isidor Mayer, was not Jewish. Hadding (talk) 23:34, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Here is the interview that the newspaper article (http://hugequestions.com/Eric/TFC/Toronto-Sun-Zundel-Jewish-2005.html) quotes and which the wiki article is using as a source: https://archive.org/details/InterviewWithErnstZundel

Nowhere in that interview does he say he suspects he’s part Jewish. I’m going to remove that section until someone finds a more credible source, or, if you can find any source at all ascribing this (I haven’t found a single one and I’ve spent the last two months studying him for a paper). Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.96.34.86 (talk) 00:16, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

The very beginning of this article is nothing but an intentional, flagrantly kitsch attempt to mislead readers of the true motives of this man. Ernst Zundel is NOT AT ALL “promoting” “Holocaust Denial”. He is simply questioning the “official” Holocaust story. He is a purveyor of the truth not a Nazi sympathizer. He is asking for credible, verifiable and above all accurate explanations on many aspects of the established Holocaust narrative, with one, and ONLY one, goal in mind: The quest for the TRUTH. There is a clear difference between denying and questioning. The ADL and the CBC (a network owned by jewish interests) that published a clearly biased article, cannot be accepted as serious reference sources. Wikipedia should remain neutral and unbiased, not becoming partisan in political debates. Wikipedia’s role is not to promote unverifiable events only documented well established facts. Obsuring the truth, propagating lies and (70+ years after the end of WWII) maintaining all these half-truths by the jewish establishment is unacceptable. We should all help and protect people like Zundel who at the expense of destroying their well established prosperous lives have agonized to help the world discover the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.63.60.100 (talk) 17:04, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Is this last comment by Jpgordon supposed to promote the right to free thought/speech? Obviously not. Then why one of you “admins” did not remove it so far? Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.176.243.174 (talk) 13:14, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

This probably needs inclusion in the artical somehow considering it’s relevance. It’s the ruling that Zundel was deported under. Although the ruling is suspended for one year current detainees have been granted bail and are free to leave the country.

“Canada’s Supreme Court struck down a controversial anti-terror law on Friday (23/02/2007) that allows foreign suspects to be detained indefinitely without trial on the basis of secret evidence. The court ruled unanimously that the government had broken the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by issuing so-called security certificates to imprison people, pending deportation, without giving them a chance to see the government’s case. The court suspended the ruling for a year to allow Parliament time to rewrite the relevant part of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act — under which the certificates are issued. The Supreme Court ruling said one way to improve the system of certificates would be to appoint a special advocate to challenge the security evidence.” (c) Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. Wayne 22:49, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

The above information – deported using an unconstitutional law, would fit in nicely at the end of the “detention and deportation” section of the article. I believe Zundel was hustled out of the country while this law was being questioned. 159.105.80.63 17:58, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

The article mentions that he lost both constitutional challenges – I believe a rewrite is in order ( he won both eventually – maybe only the last? ). No mention either of the invaluable aid given by the US government in withholding evidence that he was not a security threat – give credit where it is due. Also the Canadian government helped by withholding evidence as long as they could – bravo ( I think they were hoping the old guy would die in solitary but he just wouldn’t ). Both governments acted like they were under severe pressure but we all know that can’t be true.159.105.80.63 18:06, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

In the article it mentions that the West German government notified the Canadian Jewish Council of Zundel’s publishing. Do governments usually notify various Jewish Councils if they want something done? What did the Jewish Council do – do they have an official role in Canadian government affairs?159.105.80.141 15:10, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Why was the ban on his mailing lifted in 1983 – was it an illegal ban? The eventual overturning of bans, convictions, etc against Zundel in Canada by the Supreme Court seems to point to pressure on the government from someone ( CJC maybe?). You article in being partial fair to a close reader may undo itself – who edited this by leaving in some facts and still keeping the shrill(there is probably a better word, accusatory maybe) tone – bravo.159.105.80.141 15:14, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Do any of these articles ever get redone – uncited garbage seems to take precedence over facts. Editors who state that an article needs to be improved – toward the truth – get ignored. Even discussion pages get altered if they get too uncomfortable. Good work.159.105.80.141 18:46, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

No mention of his house being firebombed. No arresets I believe. No investigation? Maybe that it why he left Canada – RCMP seemed to be unable to act. Did Irving have similar problems? The dangerous deniers seem to get burned, beaten, etc by those nice liberals at will.159.105.80.141 14:55, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

It is fairly hard to find articles on the arson and pipe bomb attacks against Zundel – Canadian sources seem to have alrgely dried up. However, and I hate to do use this as a source, nizkor has an article on Zundel that mentions the event ( arson and pipe bombs ) so I guess we can get past the question of whether it happened. Archives mention the JDL, the terrorist organization ( citation – FBI records )members, Krugel and Rubin, being involved. I believe Mr Rubin even boasted publically about the Zundel arson. I have seen extensive reports on these events and the news articles to go with them – maybe on Zundelsite, etc. But except for the good work of nizkor and McVay? this story appears to be headed for burial. 159.105.80.141 13:57, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

On the Zundelsite- from which you can get the details and citations – some really hilarious trivia. It appears that the FBI/CIA/USA evidence that was used in Canada to help claasify ( and justify US actions ) involved mut]ltiple steps. It appears that Mr Zundel had once known ( slightly) a Mr Pierce – long since dead – who had written the Turner Diaries. The Turner Diaries were in turn read by Mr McVeigh ( the world reknown bomb design expert of ok bombing fame ). Therefore Mr Zundel is a terrorist. It’s the best humor piece you will ever read. There is far more on his site – original news articles, etc.159.105.80.141 14:16, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry – the above report about Zundel/Pierce/McVeigh was actually a court document I believe, it just is amusing. Zundel also has the transcript used to jail Rubin or Krugel – the JDL terorists – where they bragged about the arson activities. The pipe bombs were known by the RCMP but they still got through the mail, but Zundel called them up and declined to open them himself.159.105.80.141 14:23, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

RE his ancestory. The mothers family is almost certainlt Jewish. The village where they came from was predominately Jewish. Zundel still thinks the holocaust is bunkum – he must be a self-hating Jew. Even Zundel, at one time, thought that Israel might be his best chance at emmigration ( until the got denial laws – fairly recently)( that he entertained that scenario seems to seal the deal).159.105.80.141 14:30, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Citation – aratoronto.com – they document the arson and pipe bombing. They appear to be in favor of arson and pipe bombs judging from their comments – they say they just got beat to the punch by some group with a similar name. The Zundel site gives the complete police deposition with lots of background info on the widespread police investigation – when others beyond Zundel ( and it escalated to murder attempts )got threatened the Canadians finally stomped on the festivities. 159.105.80.141 14:55, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

It appears that Irving, Rudolf, Zundel, … are just the tip of the iceberg. In a recent 12 month period there have been over 17,000 thought-crime prosecutions just in Germany. Even one 90+ year old woman who just wrote a letter. I never guessed that the high-profile cases were hiding a jail-busting surge. Singing the traditional first stanza of the German national anthem can get you a jail sentence and/or a big debt. One of Zundel’s attorneys was forced to get a psychiatric evaluation when she tried to mount ( a good word in this situation )a defense. I have heard of that being done – but I thought it was only under Stalin ( I guess I was wrong – I wonder if this is part of the Patriot Act ie getting a psych test ).159.105.80.141 14:34, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

The unintended humor in these articles is endless. Reading the main article, the section on whether or not Zundel is part Jewish seems really childish – but for the hell of it I clicked the link to the newspaper article. It turns out that the quote comes from a tabloid ( ie the Enquirer Israeli style ). Do they do Paris and Britney stories, how about Elvis sightings. If a tabloid is a “reliable source” then where in the rankings of “reliable sources” does say nizkor stand ( let’s have a poll – consensus of peer reviewed wikians or something along those lines).159.105.80.141 17:48, 18 May 2007 (UTC)PS If the tabloid is really the primary source used by the author of this piece then I may want to deny/revise any comments on Zundels Jewsih origins. 159.105.80.141 11:32, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

“local police” – the local police that arrested him were INS agents ( several – many ). They didn’t bother with a warrant – or a hearing or much else. A hearing is supposed to be required, plus the fact that you are appplying for permanent residency status by reason of marriage to an American citizen usually gives you extra slack ( Zundel may have been the fastest deportation in INS history – certainly of someone married to a US citizen ). The memos floating around in the INS computers would make for some good reading I’ll bet. Zundel appears to have been spirited out of the US for violating a fairly obscure provisional of immigration law which had actually lapsed ( no longer the law ) before he came to live in the US. His trial in Germany was not based on anything he had done in Germany ( he hadn’t lived in Germany for decades ). Zuundel is unique, in that it seems that none of the legal manueveuring used by the US and Canada have ever been used in another case – we are all safer because of the good work of the INS, FBI, CICS and RCMP and our fast acting court systems who are not afraid to cut corners in an emergency. Of course we should not forget the various Jewish Councils who told these groups what and when and whatfor.159.105.80.141 19:30, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Irme Finta – even the trivia of this article is good. Finta eventually won acquittal. Last time this law was used on a Canadian – Zundel actually hurt himself ( now Canada deports yuo to a country that will convict you – rendition of a sort ).The court of appeals said that a defense of following orders is okay – Canadian law sure has some strange quirks).159.105.80.141 19:53, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

regarding the bombing of zundels house i have a vhs video of his court cases thre is footage in there that i will make available this is taken from canadian television. it seems to me that in order for someone to be hounded like he has been seems like someone is after this holocaust denier bigtime. this holocast(shoah) is open to serious debate. in some countriesyou get IMPRISONED for denying that there were gas chambers if they existed let people believe that the earth is flat are you going to imprison them too. .zundel also made available all the hate calls he recieved death threats etc. i will make this video available where there reporters from canadian tv showing the pipe bomb damage Dwnndog (talk) 15:47, 22 May 2008 (UTC) robert schmidt

is taken from the reference http://www.verfassungsschutz-bw.de/rechts/files/r_sonstige_2007_03.htm

English summary in article:

I reverted the incorrect edit of Jpgordon who moved this sentence out of the referenced paragraph and asked for citation. –85.181.42.117 21:51, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

FURs added for image use with Ernst Zndel and Holocaust denial articles. Best, A Sniper (talk) 00:58, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

New readers to this article should be certain to read the first archive, particularly the last section. The closest it appears that Mr Zundel came to being a “terrorist “was his “opposition to multiculturalism”. I wonder what “o t m” means. Most of his fame is in saying that the Jews are lying about the holocaust, how “o t m” fits in is humorous. I hope the old guy has been given a chair, an upgrade from Canadian jails, and some paper and a pencil/pen/sharpener/stamps….159.105.80.141 (talk) 19:14, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Best, Manhattan Samurai (talk) 19:31, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

(moved from top of page)

Zundel has notoriety mainly because he republished Did Six Million Really Die? in Canada, and stood trial for it from 1985 until 1992 when the Supreme Court of Canada declared the law under which he had been charged unconstitutional. Zundel also has notoriety for the case that he assembled during this series of trials, including the commissioning of the Leuchter Report and other expert testimony.

Zundel has never called himself a neo-nazi and you have not really provided any direct evidence that he was a neo-nazi. You only provided examples of some people calling him that. This is not the way to write an objective article.

As for Holocaust denier, I don’t think that it needs to be demonstrated that this is a pejorative equivalent to historical revisionist. You show bias in using this term, and you have not made the slightest effort to demonstrate that it is not derogatory. Hadding

The point that is being missed here is that denier has a negative connotation. It has that connotation because it implies a leap to a pre-determined conclusion without any demonstration. Robert Faurisson and Ernst Zundel reject the label “denier” because of that. If the revisionists have no arguments, then what are the Leuchter, Lueftl, and Rudolf reports? The application of the label denier, which has that negative connotation, is certainly POV. Hadding (talk) 10:21, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I think you are being dishonest with your refusal to acknowledge that Zundel has been labeled in a hostile manner. There is a good reason why people (like Deborah Lipstadt) actively opposed to Zundel insist on labeling him a “denier” rather than a revisionist, and a fairly good reason why Zundel and others allied with him see this label as undesirable. The uncritical parroting of that obviously hostile label is definitely POV. Hadding (talk) 15:46, 1 October 2009 (UTC) “Denier” is a dismissive term. To address Zundel’s arguments would be fair, but to imply with the label denier that he has no arguments that deserve addressing is completely presumptuous. Hadding (talk) 16:16, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

The article doesn’t say, but where did Zundel publish his hate literature? Did he ever actually publish anything in Germany? –65.127.188.10 (talk) 00:09, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I believe he hadn’t lived in Germany since he was a child. His publishing was mostly in Canada, which has a similar constitutional free speech to the USA. 159.105.80.122 (talk) 19:12, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

One does not find a “Communism” summary box when looking at the biography of Karl Marx, so why is the AntiSemitism summary box displayed on the right-hand side for Ernst Zundel. This would imply he is the ‘poster child’ for antisemitism. It is inconsistent with how other biographies are structured. Thanks. [dar] Preceding unsigned comment added by Dkar3 (talk contribs) 05:22, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

That just means that the other articles in the Antisemitism category need to be changed, and is not an excuse to have it on the right hand side like that for a biography. I’m taking it out. If someone feels the need to add it back then we can let a moderator decide this. Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.191.176.207 (talk) 12:39, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

There are problems with pinning the label “Antisemitism” on Zundel. On the various occasions when he has been asked if he hated or disliked Jews, he has always said no. One of his early great influences and a friend was J.G. Burg, a Jew who wrote a Holocaust revisionist book called Schuld und Schicksal, and he has had other friends of Jewish heritage, including Ditlieb Felderer who worked in his defense team in the 1980s. Zundel’s agenda is rehabilitation of the reputation of the German people, not attacking Jews. The label Antisemitism has been put on Zundel by some people who wanted to stigmatize his message as hate, but it’s impossible to reconcile that label with some of the facts about him. Hadding (talk) 00:28, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

A Sniper says that “the only reason this article exists, and why Zundel has notoriety, is in the subject area of antisemitism.” This is completely untrue. Zundel’s fame is based mainly on the fact that he was subjected to a series of trials in Canada because of something that he had published. He fought the False News charge all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada where the law was ruled unconstitutional. Regardless of the subject-matter involved, Zundel would be notable for that.

When you say that the label “Antisemitism” is applicable to Zundel, you are alleging a motive. You are imputing a motive which many others have gratuitously imputed, but which is not in evidence. The label is unsupported by Zundel’s own statements about his motive.

You are making the tacit assumption that antisemitism is the only possible reason why somebody would question the Holocaust, and it simply is not the case. With that assumption you have some difficult explaining ahead of you in regard to J.G. Burg, Roger Dommergue Polacco de Menasce, Ditlieb Felderer, and a few other Holocaust revisionists of Jewish ethnicity that I could name.

In other words, what is missing is a demonstration that Zundel is antisemitic apart from the fact that a lot of people say so. Hadding (talk) 16:33, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

You are referring to opinions, not facts. “Denier” instead of revisionist is an opinion.

When you say that Zundel published “what is considered antisemitic material,” you are explicitly admitting that it is somebody’s opinion. If some Jews are saying that they agree with what Zundel published, how is it even a tenable opinion?

People in various countries have published Did Six Million Really Die? without becoming famous, because they didn’t endure a series of trials for it. It’s the prosecution of Ernst Zundel that made him famous. Instead of Antisemitism, Zundel should be categorized under a banner that says Free Speech or something like that. Hadding (talk) 20:10, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

We are not talking about two different things. It’s just that you insist on citing opinions as if they were facts. If 10,000 “reliable sources” (as you see them) says that Ernst Zundel is a very bad man, it does not thereby become an objective truth. It’s still just somebody’s opinion.

I think it would be very easy to “paint a picture of Zundel as anything other than an antisemitic publisher of hate literature” as I have already pointed out, simply by referring to Zundel’s explanations of his own motives.Hadding (talk) 21:49, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

“reliable sources” seem to not be very reliable. for example medical journals used to publish that sex more than once a year was unhealthy. to say the contrary even to those that are thinking it is plainly obvious, there woould be no reliable source that could say that. but many sources state that zundel is not antisemitic although many people who read him are. Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.64.245.140 (talk) 23:31, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Show me a reliable source that states what you do not understand. 98.64.245.140 (talk) 00:28, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

You think truth is based on credential and not reason. At least you can admit that you are lost. 98.64.245.140 (talk) 01:19, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I think Sniper is just making a simple misstep in reasoning here. If for instance the “Washington Post” or some other big “reliable source” says Zundel is a neo-nazi, and Zundel himself says he is not, than is he guilty until proven innocent? That judgment would be POV. Wikipedia should say “alleged neo-nazi” rather than simply “neo-nazi”. Looking at it this way it seems flat out bizarre to limit the info in this wiki to anything less. This phrasing would cover, subtly, quite a bit more information, all easily verifiable.

That said, I have deleted the “neo-nazi” tag from the intro for the time being, as the sources provided do not directly label Zundel as a neo-nazi, only his “actions” and his “type of actions”. If better sources can be provided, they should be. If/when that happens, I assert my case that the word “alleged” should precede “neo-nazi”. Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.73.165.8 (talk) 03:32, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Does anyone know where in Canada he lived? I recall reading somewhere that he resided in Yale, BC, or somewhere in the Lower Fraser Valley. Does anyone know for sure? — 05:14, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

This guy is listed as a Holocaust denier but the article seems to lack examples demonstrating this. Could someone provide them? The closest I could find of actions of his that might actually evidence it are his publication company producing:

However that’s pretty vague and lacks quotes from this literature. It’s possible that the intrepretation of his literature might be extreme and he’s not actually a denier. To allow readers to choose for themselves I think an excerpt or two with examples of phrases that indicate he’s actually denying it.

The one quote I did see here spoke of embellishment, but speaking about Holocaust being embellished (as opposed to concocted) is holocaust revisionism, not denial. While he did publish (though not write) “Did Six Million Really Die?”, that too sounds like a potentially revisionistic rather than denial book. DB (talk) 08:09, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

BAn RfC: Which descriptor, if any, can be added in front of Southern Poverty Law Center when referenced in other articles? has been posted at the Southern Poverty Law Center talk page. Your participation is welcomed. MrX 16:41, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Really? It looks like an attempt at discrediting his views and seriously, it has no importance whether he has Jewish ancestry or not.

Drosldrosl (talk) 06:56, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

I agree. Because of no other comments since, I am removing it. Zezen (talk) 12:17, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Ernst Zndel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp= on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers. cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:35, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

The article is confused. On one hand it is said that he admitted that the UFO claims were just for publicity, yet it is said that “Zndel continued to defend these views as late as 2002”. That implies that he continued to claim that the UFO claims were real – at least that is how the Wikipedia article on the Nazi UFO’s interprets the same statement. Yet that claim follows immediately after him being quoted as admitting that it is fiction – which incidentally is surely obvious. Why doesn’t the article simply state that he has admitted that the books are fiction?Royalcourtier (talk) 09:29, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

“Why doesn’t the article” – maybe someone wants to imply something. Just a possibility. They must not be Star Wars/Trek fans, maybe another bunch of nuts. 2601:181:8000:D6D0:C41D:4BC2:C8E2:260D (talk) 13:42, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

It seems he died today. I got an unconfirmed report on this. –105.7.182.244 (talk) 18:48, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

I have tried to put quotation marks around this term as it implies or rather gives the impression Herr Zndel is a racist, which is without foundation, but twice it was removed. Here is the passage in question: “The anti-racist efforts included participation by numerous Toronto activist groups”. Now the lack quotes around the term “anti-racist” would suggest that the efforts were indeed objectively and demonstrably anti-racist and not merely the claims of a person, group, organization etc. We see this quite frequently in the media in order for journalists to avoid imparting a personal meaning or understanding of a word as would appear to the public, thus ensure neutrality. Lastly, I tried changing the term to “anti-racists'” which would be more fitting and less charged and was again shot down. For an encyclopedia that claims to be open, it takes an awful lot of effort to add two bytes of data into an article. Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.63.105.34 (talk) 17:31, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Read this article:

Talk:Ernst Zndel – Wikipedia

Fair Usage Law

November 24, 2017   Posted in: Ernst Zundel  Comments Closed

Ernst Zundel and the Charlottesville alt-right riots …

Watch this weeks False Flag Weekly Newsabove, and click HERE for links to the stories we covered, and HERE to support FFWN.

By Kevin Barrett, Veterans Today Editor

On the latest False Flag Weekly News, Prof. Tony Hall and I discussed the recent passing of two alternative icons, Jim Marrs and Ernst Zundel. We noted that Marrs whose interests included the JFK assassination, ETs, secret societies, and New World Order bankers rated a friendly mainstream newspaper obituary. Zundel, by contrast, deserved to die in agony, according to the Toronto Sun.

Marrs and Zundel both questioned orthodox histories. Both espoused controversial ideas. So why was Marrs mainstream-friendly, and Zundel mainstream-toxic?

The question practically answers itself. Marrs rarely if ever offended Jews, Zionists, or Israelis. The same cannot be said of Zundel, whose World War II revisionism violated the only sacred taboo left in an otherwise anything-goes culture.

Obviously Zionists dominate mainstream discourse. Thats why you can say pretty much any damn thing you want, as long as you dont question their sacred tribal taboos.

I was thinking of Zundel while watching surreal video of the alt-right riots in Charlottesville. The white nationalists, like Zundel, think they are innocently standing up for their country and their ethnicity, in a hostile environment in which they are inculcated with guilt just for being who they are.

Zundel, it seems to me, has a point. The German people have been guilt-tripped almost to death, force-fed a false narrative that focuses entirely on the war crimes of their own ancestors, while downplaying or ignoring the equal or greater war crimes of their ancestors enemies.

Why should Germans still be paying tribute to Israel? Why should they be participating in the post-9/11 holocaust of 32 million Muslims a holocaust incited by and for Greater Israel?

Richard Spencer and the American white nationalist movement seem to think white Americans, like Germans, have been brainwashed into loathing their ancestors and their culture. Thats why Spencers so upset over the removal of a Robert E. Lee statue.

I agree with him that we should not be purging statues of leaders we dont like. Tearing down statues, like burning books, is an effort to destroy historical memories.

Keep the statues and use them to start a discussion.

But Spencer is mostly wrong. White Americans, unlike Germans, have not succumbed to false historical narratives exaggerating their ancestors crimes. On the contrary, the mainstream version of US history, despite recent inroads of political correctness, is still a feel-good national greatness mythology that downplays the enormous crimes of white Americans ancestors (and todays white Americans themselves) crimes which dwarf those attributed to the Germans.

The real source of Americas national greatness, to the extent it has any, is its tradition as a haven for dissidents and free-thinkers of all races and creeds. Americanism is an idea not a race. (And the white race is a dubious construct to begin with.)

That is why the alt-right is alt-wrong. White nationalism is barking up the wrong tree. I hope it withers away before more people get killed.

See more here:

Ernst Zundel and the Charlottesville alt-right riots …

Fair Usage Law

November 23, 2017   Posted in: Ernst Zundel  Comments Closed

The (Chosen) People vs. Ernst Zundel – Taki’s Magazine

Ernst Zundel

In the forty-year battle between Ernst Zundel and the Jews, I think we can finally declare a winner. Hold on to your hats, folks, because the end result is a real shocker. In Harry Caray voice: Jews win! Jews win!

Zundel, for those of you who dont know, is a 78-year-old Holocaust denier and Hitler-lover. And when I say Hitler-lover, Im not using the term the way leftists do when referring to anyone slightly to the right of the Weather Underground. The living room of Zundels former home in Pigeon Forge, Tenn., is adorned with a painting of Hitler and Zundel hugging like father and son. Now, thats Hitler-lovin! Zundel sincerely believes Der Fhrer got a bum rap. How could this dog-loving, nonsmoking vegetarian have killed anyone? Zundel has made it his lifes goal to rehabilitate Hitlers image. Its a fools quest. In a rational world, there would never have been a reason for Ernst Zundel to be the topic of a column in The Washington Post by one of the nations finest constitutional scholars. Indeed, the very suggestion of such a thing would be laughable. But it happened, and if Zundels legal travails are important enough to be examined by the WaPos Prof. Eugene Volokh, theyre certainly important enough for this column.

But before we get to todays paper, lets take a look at yesterdays news.

German-born Ernst Zundel immigrated to Canada when he was a teenager. A graphic artist by profession, the adult Zundel spent several decades buzzing around Ontario as a mostly ignored political gadfly, battling negative stereotypes and discrimination against German immigrants (in other words, he was an SJW). In the 1970s, it was revealed that this SJW was actually an SSJW when a local reporter exposed Zundels true passionpublishing pamphlets that praised Hitler and denied the Holocaust.

So, what to do with a guy churning out dime-store Hitler porn, back in the days when there was no internet to allow the neighborhood kook to spread his ideas beyond his own little mailing list? In a sane country, such a man would be ignored. But when it comes to free speech, Canada is about as sane as its favorite immigrant, Vince Li. Canada, egged on incessantly by Canadian Jewish organizations, decided that the best way to deal with the Zundel menace was to give it international publicity, and to give Zundel an unheard-of gift: the ability to grill Holocaust historians and survivors on the witness stand, forcing them, under oath, to cop to errors, omissions, and exaggerations.

Take a moment to wrap your head around that. Canadian authorities and Jewish groups thought Zundel was such a menace, they gave him a one-of-a-kind opportunity to spread his theories and humiliate his opponents.

In attempting to silence Holocaust denial, Jewish groups gave it a megaphone.

My Vince Li comparison doesnt sound so far-fetched now, does it?

Twice in the 1980s, the Canucks put Zundel on trial for spreading false news. This, as much as anything else, is what put Holocaust denial on the map. As I wrote in my book, in a section titled Blame Canada,

The Zundel team was able to grill Holocaust historian Raul Hilberg, who was forced to admit, under cross-examination, that there had never been a plan for what he called the policy of the extermination of the Jews. He was forced to admit that he had never physically studied the remains of the gas chambers at Auschwitz or Majdanek. He admitted that Holocaust revisionism aids historians by challenging their beliefs and bringing about the discovery of new information, and, most startlingly, he admitted the existence of a reliable Nazi document stating that Hitler had decided to put off any decision about the final solution until after the war.

Auschwitz survivor Arnold Friedman was forced to confess that he had never seen any gas chambers at Auschwitz, and that the stories he wrote about were based on rumors that others had told him. And famed Auschwitz survivor and escapee Rudolf Vrba admitted on the stand that his account of what he saw at Auschwitz was actually an artistic picture, not factual evidence. His eyewitness testimony regarding the gas chamber? Its what I heard it might look like.

Zundel was convicted, but his conviction was overturned on appeal. So guess what? The damn puckheads put him on trial again! Both Zundel trials were breathlessly covered by the Canadian and international press. In the end, Zundel won out. His second conviction was overturned by the Canadian Supreme Court (and the false news law was declared unconstitutional). Zundel was not only free but also an international celebrity. A hated one, to be sure. But a celeb all the same.

Following Zundels courtroom victory, Canadian Jewish organizations continued to press the government to find some other way to shut him up. As Zundel had landed only immigrant status in Canada (his attempts to become a citizen had been repeatedly shot down over the years), he decided to throw in the towel and move to the States to live with his equally nutty wife, Ingrid, an American citizen. During this time, the German government, egged on by (wait for it) Jewish organizations, issued a warrant for Zundels arrest. The charge? Denial material he posted on his websitewhile in Tennessee. The German legal theory was that since the internet brought Zundels words into German territory, and since Holocaust denial is illegal in Germany, Zundel had committed a crime on German soil no differently than if hed strangled a guy in Munich.

Of course, free-speech advocates the world over rose up in outrage over such a draconian affront to speech rights. Oh wait, no. Free-speech advocates the world over pursed their lips like Don Knotts and ran away. Well done, free-speech advocates the world over. Well done.

After three years of living peacefully in the U.S., Zundel was dragged from his home in 2003, accused of violating his visa (a charge later questioned by a district court judge in Knoxville). U.S. authorities shipped him back to Toronto, where the Canadians promptly tossed him into a 6-by-8-foot isolation cellfor two years. Post-9/11 laws had given the Canadian government new powers to indefinitely detain people without charge; no need for a trial this time! In 2005, I arranged an interview with The Hamilton Spectators Bill Dunphy (a longtime Zundel foe), who straight-out stated that Zundels appalling treatment resulted from political pressure from groups that are opposed to Zundel and his ideology (i.e., Jewish organizations). Dunphy admitted that these groups demanded Zundel be locked away, and the government acquiesced.

And as Zundel languished in a tomblike cell for denying a past genocide, former Rwandan ruling-party strongman Leon Mugesera, an actual perpetrator of a present-day genocide, was not only allowed to walk free, he even got a teaching job at a prestigious Quebec university (because, from Jim Carrey to Tom Green, Canadians have always loved absurdity).

After two years of what can pretty much only be described as torture (his cell lights were never dimmed, he was allowed no hot food, he was deprived of medicine), Zundel was shipped to Germany, where he was immediately declared a security risk and put in yet another cell without bail as a flight risk. See the logic there? Bring a guy against his will into your country, declare that you dont want him there, and then imprison him because youre afraid hell leave.

Theres that big-brained Deutsche brilliance Hitler was always going on about.

Zundel was sentenced to five years imprisonment for the stuff he legally posted while legally residing in the U.S. The sentence was cheered by (here we go again) Jewish organizations, and, as before, free-speech advocates the world over remained silent.

Zundel was released in 2010, a tired, sickly, broken man. Yay, we got im!

So why was Zundel in The Washington Post last week? Well, leave it to the exceptionally fair-minded UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh (who Ive previously interviewed for this column on an unrelated matter) to dare to examine the legality of Zundels latest nad-kick. Zundel, now 78, had sought to return to the U.S. to join his 80-year-old wife (she cant join him in Germany, because her ideas traveled to Germany and committed crimes too). Volokhs column deserves to be read in full. The short version is, Homeland Security denied the request, stating:

A foreign conviction can be the basis for a finding of inadmissibility only where the conviction is for conduct which is deemed criminal by United States standards.

Volokh points out what should be obvious (but, of course, isnt) to any rational American:

But as best I can tell from press accounts, Zundels speech that formed the basis of his German conviction would not have been deemed criminal by United States standards. Denying the Holocaust and expressing anti-Semitic sentiments is just not a crime under American law. Indeed, it cant be made a crime, given the First Amendment.

Volokh concludes that the ruling appears to have been a violation of American immigration law.

Now, heres where Im gonna lose a few readers. One might be tempted to think that the repeated involvement of Jewish organizations, in multiple countries, in the persecution of Ernst Zundel indicates the presence of some vast international conspiracythe Jewish octopus of anti-Semitic lore. But no, Im actually suggesting the opposite. Jewish advocates were able to get their way regarding Zundel because no one on earth gives a shit about him. When Jews whined, Give us Zundel, it was a very cheap and painless bone to throw them to shut them up. Bully Jews picked on a nobody, and politicians, who never give a damn about nobodies anyway, happily threw him under the bus to stop the kvetching.

But, my Jewish brider, look what the war on Zundel wrought. Holocaust denial was put on the map, and Zundel became an international figure of note. Was it worth it, going after this rotund little bald man? Is it still worth it? Yes, its a victory in that Zundel is finished. Hell probably die soon, and Jews can dance on his grave. Satisfied? But in a broader sense, it was a terrible defeat, in terms of what Zundels bullies were hoping to accomplish versus what they actually did. In attempting to silence Holocaust denial, Jewish groups gave it a megaphone. Worse still, in trying to squash a man who spreads Jewish conspiracy theories, Jews acted just like the vengeful, world-controlling puppeteers Zundel portrays them as. In trying to suppress Zundels crude stereotypes, Jews ended up personifying them.

This is Jewrys Appointment in Samarra, the old fable in which a man, seeking to flee the Reaper, ends up riding straight toward him. The moral of the tale is that sometimes, in our blind desire to avoid an unpleasant fate, we end up bringing it about ourselves.

Such is the sad, bitter legacy of Ernst Zundel.

SIGN UPDaily updates with TMs latest

See more here:

The (Chosen) People vs. Ernst Zundel – Taki’s Magazine

Fair Usage Law

October 19, 2017   Posted in: Ernst Zundel  Comments Closed

Smoking Mirrors | Ernst Zundel, a Man of Truth, Conviction …

Dog Poet Transmitting……. I can’t let pass an important passing of a truly great man; Ernst Zundel who was a tireless fighter for truth and responsible for a large amount of fantasy refutation, like the alleged gas chambers at Auschwitz that never existed. During his bullshit show trial in Germany I was in the country and followed the charade closely. I communicated with his wife, Ingrid, who sent me a video of his life and work. The Sleaze Patrol in Germany was so powerful that they even gave Zundel’s lawyer five years in prison too, for defending him. I don’t think that was the charge but they came up with something. As time marches on and the apocalypse accelerates, the truth is being exposed in greater and greater detail. It is astounding that this robust and pernicious lie about the murder of 6 million Jews is allowed to continue and even more amazing that the vast army of cinder-block heads, dunderheads and Nimrods continue to be programmed to believe this fantasy construct. Their own almanac shows an increase in their population over the war years. Given this, how can their claims be at all credible? Of course, they are not. Halfway down this following page is a list of the same hoaxing effort before and during the first World War that is entitled; read every word and prepare to be mesmerized. The thing is… if you are ignorant, or a coward, it is easy to be convinced of anything. It is something else to be so indifferent and obsessed with personal pursuits that the truth is unimportant and only useful when it serves your ends. If you are an honest person and not a coward and you know how the power of lies can pervert the minds of the populations that you have to move among, then… then you probably know about this monstrous lie and those who suffered because of it and you’re not shy about saying so… Still, in time to come, this lie is going to be exposed for the lie that it is and oh my… that is going to be something. In any case, I wanted to call attention to that fine and noble soul, Ernst Zundel, who had the courage of his certitude and convictions to bear all the censure, injury, harassment and confinement that they brought into his life. Speaking truth to power never comes at a small cost and that is why there is such a small number of us who are capable of it. Ernst Zundel was such a man. Here is the truth about the so called Holocaust; it is a lie fabricated to cover a far more monstrous Holocaust, performed by these same self proclaimed victims. (who assert that they have been so egregiously injured in an extended event that never happened). I speak of the Russian Holocaust, where tens of millions were tortured and executed by these so called victims. These are the same people who today, torment the Palestinians and seek to replace them in the annals of history, because the Palestinians are the true residents of the so-called Holy Land. Their DNA convincingly proves this. On the other hand, the interloper Ashkenazi Jew has no ancestral claim on this region whatsoever. This is hard, cold and clinical scientific fact. Lies, enormous lies, lacking in even the most basic substance of validity, are made possible by the control of nearly every large media organ in operation. This is further bolstered by the control of most of the publishing houses, as well as the distribution agencies and social media constructs from Amazon to Facebook. It is further assured by the control of the international banking system. The culture is malformed and misshapen into monstrous abortions of twisted and demented expression by the control of the art galleries, which control the character of modern art. This is even further enhanced by control of the entertainment industries. Here is a classic example of the latter as it relates to the Satanic medium of Rap and Hip Hop. They are like some invasive species that has burrowed into every area of human expression, in order to assist in the downward spiral of devolution, presently in operation. Typhon is one of the mega devils who are operational in the psyche of this tiny demon-graphic, along with Mammon, Baal and a host of others. When you study the landscape of contemporary existence and omit the invisible presence and influence of the ineffable, it can be crushing and disheartening and certain of dovetailing one’s spirits into the pit of despair. This is the manifest power of shadows and appearances, which cause us to be unaware of the brilliant light of the all pervasive and eternal author of existence, which is the divine. The divine shines forever behind every mask of darkness and is in absolute control of the destiny of all things, be they of the supernal or infernal realms. The supernal realm exists for the housing of every being of light, which serves the ineffable without question or argument at all times and the infernal exists for those who war against the natural harmonies of life …and for the souls of those convinced into the service of infernal designs and agendas. Those of us that aspire to the light and who, in our own, often less than capable ways, seek to serve the light, can take comfort from the FACT that the ineffable is always in control of everything, no matter what appearances might say. Do not despair, ever! Let your light shine; this little light of mine, I’m gonna let it shine Do not hide it under a bushel. ‘Put on the whole armor of God’. Let us think that the greatest expression of the ineffable is Love and the highest expression of Love is Sacrifice. Let us imagine Love being the white light that is shot through a prism and which creates all the other qualities of God, which constitute the armor of God. Let Love suffuse, enthuse and maintain you at all times and in all places. Let it grow. Love is like a plant; water it with the attention of your focus upon it and it will grow. However fragile it may appear at its inception, it will become a Sequoia redwood if you cultivate and express it. Love increases with every effort of expression. You can mull about and agonize over appearances. You can be startled by shadows that bear no resemblance in size to the image casting them. Shadows are without substance. Our fear crystallizes them into manifestation but they are not real. For once in this life, cast all fear aside. Fear can only exist in the absence of Love and cannot exist where Love is resident. They displace one another and those who prey upon our fear require our participation in the charades that they create in order for Fear to have any power at all. I receive so many emails from people who tell me about what they struggle with and ask what it is that they can do. It could be troubling if I took it seriously; neither should you. {I am much gladdened by those who are perfectly content to receive daily postings from this source and who are dismayed when they stop appearing but you must understand that if I don’t hear from you in the comments section I have no way of knowing that you are appreciating them as you say you do. My sites are presently in transition and a state of turmoil. I have no counter on my pages anymore. I don’t know who’s coming around. The search engine function is gone. We’re working on it but it is slow going.} For myself, the level of pedestrian frustrations is at an all time high. I could take these seriously. I do not. The waters will clear. I do not know when but they will. Remember what has often been said here, the degree of difficulty accounts for the greater possibilities that are before us. Rise to the occasion! Ernst Zundel was a great man. He still is a great man. A few will mention this. A few will speak to the accomplishments he was the author of. Mostly there will be silence if not outright opprobrium. He was slandered in life. He will surely be slandered in transition. I celebrate his fearless efforts on behalf of the German people and all right thinking members of the human race. He was a guidon in the march toward liberty in the heart and in the mind. He spoke the truth and he lived it at great personal cost. God bless him! Much love to you, one and all, in your struggles here in this veil of tears. It shall not always be so that such travail and darkness shall assail us. It shall not always be so that we are burdened as we are. Hold fast to the Love and Truth that dwells within and the day will come when those who trouble us are no more. They will be exposed for what they are and there will be nowhere to run and nowhere to hide. They believe they are impervious and completely in command of events and appearances but they are not. They have revealed themselves because in their hubris they believe that no one and nothing can touch them. They are wrong and walking toward perdition, one step after another. Their time will come and so will ours. Let us hope that when that time comes we are found in a state of being that is pleasing to the author of us all. Rest in Peace, Ernst Zundel. End Transmission…….

Fair Usage Law

July 17, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Ernst Zundel  Comments Closed

Mr. Death: The Rise and Fall of Fred A. Leuchter, Jr …

Edit Storyline Documentary about Fred Leuchter, an engineer who became an expert on execution devices and was later hired by revisionist historian Ernst Zundel to “prove” that there were no gas chambers at Auschwitz. Leuchter published a controversial report confirming Zundel’s position, which ultimately ruined his own career. Most of the footage is of Leuchter, puttering around execution facilities or chipping away at the walls of Auschwitz, but Morris also interviews various historians, associates, and neighbors. Written byccampbell Opening Weekend USA: $24,125,2 January 2000, Limited Release Gross USA: $495,318, 26 March 2000 Runtime: 91 min Aspect Ratio: 1.85 : 1

Fair Usage Law

May 16, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Ernst Zundel  Comments Closed

HOLOCAUST OR HOLOHOAX? YOU BE THE JUDGE! The Official …

In this article I am going to prove to you why amongst other things we have holocaust denial laws today, and what it was that caused those laws to be enacted. But first lets start in 1919 when an early incarnation of the holocaust of 6 million Jews is reported by former Governor of New York, Martin H. Glynn in the American Hebrew magazine. This holocaust of six million Jews in Romania, Poland and the Ukraine clearly doesnt receive the publicity required and quietly disappears from history However Martin H. Glynns unsubstantiated and abandoned claims certainly prove influential as ten separate holocausts of 6 million Jews are reported in various newspapers between 1915 and 1938. You can see the stories from each of these newspapers in the YouTube video below. In light of the Nuremberg Trials in which Nazi confessions are reported worldwide, lets move swiftly forward to January 9th 1949 when in relation to alleged Nazi confessions at the Dachau trials, the Washington Daily News, gives an account of the American Judge, Edward L. Van Roden, in which he describes the methods via which investigators obtained confessions as, Posturing as priests to hear confessions and give absolution; torture with burning matches driven under the prisoners finger-nails; knocking out of teeth and breaking jaws; solitary confinement and near starvation rationsThe statements which were admitted as evidence were obtained from men who had first been kept in solitary confinement for three, four and five monthsThe investigators would put a black hood over the accuseds head and then punch him in the face with brass knuckles, kick him and beat him with rubber hosesAll but two of the Germans, in the 139 cases we investigated, had been kicked in the testicles beyond repair. This was standard operating procedure with our American Investigators. The names of some of these so called, American Investigators, is particularly interesting: Captain Raphael Shumacker; Lieutenant William R. Perl; Morris Ellowitz; Harry Thon; Joseph Kirschbaum; and the chief of the Dachau War Crimes Branch, Colonel A. H. Rosenfeld. Arthur R. Butz in his 1976 seminal work on the alleged holocaust, The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, reports the following interesting extract of these trials, One notable incident occurred when investigator Joseph Kirschbaum brought a certain Einstein into court to testify that the accused Menzel had murdered Einsteins brother. When the accused was able to point out that the brother was alive and well and, in fact, sitting in court, Kirschbaum was deeply embarrassed and scolded poor Einstein: How can we bring this pig to the gallows, if you are so stupid as to bring your brother into court? The U.S. Army authorities in charge admitted some of these things. When the chief of the Dachau War Crimes Branch, Colonel A. H. Rosenfeld, quit his post in 1948, he was asked by newspapermen if there was any truth to the stories about the mock trials, at which sham death sentences had been passed. He replied: Yes, of course. We couldnt have made these birds talk otherwiseIt was a trick and it worked like a charm. Now as we carry on looking at the work of historical revisionists, we move forward to 1974 when the original expose questioning the official holocaust narrative, Richard E. Harwoods, Did Six Million Really Die? is published, in which he states, The question most pertinent to the extermination legend is, of course: how many of the 3 million European Jews under German control survived after 1945? The Jewish Joint Distribution Committee estimated the number of survivors in Europe to be only one and a half million, but such a figure is now totally unacceptable. This is proved by the growing number of Jews claiming compensation from the West German Government for having allegedly suffered between 1939 and 1945. By 1965 the number of these claimants registered with the West German Government had tripled in ten years and reached 3,375,000 (Aufbau, June 30, 1965). Two years later in 1976 the South African Jewish Board of Deputies applies to get, Did Six Million Really Die? banned in South Africa. Whilst the local distributor SED Brown tried their best to fight this censorship, their funds were simply insufficient to mount an appeal against such a well-funded organisation. Carrying on with holocaust revisionism, in his 1978 book, Auschwitz A Judge Looks At The Evidence, German Judge, Wilhelm Staglich, gives an account of his impressions of the Auschwitz Camp in 1944 based upon several visits there whilst he was stationed in the village of Osiek, nearby: I was inside the camp three or four times altogether. On none of these visits did I see gassing installations, crematoria, instruments of torture, or similar horrorsOn none of my visits did I find that inmates at least the ones present in the camp, for example inmates employed in the various workshops or on clean-up details were badly, much less inhumanely, treated Finally I can report that the German residents of Osiek were unaware of mass exterminations or other atrocities in the camp. At any rate, they never spoke to me of such things. As an afterthought, I should like to mention the following: In the Dachau Concentration Camp Museum, there is a picture captioned Auschwitz cremation furnaces. They reminded me of the baking ovens shown to us by an inmate working in the camp bakery. Moving onto 1982 in the Summer Edition of the, Journal of Historical Review, Professor Robert Faurisson states, The truth obliges me to say that the Diary of Anne Frank is only a simple literary fraud. He cites evidence in which the structure of the house the family allegedly hid in does not resemble the structure of the house in the diary and also that two forms of handwriting supposedly written by Anne Frank only four months apart, in no way resemble each other. Interestingly, on the subject of handwriting there are parts of the diary that were written in a ballpoint pen which was not available on the market until long after the end of World War 2. In 1984 in Toronto, Canada, German publisher, Ernst Zundel, distributes his own edition of, Did Six Million Really Die? and sends copies out to: Canadian Members of Parliament; members of the clergy; journalists; and broadcasters. A year later Ernst Zundel is subsequently put on trial and sentenced to 15 months imprisonment followed by automatic deportation, after a complaint under an obscure law prohibiting the publication of, false news, by a certain, Sabrina Citron, who ran an organisation called the, Holocaust Remembrance Association. This sentence was passed even though both the defence and the prosecution agreed that the bulk of, Did Six Million Really Die? was correct and only small points were in dispute. Interestingly it is subsequently revealed that the law firm of the presiding judge, Hugh Loeke, did work for Mrs Citrons Holocaust Remembrance Association whilst he was a barrister there. Moving forward to February 1988, the first forensic examination of the alleged execution gas chambers at Auschwitz, Birkenau, and Majdanek, is conducted by, Fred Leuchter, and subsequently published as, The Leuchter Report. Fred Leuchter is an engineer who specialises in the design and fabrication of execution hardware used in prisons throughout the United States. Indeed one of his projects was the design of a new gas chamber at the Missouri State Penitentiary at Jefferson City. In essence Fred Leuchter took samples from the walls of the alleged gas chambers and also from the walls of the de-lousing chambers so he could compare the claim that rather than Zyklon B being used to gas inmates of the various camps, it was actually used to de-louse the inmates clothing of lice in order to prevent outbreaks of typhus. His results were overwhelming. He could find no trace of Zyklon B in the walls of the alleged gas chambers yet it was overwhelmingly prevalent in the walls of the de-lousing chambers where the inmates clothing was cleaned of lice. I will leave the last word on this to Mr Leucter which I quote from the conclusion of his report, After reviewing all the material and inspecting all of the sites at Auschwitz, Birkenau and Majdanek your author finds the evidence overwhelming: There were no execution gas chambers at any of these locations. It is the best engineering opinion of this author that the alleged gas chambers at the inspected sites could not have been, or now, be utilized or seriously considered to function as execution gas chambers. The Leuchter report was actually commissioned by Ernst Zundel, to act in his defence, after his 1985 conviction was overturned by the Ontario Court of Appeal in 1987 and a retrial was ordered to commence in January 1988. Even though Fred Leuchter did not question the official Holocaust narrative, Professor Robert Faurisson (who had taken an interest in the Zundel case and offered his assistance) was confident that an investigation on the basis of Leuchters skills in relation to poison gas and execution chambers would successfully serve as the core of Ernst Zundels defence. Despite Fred Leuchters neutral position in questioning the official version of the holocaust and his evidence based upon the exact science of forensic chemistry, Ernst Zundel is once again found guilty albeit this time he is given a nine month sentence as opposed to the 15 month one he was given previously. Oh and interestingly he is granted bail after signing a, gag order, promising not to write or speak about the, Holocaust. In 1989 in the former concentration camp of Auschwitz, a plaque claiming that four million people had been murdered there, mainly Jews, is replaced with a plaque stating that one and a half million had died there. Strangely, the figure of six million Jews dying in the holocaust is not reduced accordingly to reflect this two and a half million reduction of the stated death toll at Auschwitz. Furthermore, no reasons for this reduction in the death toll at Auschwitz, nor the fact the six million figure has not been reduced to reflect this reduction are ever given. I will now quote from the 1990 entry in my 2012 book, The Synagogue Of Satan Updated, Expanded, And Uncensored, Due to a mass panic among Jewish groups, regarding alleged discrepancies in the official version of the holocaust, they use their influence to ensure France introduces and passes the Gayssot law, making Holocaust denial a crime. The following European countries follow suit: Germany (who already had limited holocaust denial laws); Switzerland; Austria; Belgium; Romania; Czech Republic; Lithuania; Poland; and Slovakia. This is done to protect the Jews greatest weapon against those who criticise their criminal actions, the alleged slaughter of six million Jews during World War 2, a weapon which they use continually to make them appear the unfairly persecuted underdog, and thus justify their oppressive actions against other races. It is also done to protect their, holocaust industry, which generates billions of dollars for them every year in so called, reparations, which would no doubt have to be paid back if the actual facts were revealed regarding this alleged historical event. The Jews alleged holocaust is the only historical event that historians are sentenced to jailed for researching (in so-called free speech countries), which has led to the following unsatisfactory ring-fenced historical conclusions. Elie Wiesels testimony in the 1966 book, The Jews of Silence, that the blood of Jews murdered by Nazis spurted in geysers out of the ground where they were buried for months afterward this cannot be questioned. Or Martin Gilberts testimony in the 1981 book, Auschwitz and the Allies, that in the spring and summer of 1942 hundreds of thousands of Jews were being gassed everyday (which at 200,000 a day for 17 weeks would equal just under 24 million Jews, when figures indicate werent that many in the world at the time) this cannot be questioned. Or Abraham Bombas testimony in the 1985 film, Shoah, that he worked in a 4 by 4 metre barber shop in Treblinka which somehow accommodated 15 other barbers and 70 to 80 women and children whose hair they cut in 8 minutes, before he and the barbers left the room for 5 minutes whilst the women and children were gassed and then re-entered with the barbers to repeat the process despite the fact the room would still be full of gas this cannot be questioned. Or Arnold Friedmans 1985 testimony at the trial of Ernst Zundel, that one could tell what nationality of Jew was being burned in the ovens by the colour of the flames: green for a Polish Jew; blue for a Hungarian Jew, etc, that shot out of the crematorium chimney this cannot be questioned. Or the claims that the Nazis made bars of soap out of their Jewish victims, that Jewish researchers Deborah Lipstadt and Yehuda Bauer have since admitted was false this cannot be questioned. When I put this research together, I missed the vital point here. Why were these laws not introduced earlier? Or why were they introduced now? I think The Leuchter Report is the smoking gun answer to that. It is abundantly clear that as soon as a forensic study was undertaken showing the claims of poison gassings to be patently false, suddenly laws start popping up all over Europe threatening anyone who questioned the official holocaust narrative with imprisonment. Basically the Jews couldnt argue with scientific evidence, so they chose to make the alleged holocaust the only part of mainstream history you can be prosecuted and jailed for: researching; discussing; or disputing. And now a quote from the 2005 entry in, The Synagogue Of Satan Updated, Expanded, And Uncensored, On December 5th, following accusations from holocaust revisionists, that World War 2 leaders never mentioned the alleged holocaust of the Jews in gas chambers, Richard Lynn, Professor Emeritus at the University of Ulster, reports his research into this matter, as follows, Ive checked out Churchills Second World War and the statement is quite correct not a single mention of Nazi, gas chambers, a, genocide of the Jews, or of, six million, Jewish victims of the war. This is astonishing. How can it be explained? Eisenhowers, Crusade in Europe, is a book of 559 pages; the six volumes of Churchills, Second World War, total 4,448 pages; and de Gaulles three-volume, Memoires de guerre, is 2,054 pages. In this mass of writing which altogether totals 7,061 pages (not including the introductory parts), published from 1948 to 1959, one will find no mention either of Nazi, gas chambers, a, genocide, of the Jews, or of, six million, Jewish victims of the war. This should have come as no surprise to Professor Lynn, as even the most liberal of readers cannot explain why, as I have already mentioned, the two and a half million reduction of the four million dead to one and a half million at Auschwitz in 1989 is never deducted from the six million the Jews allege died in the holocaust. Here are some other facts the Jews have never explained regarding the holocaust they allege happened to six million of their brethren in World War 2: The World Almanac and Book of Facts for 1945 estimated that in 1939 the population of Jews in the world was 15,688,259, which in 1945 had decreased to 15,192,089. That is a decrease of only 496,170, not 6 million, and by the way, the Almanacs source for these figures is the American Jewish Committee. Furthermore the number of Jews in Europe in 1939 are shown as 8,939,608 and in 1945, 9,372,666, which is a population increase of 422,058 after the alleged holocaust of 6 million. Despite these official figures this did not stop nearly 4 million Jews applying for reparations from Germany after the war, which begs the question that if this many Jews suffered at the hands of the Germans during the war and survived, how many did the Germans actually kill? I cannot see how the Jews can have it both ways, but as pointed out by another prominent researcher into this intrigue, theres no business like Shoah Business! If the Zyklon B gas was used to kill Jews in gas chambers, why were no traces of the chemical ever found within the walls of the gas chambers, when traces have been found in the walls of the delousing chambers, which records indicate the gas was used for: delousing the clothing of camp inmates. This may be why research chemist for 33 years with the Dupont Corporation, Dr. William B. Lindsey stated under oath in Canada in 1985, I have come to the conclusion that no one was willfully or purposefully killed with Zyklon B in this manner. I consider it absolutely impossible. The claim that six million Jews gassed were then incinerated in ovens does not make sense when a number of crematoria experts have confirmed that it takes a minimum of 2 hours to burn one human body in an incinerator, yet the Jews claim the Nazis were burning 25,000 bodies a day at Auschwitz which had only two crematoria ovens. Furthermore the ashes generated by the cremation of 6 million would weigh in at a minimum of 6,000 tonnes (minimum 1 kilogram of ash per body), yet Allied aerial reconnaissance photographs revealed no piles of ash at the concentration camps. Why? No autopsy on even one Jewish body found at the concentration camps has ever proved a Jew was killed by poison gas. Teams of pathologists followed the invasion forces into Europe and did autopsies on thousands of bodies found at the camps. Dr. Larson, pathologist with the Judge Advocate Generals Office led these teams and reported, Not one case of death by poison gas was found. Dr John E. Gordon who was with the United States forces stated, Most deaths in concentration camps were caused, not by starvation or maltreatment, but by typhus. Why are these professional medical accounts missing from the mainstream reporting on the holocaust? If 6 million Jews died as the Jews claim, why is it that the impartial International Red Cross have claimed 271,504 prisoners (not just Jews) died in total throughout the war in the concentration camps, which they even break down in a camp by camp list. Furthermore the Red Cross Report of 1948 explains that most of these casualties were at the end of the war as the saturation bombing by the Allies paralysed the German transport system, and thus no food reached the camps resulting in many inmates dying of starvation. Could this explain the pictures of under-nourished inmates and emaciated corpses? A, Holocaust Survivor, is deemed to be any Jew who lived in any country occupied or controlled by the Nazi regime or; who was forced to flee because of the Nazis. On that basis any Jew who left Europe from 1933 onwards and settled in another country is regarded as a holocaust survivor and thus can claim reparations, despite never so much as having gone near a prison camp. Why? Ill leave the last word to Bobby Fischer, widely regarded as the greatest chess player of all time, who incidentally was Jewish, I exposed the holocaust as never having happened. Totally made up. The Jews are liars. There is not a shred of truth to this holocaust. In 2006, Ernst Zundel, now living in Germany after being deported by Canada is tried for, Holocaust Denial, and faces a maximum five year sentence. In the lead-up to this trial his original lawyer, Horst Mahler is barred from representing him and during the trial his replacement lawyer, Sylvia Stolz is also removed from the court and astonishingly jailed for three and a half years in 2008. She is furthermore stripped of her licence to practice law. So much for a fair judicial system in Germany when you consider lawyers can be jailed for representing their clients. The outcome of this show trial is obviously a foregone conclusion and as expected Ernst Zundel is jailed for the full 5 year term. Finally in 2015 the Fifth Edition of Peter Winters book, The Six Million: Fact or Fiction? is released. In it he states of the French historian, Professor Paul Rassinier, French anti-Nazi and resistance fighter Paul Rassinier was arrested by the Gestapo and imprisoned in Buchenwald concentration camp. After the war, he was elected to the French National Assembly and awarded heroism medals. He was shocked to find that others claimed there were gas chambers at Buchenwald, something he knew was a lie because of his internment there. Rassinier spent the rest of his life exposing the lies behind the Holocaust and, as a result, his memoirs of internment at Buchenwald are ignored by the Holocaust storytellers. In conclusion, rather than those Jew-controlled governments who tell you to believe the official holocaust narrative unless you want to face imprisonment, I present these findings to you and say, Holocaust Or Holohoax? YOU Be The Judge! Andrew Carrington Hitchcock 08 October 2015 P.S. As reported in the mainstream media in August 2015, the Jew Rachel Yehuda, claims holocaust suffering is passed down through DNA, so I guess as the so-called holocaust survivors are dying off, those holocaust reparations are going to be the gift that keeps on giving! Andrew Carrington Hitchcock. All Rights Reserved. You can listen to me reading this article by left clicking the link below. You can download this audio by right clicking the link, then left clicking save link as and finally left clicking the save button. Audio Book Of Holocaust Or Holohoax YOU BE THE JUDGE! I did a Bloodlines show on this article with my guest co-host and Eurofolk Radios, Paul English. You can listen to this show by left clicking the link. You can download this show by right clicking the link, then left clicking save link as and finally left clicking the save button. Holocaust Or Holohaox? You Be The JUDGE! You can download all the Bloodlines shows at the Bloodlines page here

Fair Usage Law

January 18, 2018   Posted in: Ernst Zundel  Comments Closed

German lawyer for far-right activist Ernst Zundel charged …

German prosecutors on Tuesday charged the former lawyer for far-right activist Ernst Zundel with incitement, accusing her of denying the Holocaust and ending one of her legal filings with Heil Hitler. Sylvia Stolz represented Zundel in his first trial, which collapsed after Stolz was banned on grounds she was trying to sabotage the proceedings. Zundels second trial at the Mannheim state court ended last month with his conviction for incitement for denying the Holocaust. Zundel, 67, who was deported from Canada in 2005 and also once lived in Tennessee, was sentenced to the maximum five years in prison. Mannheim prosecutors said in a statement that Stolz herself has now been charged with incitement, attempting to thwart a prosecution and using symbols of a banned organization. During Zundels trial, Stolz repeatedly disputed the Nazis mass murder of Jews, called for hatred of the Jewish population and ended a legal document with the words Heil Hitler, the statement said. The document was freely accessible on the Internet, it added. Stolz does not deny making the statements or writing Heil Hitler on the document. However, she told The Associated Press in a telephone interview that while she anticipated she might be charged, it was part of her fight against what she considers an illegitimate government built upon the postwar allied occupation of Germany. We are under foreign occupation, and this foreign occupation has portrayed Adolf Hitler as a devil for 60 years, but that is not true, she said. But the real truth can only be told when someone attempts to break this taboo. Stolz is also accused of trying to force an end to the proceedings with constant interventions and provocations that disturbed the conduct of the trial. The presiding judge halted Zundels trial last March to ask for Stolzs removal after she denounced the court as a tool of foreign domination and described the Jews as an enemy people in earlier sessions. In April, she was carried out of the court room, shouting Resistance! The German people are rising up, after defying an order for her removal. Prosecutors said they are seeking a ban on Stolz working as a lawyer. This foreign occupation seems threatened and insulted, Stolz said. So telling the truth is prosecuted for slander and the people who speak the truth are silenced, whether theyre attorneys, doctors, engineers or any other profession.http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/story.html?id=5054cd67-0288-4acc-97f8-030224c109c0&k=43333

Fair Usage Law

December 18, 2017   Posted in: Ernst Zundel  Comments Closed

Ernst Zundel interviews Ingrid Rimland (1998) – YouTube

This interview was filmed in 1998 at the “Zundel-Haus” in Toronto, Canada. The ethnic novelist, Ingrid Rimland, discusses her trilogy of books named “Lebensraum” (roughly translated to the English language as “living-space”). It’s a three part epic narrative, spanning seven generations and 200 years !! Here she shares her fascinating personal (and at times.., heart-wrenching !) experiences as a young child in World War II. She also then.., describes her teenage years living in the jungles of Paraguay, South America.., and her personal struggles on the North-American continent as a first-generation immigrant… The video interview is about 1 hour and 45 minutes long.., and is WELL worth the time to watch !! After watching this incredibly well spoken and articulated interview.., do your best to then PASS IT ON.., in whatever way possible… As always.., after watching.., do your best to “pass it on”….. “Truth Does Not Fear Investigation” AND… “He who Wins the War.., also Writes the History”

Fair Usage Law

December 6, 2017   Posted in: Ernst Zundel  Comments Closed

Ernst Zundel, the man who destroyed the Holocaust industry …

Ernst Zundel, one of the great fighters against the Holocaust establishment in the Western world, has recently passed away. His wife put me in contact with him at the end of last month, and we had a very brief correspondence. But I never knew that he was dying. Zundel stirred the ideological pot throughout his life. Long before Zundel passed away, Michael Shermer repeatedly said that Zundel was a very nice guy. But then Shermer ended up writing a book mischaracterizing and misconstruing virtually everything Zundel has said.[1] Zundel was called a threat to national security. Canada once declared that Zndel is inadmissible on security grounds for being a danger to the security of Canada. Zundel was a threat to national security, but no one could judiciously pronounce the nature of his crime. Since Zundel was a threat to national security, his house was burned to the ground because he challenged the Khazaran Bansker Cult, the ideological force that has progressively become, in the words of Yuri Slezkine, The Jewish Century.[2] On May 8, 1995, his Toronto residence at Carlton Street was the target of an arson attack resulting in $400,000 in damage. A group calling itself the Jewish Armed Resistance Movement claimed responsibility for the arson attack; according to the Toronto Sun, the group had ties to the Jewish Defense League and to the extremist group Kahane Chai. The leader of the Toronto wing of the Jewish Defense League, Meir Weinstein, (known then as Meir Halevi) denied involvement in the attack; however, five days later, Weinstein and US JDL leader Irv Rubin were caught trying to break into the Zndel property, where he was apprehended by police. No charges have ever been laid in the incident. Later the same month Zndel was the recipient of a parcel bomb that was detonated by the Toronto Police bomb squad. The investigation into the parcel bomb attack led to charges being laid against David Barbarash, an animal rights activist based in British Columbia, but they were eventually stayed. You burn someones house to the ground and try to kill him, but no charges have ever been laid in the incident. This could only happen again in the Jewish Century, where no one is allowed to question or challenge the central aspect of what is now known as the Holocaust. The media faulted Zundel because Samisdat Publishers, which was then owned by Zundel, released a pamphlet back in 1977 entitled, The Hitler We Love and Why. Zundel, we were told, was an anti-Semite for doing so. Yet in 2011, noted military historian R. H. S. Stolfi of the U.S. Naval Post-graduate School published his study Hitler: Beyond Evil and Tyranny, in which cogently argued that Hitler was rational in making many of his decisions and that the Holocaust establishment has irresponsibly demonized him for ideological purposes. Stolfi declares that he has weighted the great biographies [of Hitler] on the scales of historical reality and found them wanting[3] According to Stolfi, the great biographies do not ask deep questions and fail to address the serious issues surrounding the evolution of Hitler and Nazi Germany. He writes, Virtually every literary piece written about Adolf Hitler in the more than half century since 1945 has been based on antipathy. In a seemingly boundless corpus of writing, every work from the mighty to the insignificant is fundamentally similar in its common revulsion for the man and his national movement. In the most recent great biography, Professor Ian Kershaw begins and ends with detestation. His work is skilled and often brilliant, but he fails to inform the reader of certain characteristics indispensable for true comprehension of the man, and he underestimates the importance of the postwar conditions inflicted by the Allies on Germany, which contributed to Hitlers rise. Bullock, Fest, and Kershaw ascribe criminal features to Hitlers foreign policy from 1933 through 1939, but they fail to correlate it realistically with the Allied imposition of the Versailles Treatythe ultimate manifestation of German defeat and Allied victory following World War I. In the present situation, the reading public has been served only half a portrait of the great tyrant of the twentieth century.half a portrait of Hitler tells us little about the man as a human being and presents a distorted and incredible interpretation of his actions as creator of National Socialism and leader of Germany. The great biographies take excessive liberties in denigrating his person, and, in doing so, they make it difficult to comprehend himEvery single one falls short of producing an adequate understanding of Hitler as a historical person. To this point in time, the biographers have lost the biographical war.[4] In a review of Stolfis work, biographer Carl Rollyson writes in theStar Tribune, Stolfi is no apologist for Hitler in the sense of minimizing his culpability for the Holocaust and the war, but the biographer wants to understand, even empathize, with the man. He portrays Hitlers great personal courage during World War I as an intrepid combat soldier, and afterward as a man who personally waged war in the streets of Germany against Marxist street gangs. Stolfi quotes Thomas Manns reluctant admission that Hitler was an artist, and shows, in detail, Hitlers consummate understanding of opera and architecture and how those arts shaped his view of history and modern Germany. Most important, however, Stolfi analyzes Hitler as a world leader of astonishing capability, a leader unlike any other politician of his time. Hitler was a messiah, wishing to create a new Germany unencumbered by the restrictions of the Versailles Treaty that crippled German politics and the countrys economy.[5] I shook my head in dismay largely because David Irving has been saying almost the same thing inHitlers War. Zundel has also been punished for saying the same thing. Yet to this very day the Holocaust establishment charges both Irving and Zundel of being vicious anti-Semites! I was even appalled by a statement made by Mimi Frank of the Jewish Book Council: I personally found it difficult to readHitler: Beyond Evil and Tyranny, because I, like the other biographers, have a hard time overlooking the evil deeds of Hitler and concentrating instead upon his supposed genius. Stolfi characterizes Hitler as a rare world historical figure, compared with the likes of Alexander the Great, Napoleon, and Julius Caesar. He clearly presents an alternate view from all the other major biographers of Adolf Hitler, but not a view that I can share.[6] What we are seeing here is that the so-called Holocaust has never been about establishing historically rigorous scholarship and criteria. At least for Frank, it boils down to personal opinion. Frank cannot share Stolfis views not because he has rigorous evidence to the contrary, but because Stolfis analysis does not line up with Franks ideological premises. In any event, Stolfis study, like IrvingsHitlers War, is an important book and it will more than likely stand the test of time. If Zundel was evil, what about Benjamin Netanyahu? Let us assume for a moment that Zundel was wrong, that his then publisher should not have written the pamphlet praising Hitler. Let us further assume that Zundel was a vicious anti-Semite for doing so. Are we going to apply the same logic to Benjamin Netanyahu, who praised the Red Army which ended up killing more than twenty million innocent men, women, and children?[7] Is Netanyahus palace going to be razed to the ground any time soon for praising Bolshevism? Why the double standard? Moreover, organized Jewry will not ban Hollywood, despite the fact that Hollywood collaborated with Hitler![8]David Mikics ofTablet Magazinecalls this a creepy love affair.[9] Mikics says that some of the Hollywood studio heads, nearly all of whom were Jewish, cast their lot with Hitler almost from the moment he took power, and that they did so eagerlynot reluctantly.[10] Since Hollywood has largely and progressively become a Jewish town,[11]and since Zundel does not ally with that particular town, Zundel was ontologically an anti-Semite who deserved to be punished. The simple fact is that Zundel never denied that Jews suffered and died at the hands of Nazi Germany. What he questioned was did six million really die? If we take a number of Jewish historians seriously (Bauer and Reitlinger), the answer is no. The 1985 Trial The gas chamber controversy again became an issue that refused to go away in 1985 when Raul Hilberg was summoned to testify at the trial of Zundel, who was also accused of spreading false news. (Keep in mind that Hilberg was the first Holocaust historian and many Holocaust historians and scholars had relied on his voluminous work, The Destruction of the European Jews, which was first published in 1961. It was reprinted intact in 1967 and 1979.) All of that changed in 1985. Zundels attorney, Douglas Christie, pressed Hilberg to give historical evidence of an Hitler order to exterminate all Jews in Germany, a claim which Hilberg made in The Destruction of the European Jews. Hilberg eventually confessed that no such order existed. Then Christie on moved on to his next point: evidence for the gas chamber theory. What do you mean by a scientific report?, asked Hilberg. I dont usually have to define simple words, said Christie, but by scientific report I mean a report conducted by anyone who purported to be a scientist and who examined physical evidence. Name one report of such a kind that showed the existence of gas chambers anywhere in Nazioccupied territory. I still dont quite understand the import of your question, said Hilberg. Are you referring to a German, or a post-war I dont care whoGerman, post-war, Allied, Sovietany source at all. Name one, said Christie. To prove what?, asked Hilberg. To conclude that they have physically seen a gas chamber. One scientific report, repeated Christie. I am really at loss. I am very seldom at such a loss, but Judge Locke interrupted: Doctordo you know of such a report? No, replied Hilberg.[12] The debate became interesting when Christie asked Hilberg about some of his sources, particularly Kurt Gerstein, who allegedly witnessed the gassing of some 3,000 Jews in camps such as Belzec and Treblinka.[13] Gerstein maintained that there were between 28 and 32 people per square meter in a room 1.8 meter high. Moreover, he maintained before he committed suicide in a French prison that at least 20 million people were gassed. Hilberg used Gerstein as a testimony six times in his book.[14] Christie told Hilberg that a person like that would be either crazy or a liar, to which Hilberg responded: Well, on this particular datum I would be very careful because Gerstein, apparently, was a very excitable person. He was capable of all kinds of statements Christie produced the Gerstein statement and proceeded to ask Hilberg whether certain statements appeared in the statement. Hilberg agreed that in his statement, Gerstein alleged that 700-800 persons were crushed together in 25 square metres in 45 cubic metres; he also agreed that he had ignored this part of Gersteins statement in his book And he refers to Hitler and Himmler witnessing gassings, right?, asked Christie. Hilberg agreed that Gerstein had made this statement and that it was absolutely and totally false Christie asked Hilberg whether he considered Gersteins statementthat at Belzec and Treblinka nobody bothered to make a count and that in fact about 25 million people, not only Jews, were actually killedwas credible? Well, parts of it are true, and other parts of it are sheer exaggeration, manifest and obvious exaggeration. To me, the important point made in this statement is that there were no counting at the point at which people entered the gas chamber, said Hilberg.[15] Hilberg eventually admitted that the evidence for mass murder in the eastern camps came directly from the Soviets. The whole site, suggested Christie, was within the Soviet sphere of control, and nobody from the west was allowed into those camps to investigate, isnt that right? Well, I dont know of any requests made to investigateWhen you say no one was allowed, it implies some request, said HilbergAll I could say is, I know of no Western investigators early on in Auschwitz, or any of Treblinka?, asked Christie. Well, there was no more Treblinka in 1945. Sobibor? That was no more. Majdanek? Majdanek is another matter. Was there anybody from the West that went to Majdaneck?, asked Christie. Not to my knowledge. Belzec? Belzec was the first camp to have been obliterated. Chelmno or Stuftthof? No, sir. Auschwitz or Birkenau? No.[16] Finally, Christie confronted Hilberg with another source which he had quoted as a witness for mass murderRudolf Franz Ferdinand Hoss, who was an SS lieutenant colonel from 1940 to 1943, and was one of the first commandants of Auschwitz. Hilberg cites Hoss as one of his authorities, but Christie asked Hilberg why he mentioned Wolzek, a non-existent camp, in his book: Yes, I have seen that garbled reference, said Hilberg. It may have been Belzec. Its very hard, if the man did not write anything, if he said things, if he was tired, if he was misunderstood, if he misspoke himself Christie pointed out that Hoss referred to Belzec as well as Wolzek. I suggested to you, he said to Hilberg, that there is a reason to believe that this man was not only being obliged to sign a confession in a language he didnt understand, but things were being put into a statement for him that were patently absurd, like Gerstein. There was obvious confusion in this one statement, said Hilberg. Christie produced Nuremberg document 3868-PS, the Hoss affidavit. Hilberg agreed he had seen the document before and agreed he had seen the Wolzek reference. Yes, Ive seen that reference. Its terrible. Its obvious that something wasnt quite right about that individual, would you agree?, asked Christie. No, I wouldnt say that something wasnt quite right about the individual, said Hilberg. I would say that something wasnt quite right about the circumstances under which this was made as an affidavit.[17] Hilbergs second edition of his voluminous work was ready to go to press that same year. Within weeks after the trial, Hilberg made sure thata Hitler order for the Final Solution, a point which he argued in the first edition, was removed completely, without an explanation. Historian Christopher Browning, who believes that Hitlers 1941 speech to the Gauleiters may have alluded to a Hitler order and who also believes that the argument over whether Hitler gave an order or not is not commonly part of the issue of Holocaust denial because enough reputable historians like Hans Mommsen and Martin Broszat do not believe in it,[18] was quite surprised that Hilberg would make such a decision.[19] Yet in an interview with journalist D. D. Guttenplan, Hilberg said that he made the change in the interest of precision about the evidence,[20] and never mentioned the trial during which he was asked to provide evidence for the assertion and could not. Deep down Hilberg believed a Hitler order still existed, even though he had no evidence.[21] In 1988, Hilberg was asked to testify against Zundel by prosecutor John Pearson, but this time he refused. Here is a confidential letter, which Hilberg sent to Pearson, in which he laid the whole issue out: I have grave doubts about testifying in the Zndel case again. Last time, I testified for a day under direct examination and for three days under cross-examination. Were I to be in the witness box for a second time, the defense would be asking not merely the relevant and irrelevant questions put to me during the first trial, but it would also make every attempt to entrap me by pointing to any seeming contradiction, however trivial the subject might be, between my earlier testimony and an answer that I might give in 1988. The time and energy required to ward off such an assault would be great, and I am afraid that the investment of time alone would be too much, given all the commitments and deadlines I am facing now.[22] The interesting thing is that Michael Shermer never even remotely mentioned the Zundel trial in his entire book! It is now obvious that the Holocaust establishment is a package deal, and that package deal is riddled with unanswered questions. Once again we are forced to ask: how was the establishment able to persecute Zundel when he was simply asking for serious evidence for extraordinary claims? Well, J. J. Goldberg and other Jewish writers and scholars have always had the freedom to brag about Jewish Power.[23] Its only the Goyim who cant talk about these issues without being called disgusting names. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CpBifRBbu8 [1] See Michael Shermer and Alex Grubman, Denying History: Who Says the Holocaust Never Happened and Why Do They Say It? (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002). [2] Yuri Slezkine, The Jewish Century (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004). [3] R. H. S. Stolfi,Hitler: Beyond Evil and Tyranny(New York: Prometheus Books, 2011), 11. [4] Ibid., 11, 12, 17. [5] Carl Rollyson, Biography Review: Hitler: Beyond Evil and Tyranny,Star Tribune, January 14, 2012. [6] Mimi Frank, Hitler: Beyond Evil and Tyranny,Jewish Book Council,http://www.jewishbookcouncil.org/book/hitler-beyond-evil-and-tyranny. [7] For similar studies, see for example Jean-Louis Pann and Andrzej Paczkowski, The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999); Norman M. Naimark, Stalins Genocide (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2010); Steven Rosefielde, Red Holocaust (New York: Routledge, 2010); Robert Conquest, The Harvest of Sorrow: Soviet Collectivization and the Terror-Famine (New York: Oxford University Press, 1987). [8] See for example Ben Urwand, The Collaboration: Hollywoods Pact with Hitler (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2013); Thomas Doherty,Hollywood and Hitler, 1933-1939(New York: Columbia University Press, 2013). [9] David Mikics, Hollywoods Creepy Love Affair With Adolf Hitler, in Explosive New Detail,Tablet Magazine, June 10, 2013. [10] Ibid. [11] See for example Neal Gabler,Empire of their Own: How the Jews Invented Hollywood(New York: Anchor Books, 1988). [12] Jurgen Graf, The Giant with Feet of Clay (Chicago: Theses & Dissertations Press, 2001), 113-114.

Fair Usage Law

November 25, 2017   Posted in: Ernst Zundel  Comments Closed

Talk:Ernst Zndel – Wikipedia

Quote section[edit] This quote section contains numerous cherry-picked quotes in what seems to me an attempt to paint the subject in a certain light. How necessary is this section? Shouldn’t this just be merged into the article? It seems to violate Wikipedia’s NPOV policy pretty badly to me. Some of these violate context pretty blatantly, for example – Zndel has presented himself delivering warnings to the Jews, not making threats to them as the holocaust quote would imply, for example. And how would you “balance” it? By just adding more quotes? What a mess, just merge them into the article if they are really that necessary. I’ve deleted it once with this reasoning before, however it was simply restored. :bloodofox: 03:07, 19 February 2007 (UTC) The quotations do not express the views of any editor or any source other than Zundel himself. I don’t see an NPOV issue. Gazpacho 07:47, 23 February 2007 (UTC) I changed the quote in the Ancestry section to something that actually presents Zundel’s opinion about his ancestry. The previous quote was of Zundel saying “No” to the question of whether he could be certain that he had no Jewish ancestry. This is really a meaningless statement, because Zundel was simply admitting a lack of certainty on a question about which nobody can be completely certain. Zundel was not expressing an opinion, merely conceding a possibility. Instead I put a different quote from the same source wherein Zundel says that in his opinion his maternal grandfather, Isidor Mayer, was not Jewish. Hadding (talk) 23:34, 27 September 2009 (UTC) Here is the interview that the newspaper article (http://hugequestions.com/Eric/TFC/Toronto-Sun-Zundel-Jewish-2005.html) quotes and which the wiki article is using as a source: https://archive.org/details/InterviewWithErnstZundel Nowhere in that interview does he say he suspects he’s part Jewish. I’m going to remove that section until someone finds a more credible source, or, if you can find any source at all ascribing this (I haven’t found a single one and I’ve spent the last two months studying him for a paper). Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.96.34.86 (talk) 00:16, 5 October 2014 (UTC) The very beginning of this article is nothing but an intentional, flagrantly kitsch attempt to mislead readers of the true motives of this man. Ernst Zundel is NOT AT ALL “promoting” “Holocaust Denial”. He is simply questioning the “official” Holocaust story. He is a purveyor of the truth not a Nazi sympathizer. He is asking for credible, verifiable and above all accurate explanations on many aspects of the established Holocaust narrative, with one, and ONLY one, goal in mind: The quest for the TRUTH. There is a clear difference between denying and questioning. The ADL and the CBC (a network owned by jewish interests) that published a clearly biased article, cannot be accepted as serious reference sources. Wikipedia should remain neutral and unbiased, not becoming partisan in political debates. Wikipedia’s role is not to promote unverifiable events only documented well established facts. Obsuring the truth, propagating lies and (70+ years after the end of WWII) maintaining all these half-truths by the jewish establishment is unacceptable. We should all help and protect people like Zundel who at the expense of destroying their well established prosperous lives have agonized to help the world discover the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.63.60.100 (talk) 17:04, 30 September 2015 (UTC) Is this last comment by Jpgordon supposed to promote the right to free thought/speech? Obviously not. Then why one of you “admins” did not remove it so far? Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.176.243.174 (talk) 13:14, 24 August 2016 (UTC) This probably needs inclusion in the artical somehow considering it’s relevance. It’s the ruling that Zundel was deported under. Although the ruling is suspended for one year current detainees have been granted bail and are free to leave the country. “Canada’s Supreme Court struck down a controversial anti-terror law on Friday (23/02/2007) that allows foreign suspects to be detained indefinitely without trial on the basis of secret evidence. The court ruled unanimously that the government had broken the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by issuing so-called security certificates to imprison people, pending deportation, without giving them a chance to see the government’s case. The court suspended the ruling for a year to allow Parliament time to rewrite the relevant part of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act — under which the certificates are issued. The Supreme Court ruling said one way to improve the system of certificates would be to appoint a special advocate to challenge the security evidence.” (c) Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. Wayne 22:49, 24 February 2007 (UTC) The above information – deported using an unconstitutional law, would fit in nicely at the end of the “detention and deportation” section of the article. I believe Zundel was hustled out of the country while this law was being questioned. 159.105.80.63 17:58, 14 March 2007 (UTC) The article mentions that he lost both constitutional challenges – I believe a rewrite is in order ( he won both eventually – maybe only the last? ). No mention either of the invaluable aid given by the US government in withholding evidence that he was not a security threat – give credit where it is due. Also the Canadian government helped by withholding evidence as long as they could – bravo ( I think they were hoping the old guy would die in solitary but he just wouldn’t ). Both governments acted like they were under severe pressure but we all know that can’t be true.159.105.80.63 18:06, 14 March 2007 (UTC) In the article it mentions that the West German government notified the Canadian Jewish Council of Zundel’s publishing. Do governments usually notify various Jewish Councils if they want something done? What did the Jewish Council do – do they have an official role in Canadian government affairs?159.105.80.141 15:10, 28 March 2007 (UTC) Why was the ban on his mailing lifted in 1983 – was it an illegal ban? The eventual overturning of bans, convictions, etc against Zundel in Canada by the Supreme Court seems to point to pressure on the government from someone ( CJC maybe?). You article in being partial fair to a close reader may undo itself – who edited this by leaving in some facts and still keeping the shrill(there is probably a better word, accusatory maybe) tone – bravo.159.105.80.141 15:14, 28 March 2007 (UTC) Do any of these articles ever get redone – uncited garbage seems to take precedence over facts. Editors who state that an article needs to be improved – toward the truth – get ignored. Even discussion pages get altered if they get too uncomfortable. Good work.159.105.80.141 18:46, 28 March 2007 (UTC) No mention of his house being firebombed. No arresets I believe. No investigation? Maybe that it why he left Canada – RCMP seemed to be unable to act. Did Irving have similar problems? The dangerous deniers seem to get burned, beaten, etc by those nice liberals at will.159.105.80.141 14:55, 3 April 2007 (UTC) It is fairly hard to find articles on the arson and pipe bomb attacks against Zundel – Canadian sources seem to have alrgely dried up. However, and I hate to do use this as a source, nizkor has an article on Zundel that mentions the event ( arson and pipe bombs ) so I guess we can get past the question of whether it happened. Archives mention the JDL, the terrorist organization ( citation – FBI records )members, Krugel and Rubin, being involved. I believe Mr Rubin even boasted publically about the Zundel arson. I have seen extensive reports on these events and the news articles to go with them – maybe on Zundelsite, etc. But except for the good work of nizkor and McVay? this story appears to be headed for burial. 159.105.80.141 13:57, 10 May 2007 (UTC) On the Zundelsite- from which you can get the details and citations – some really hilarious trivia. It appears that the FBI/CIA/USA evidence that was used in Canada to help claasify ( and justify US actions ) involved mut]ltiple steps. It appears that Mr Zundel had once known ( slightly) a Mr Pierce – long since dead – who had written the Turner Diaries. The Turner Diaries were in turn read by Mr McVeigh ( the world reknown bomb design expert of ok bombing fame ). Therefore Mr Zundel is a terrorist. It’s the best humor piece you will ever read. There is far more on his site – original news articles, etc.159.105.80.141 14:16, 10 May 2007 (UTC) Sorry – the above report about Zundel/Pierce/McVeigh was actually a court document I believe, it just is amusing. Zundel also has the transcript used to jail Rubin or Krugel – the JDL terorists – where they bragged about the arson activities. The pipe bombs were known by the RCMP but they still got through the mail, but Zundel called them up and declined to open them himself.159.105.80.141 14:23, 10 May 2007 (UTC) RE his ancestory. The mothers family is almost certainlt Jewish. The village where they came from was predominately Jewish. Zundel still thinks the holocaust is bunkum – he must be a self-hating Jew. Even Zundel, at one time, thought that Israel might be his best chance at emmigration ( until the got denial laws – fairly recently)( that he entertained that scenario seems to seal the deal).159.105.80.141 14:30, 10 May 2007 (UTC) Citation – aratoronto.com – they document the arson and pipe bombing. They appear to be in favor of arson and pipe bombs judging from their comments – they say they just got beat to the punch by some group with a similar name. The Zundel site gives the complete police deposition with lots of background info on the widespread police investigation – when others beyond Zundel ( and it escalated to murder attempts )got threatened the Canadians finally stomped on the festivities. 159.105.80.141 14:55, 10 May 2007 (UTC) It appears that Irving, Rudolf, Zundel, … are just the tip of the iceberg. In a recent 12 month period there have been over 17,000 thought-crime prosecutions just in Germany. Even one 90+ year old woman who just wrote a letter. I never guessed that the high-profile cases were hiding a jail-busting surge. Singing the traditional first stanza of the German national anthem can get you a jail sentence and/or a big debt. One of Zundel’s attorneys was forced to get a psychiatric evaluation when she tried to mount ( a good word in this situation )a defense. I have heard of that being done – but I thought it was only under Stalin ( I guess I was wrong – I wonder if this is part of the Patriot Act ie getting a psych test ).159.105.80.141 14:34, 18 May 2007 (UTC) The unintended humor in these articles is endless. Reading the main article, the section on whether or not Zundel is part Jewish seems really childish – but for the hell of it I clicked the link to the newspaper article. It turns out that the quote comes from a tabloid ( ie the Enquirer Israeli style ). Do they do Paris and Britney stories, how about Elvis sightings. If a tabloid is a “reliable source” then where in the rankings of “reliable sources” does say nizkor stand ( let’s have a poll – consensus of peer reviewed wikians or something along those lines).159.105.80.141 17:48, 18 May 2007 (UTC)PS If the tabloid is really the primary source used by the author of this piece then I may want to deny/revise any comments on Zundels Jewsih origins. 159.105.80.141 11:32, 21 May 2007 (UTC) “local police” – the local police that arrested him were INS agents ( several – many ). They didn’t bother with a warrant – or a hearing or much else. A hearing is supposed to be required, plus the fact that you are appplying for permanent residency status by reason of marriage to an American citizen usually gives you extra slack ( Zundel may have been the fastest deportation in INS history – certainly of someone married to a US citizen ). The memos floating around in the INS computers would make for some good reading I’ll bet. Zundel appears to have been spirited out of the US for violating a fairly obscure provisional of immigration law which had actually lapsed ( no longer the law ) before he came to live in the US. His trial in Germany was not based on anything he had done in Germany ( he hadn’t lived in Germany for decades ). Zuundel is unique, in that it seems that none of the legal manueveuring used by the US and Canada have ever been used in another case – we are all safer because of the good work of the INS, FBI, CICS and RCMP and our fast acting court systems who are not afraid to cut corners in an emergency. Of course we should not forget the various Jewish Councils who told these groups what and when and whatfor.159.105.80.141 19:30, 18 May 2007 (UTC) Irme Finta – even the trivia of this article is good. Finta eventually won acquittal. Last time this law was used on a Canadian – Zundel actually hurt himself ( now Canada deports yuo to a country that will convict you – rendition of a sort ).The court of appeals said that a defense of following orders is okay – Canadian law sure has some strange quirks).159.105.80.141 19:53, 18 May 2007 (UTC) regarding the bombing of zundels house i have a vhs video of his court cases thre is footage in there that i will make available this is taken from canadian television. it seems to me that in order for someone to be hounded like he has been seems like someone is after this holocaust denier bigtime. this holocast(shoah) is open to serious debate. in some countriesyou get IMPRISONED for denying that there were gas chambers if they existed let people believe that the earth is flat are you going to imprison them too. .zundel also made available all the hate calls he recieved death threats etc. i will make this video available where there reporters from canadian tv showing the pipe bomb damage Dwnndog (talk) 15:47, 22 May 2008 (UTC) robert schmidt is taken from the reference http://www.verfassungsschutz-bw.de/rechts/files/r_sonstige_2007_03.htm English summary in article: I reverted the incorrect edit of Jpgordon who moved this sentence out of the referenced paragraph and asked for citation. –85.181.42.117 21:51, 30 May 2007 (UTC) FURs added for image use with Ernst Zndel and Holocaust denial articles. Best, A Sniper (talk) 00:58, 24 May 2008 (UTC) New readers to this article should be certain to read the first archive, particularly the last section. The closest it appears that Mr Zundel came to being a “terrorist “was his “opposition to multiculturalism”. I wonder what “o t m” means. Most of his fame is in saying that the Jews are lying about the holocaust, how “o t m” fits in is humorous. I hope the old guy has been given a chair, an upgrade from Canadian jails, and some paper and a pencil/pen/sharpener/stamps….159.105.80.141 (talk) 19:14, 17 July 2008 (UTC) Best, Manhattan Samurai (talk) 19:31, 17 July 2008 (UTC) (moved from top of page) Zundel has notoriety mainly because he republished Did Six Million Really Die? in Canada, and stood trial for it from 1985 until 1992 when the Supreme Court of Canada declared the law under which he had been charged unconstitutional. Zundel also has notoriety for the case that he assembled during this series of trials, including the commissioning of the Leuchter Report and other expert testimony. Zundel has never called himself a neo-nazi and you have not really provided any direct evidence that he was a neo-nazi. You only provided examples of some people calling him that. This is not the way to write an objective article. As for Holocaust denier, I don’t think that it needs to be demonstrated that this is a pejorative equivalent to historical revisionist. You show bias in using this term, and you have not made the slightest effort to demonstrate that it is not derogatory. Hadding The point that is being missed here is that denier has a negative connotation. It has that connotation because it implies a leap to a pre-determined conclusion without any demonstration. Robert Faurisson and Ernst Zundel reject the label “denier” because of that. If the revisionists have no arguments, then what are the Leuchter, Lueftl, and Rudolf reports? The application of the label denier, which has that negative connotation, is certainly POV. Hadding (talk) 10:21, 30 September 2009 (UTC) I think you are being dishonest with your refusal to acknowledge that Zundel has been labeled in a hostile manner. There is a good reason why people (like Deborah Lipstadt) actively opposed to Zundel insist on labeling him a “denier” rather than a revisionist, and a fairly good reason why Zundel and others allied with him see this label as undesirable. The uncritical parroting of that obviously hostile label is definitely POV. Hadding (talk) 15:46, 1 October 2009 (UTC) “Denier” is a dismissive term. To address Zundel’s arguments would be fair, but to imply with the label denier that he has no arguments that deserve addressing is completely presumptuous. Hadding (talk) 16:16, 1 October 2009 (UTC) The article doesn’t say, but where did Zundel publish his hate literature? Did he ever actually publish anything in Germany? –65.127.188.10 (talk) 00:09, 3 June 2009 (UTC) I believe he hadn’t lived in Germany since he was a child. His publishing was mostly in Canada, which has a similar constitutional free speech to the USA. 159.105.80.122 (talk) 19:12, 6 August 2010 (UTC) One does not find a “Communism” summary box when looking at the biography of Karl Marx, so why is the AntiSemitism summary box displayed on the right-hand side for Ernst Zundel. This would imply he is the ‘poster child’ for antisemitism. It is inconsistent with how other biographies are structured. Thanks. [dar] Preceding unsigned comment added by Dkar3 (talk contribs) 05:22, 5 July 2009 (UTC) That just means that the other articles in the Antisemitism category need to be changed, and is not an excuse to have it on the right hand side like that for a biography. I’m taking it out. If someone feels the need to add it back then we can let a moderator decide this. Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.191.176.207 (talk) 12:39, 4 August 2009 (UTC) There are problems with pinning the label “Antisemitism” on Zundel. On the various occasions when he has been asked if he hated or disliked Jews, he has always said no. One of his early great influences and a friend was J.G. Burg, a Jew who wrote a Holocaust revisionist book called Schuld und Schicksal, and he has had other friends of Jewish heritage, including Ditlieb Felderer who worked in his defense team in the 1980s. Zundel’s agenda is rehabilitation of the reputation of the German people, not attacking Jews. The label Antisemitism has been put on Zundel by some people who wanted to stigmatize his message as hate, but it’s impossible to reconcile that label with some of the facts about him. Hadding (talk) 00:28, 30 September 2009 (UTC) A Sniper says that “the only reason this article exists, and why Zundel has notoriety, is in the subject area of antisemitism.” This is completely untrue. Zundel’s fame is based mainly on the fact that he was subjected to a series of trials in Canada because of something that he had published. He fought the False News charge all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada where the law was ruled unconstitutional. Regardless of the subject-matter involved, Zundel would be notable for that. When you say that the label “Antisemitism” is applicable to Zundel, you are alleging a motive. You are imputing a motive which many others have gratuitously imputed, but which is not in evidence. The label is unsupported by Zundel’s own statements about his motive. You are making the tacit assumption that antisemitism is the only possible reason why somebody would question the Holocaust, and it simply is not the case. With that assumption you have some difficult explaining ahead of you in regard to J.G. Burg, Roger Dommergue Polacco de Menasce, Ditlieb Felderer, and a few other Holocaust revisionists of Jewish ethnicity that I could name. In other words, what is missing is a demonstration that Zundel is antisemitic apart from the fact that a lot of people say so. Hadding (talk) 16:33, 1 October 2009 (UTC) You are referring to opinions, not facts. “Denier” instead of revisionist is an opinion. When you say that Zundel published “what is considered antisemitic material,” you are explicitly admitting that it is somebody’s opinion. If some Jews are saying that they agree with what Zundel published, how is it even a tenable opinion? People in various countries have published Did Six Million Really Die? without becoming famous, because they didn’t endure a series of trials for it. It’s the prosecution of Ernst Zundel that made him famous. Instead of Antisemitism, Zundel should be categorized under a banner that says Free Speech or something like that. Hadding (talk) 20:10, 1 October 2009 (UTC) We are not talking about two different things. It’s just that you insist on citing opinions as if they were facts. If 10,000 “reliable sources” (as you see them) says that Ernst Zundel is a very bad man, it does not thereby become an objective truth. It’s still just somebody’s opinion. I think it would be very easy to “paint a picture of Zundel as anything other than an antisemitic publisher of hate literature” as I have already pointed out, simply by referring to Zundel’s explanations of his own motives.Hadding (talk) 21:49, 1 October 2009 (UTC) “reliable sources” seem to not be very reliable. for example medical journals used to publish that sex more than once a year was unhealthy. to say the contrary even to those that are thinking it is plainly obvious, there woould be no reliable source that could say that. but many sources state that zundel is not antisemitic although many people who read him are. Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.64.245.140 (talk) 23:31, 3 November 2009 (UTC) Show me a reliable source that states what you do not understand. 98.64.245.140 (talk) 00:28, 6 November 2009 (UTC) You think truth is based on credential and not reason. At least you can admit that you are lost. 98.64.245.140 (talk) 01:19, 9 November 2009 (UTC) I think Sniper is just making a simple misstep in reasoning here. If for instance the “Washington Post” or some other big “reliable source” says Zundel is a neo-nazi, and Zundel himself says he is not, than is he guilty until proven innocent? That judgment would be POV. Wikipedia should say “alleged neo-nazi” rather than simply “neo-nazi”. Looking at it this way it seems flat out bizarre to limit the info in this wiki to anything less. This phrasing would cover, subtly, quite a bit more information, all easily verifiable. That said, I have deleted the “neo-nazi” tag from the intro for the time being, as the sources provided do not directly label Zundel as a neo-nazi, only his “actions” and his “type of actions”. If better sources can be provided, they should be. If/when that happens, I assert my case that the word “alleged” should precede “neo-nazi”. Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.73.165.8 (talk) 03:32, 24 March 2010 (UTC) Does anyone know where in Canada he lived? I recall reading somewhere that he resided in Yale, BC, or somewhere in the Lower Fraser Valley. Does anyone know for sure? — 05:14, 28 August 2010 (UTC) This guy is listed as a Holocaust denier but the article seems to lack examples demonstrating this. Could someone provide them? The closest I could find of actions of his that might actually evidence it are his publication company producing: However that’s pretty vague and lacks quotes from this literature. It’s possible that the intrepretation of his literature might be extreme and he’s not actually a denier. To allow readers to choose for themselves I think an excerpt or two with examples of phrases that indicate he’s actually denying it. The one quote I did see here spoke of embellishment, but speaking about Holocaust being embellished (as opposed to concocted) is holocaust revisionism, not denial. While he did publish (though not write) “Did Six Million Really Die?”, that too sounds like a potentially revisionistic rather than denial book. DB (talk) 08:09, 26 April 2011 (UTC) BAn RfC: Which descriptor, if any, can be added in front of Southern Poverty Law Center when referenced in other articles? has been posted at the Southern Poverty Law Center talk page. Your participation is welcomed. MrX 16:41, 22 September 2012 (UTC) Really? It looks like an attempt at discrediting his views and seriously, it has no importance whether he has Jewish ancestry or not. Drosldrosl (talk) 06:56, 4 April 2015 (UTC) I agree. Because of no other comments since, I am removing it. Zezen (talk) 12:17, 30 August 2015 (UTC) Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Ernst Zndel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes: When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know. You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request. If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp= on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors. Cheers. cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:35, 29 August 2015 (UTC) The article is confused. On one hand it is said that he admitted that the UFO claims were just for publicity, yet it is said that “Zndel continued to defend these views as late as 2002”. That implies that he continued to claim that the UFO claims were real – at least that is how the Wikipedia article on the Nazi UFO’s interprets the same statement. Yet that claim follows immediately after him being quoted as admitting that it is fiction – which incidentally is surely obvious. Why doesn’t the article simply state that he has admitted that the books are fiction?Royalcourtier (talk) 09:29, 5 September 2015 (UTC) “Why doesn’t the article” – maybe someone wants to imply something. Just a possibility. They must not be Star Wars/Trek fans, maybe another bunch of nuts. 2601:181:8000:D6D0:C41D:4BC2:C8E2:260D (talk) 13:42, 29 December 2015 (UTC) It seems he died today. I got an unconfirmed report on this. –105.7.182.244 (talk) 18:48, 6 August 2017 (UTC) I have tried to put quotation marks around this term as it implies or rather gives the impression Herr Zndel is a racist, which is without foundation, but twice it was removed. Here is the passage in question: “The anti-racist efforts included participation by numerous Toronto activist groups”. Now the lack quotes around the term “anti-racist” would suggest that the efforts were indeed objectively and demonstrably anti-racist and not merely the claims of a person, group, organization etc. We see this quite frequently in the media in order for journalists to avoid imparting a personal meaning or understanding of a word as would appear to the public, thus ensure neutrality. Lastly, I tried changing the term to “anti-racists'” which would be more fitting and less charged and was again shot down. For an encyclopedia that claims to be open, it takes an awful lot of effort to add two bytes of data into an article. Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.63.105.34 (talk) 17:31, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Fair Usage Law

November 24, 2017   Posted in: Ernst Zundel  Comments Closed

Ernst Zundel and the Charlottesville alt-right riots …

Watch this weeks False Flag Weekly Newsabove, and click HERE for links to the stories we covered, and HERE to support FFWN. By Kevin Barrett, Veterans Today Editor On the latest False Flag Weekly News, Prof. Tony Hall and I discussed the recent passing of two alternative icons, Jim Marrs and Ernst Zundel. We noted that Marrs whose interests included the JFK assassination, ETs, secret societies, and New World Order bankers rated a friendly mainstream newspaper obituary. Zundel, by contrast, deserved to die in agony, according to the Toronto Sun. Marrs and Zundel both questioned orthodox histories. Both espoused controversial ideas. So why was Marrs mainstream-friendly, and Zundel mainstream-toxic? The question practically answers itself. Marrs rarely if ever offended Jews, Zionists, or Israelis. The same cannot be said of Zundel, whose World War II revisionism violated the only sacred taboo left in an otherwise anything-goes culture. Obviously Zionists dominate mainstream discourse. Thats why you can say pretty much any damn thing you want, as long as you dont question their sacred tribal taboos. I was thinking of Zundel while watching surreal video of the alt-right riots in Charlottesville. The white nationalists, like Zundel, think they are innocently standing up for their country and their ethnicity, in a hostile environment in which they are inculcated with guilt just for being who they are. Zundel, it seems to me, has a point. The German people have been guilt-tripped almost to death, force-fed a false narrative that focuses entirely on the war crimes of their own ancestors, while downplaying or ignoring the equal or greater war crimes of their ancestors enemies. Why should Germans still be paying tribute to Israel? Why should they be participating in the post-9/11 holocaust of 32 million Muslims a holocaust incited by and for Greater Israel? Richard Spencer and the American white nationalist movement seem to think white Americans, like Germans, have been brainwashed into loathing their ancestors and their culture. Thats why Spencers so upset over the removal of a Robert E. Lee statue. I agree with him that we should not be purging statues of leaders we dont like. Tearing down statues, like burning books, is an effort to destroy historical memories. Keep the statues and use them to start a discussion. But Spencer is mostly wrong. White Americans, unlike Germans, have not succumbed to false historical narratives exaggerating their ancestors crimes. On the contrary, the mainstream version of US history, despite recent inroads of political correctness, is still a feel-good national greatness mythology that downplays the enormous crimes of white Americans ancestors (and todays white Americans themselves) crimes which dwarf those attributed to the Germans. The real source of Americas national greatness, to the extent it has any, is its tradition as a haven for dissidents and free-thinkers of all races and creeds. Americanism is an idea not a race. (And the white race is a dubious construct to begin with.) That is why the alt-right is alt-wrong. White nationalism is barking up the wrong tree. I hope it withers away before more people get killed.

Fair Usage Law

November 23, 2017   Posted in: Ernst Zundel  Comments Closed

The (Chosen) People vs. Ernst Zundel – Taki’s Magazine

Ernst Zundel In the forty-year battle between Ernst Zundel and the Jews, I think we can finally declare a winner. Hold on to your hats, folks, because the end result is a real shocker. In Harry Caray voice: Jews win! Jews win! Zundel, for those of you who dont know, is a 78-year-old Holocaust denier and Hitler-lover. And when I say Hitler-lover, Im not using the term the way leftists do when referring to anyone slightly to the right of the Weather Underground. The living room of Zundels former home in Pigeon Forge, Tenn., is adorned with a painting of Hitler and Zundel hugging like father and son. Now, thats Hitler-lovin! Zundel sincerely believes Der Fhrer got a bum rap. How could this dog-loving, nonsmoking vegetarian have killed anyone? Zundel has made it his lifes goal to rehabilitate Hitlers image. Its a fools quest. In a rational world, there would never have been a reason for Ernst Zundel to be the topic of a column in The Washington Post by one of the nations finest constitutional scholars. Indeed, the very suggestion of such a thing would be laughable. But it happened, and if Zundels legal travails are important enough to be examined by the WaPos Prof. Eugene Volokh, theyre certainly important enough for this column. But before we get to todays paper, lets take a look at yesterdays news. German-born Ernst Zundel immigrated to Canada when he was a teenager. A graphic artist by profession, the adult Zundel spent several decades buzzing around Ontario as a mostly ignored political gadfly, battling negative stereotypes and discrimination against German immigrants (in other words, he was an SJW). In the 1970s, it was revealed that this SJW was actually an SSJW when a local reporter exposed Zundels true passionpublishing pamphlets that praised Hitler and denied the Holocaust. So, what to do with a guy churning out dime-store Hitler porn, back in the days when there was no internet to allow the neighborhood kook to spread his ideas beyond his own little mailing list? In a sane country, such a man would be ignored. But when it comes to free speech, Canada is about as sane as its favorite immigrant, Vince Li. Canada, egged on incessantly by Canadian Jewish organizations, decided that the best way to deal with the Zundel menace was to give it international publicity, and to give Zundel an unheard-of gift: the ability to grill Holocaust historians and survivors on the witness stand, forcing them, under oath, to cop to errors, omissions, and exaggerations. Take a moment to wrap your head around that. Canadian authorities and Jewish groups thought Zundel was such a menace, they gave him a one-of-a-kind opportunity to spread his theories and humiliate his opponents. In attempting to silence Holocaust denial, Jewish groups gave it a megaphone. My Vince Li comparison doesnt sound so far-fetched now, does it? Twice in the 1980s, the Canucks put Zundel on trial for spreading false news. This, as much as anything else, is what put Holocaust denial on the map. As I wrote in my book, in a section titled Blame Canada, The Zundel team was able to grill Holocaust historian Raul Hilberg, who was forced to admit, under cross-examination, that there had never been a plan for what he called the policy of the extermination of the Jews. He was forced to admit that he had never physically studied the remains of the gas chambers at Auschwitz or Majdanek. He admitted that Holocaust revisionism aids historians by challenging their beliefs and bringing about the discovery of new information, and, most startlingly, he admitted the existence of a reliable Nazi document stating that Hitler had decided to put off any decision about the final solution until after the war. Auschwitz survivor Arnold Friedman was forced to confess that he had never seen any gas chambers at Auschwitz, and that the stories he wrote about were based on rumors that others had told him. And famed Auschwitz survivor and escapee Rudolf Vrba admitted on the stand that his account of what he saw at Auschwitz was actually an artistic picture, not factual evidence. His eyewitness testimony regarding the gas chamber? Its what I heard it might look like. Zundel was convicted, but his conviction was overturned on appeal. So guess what? The damn puckheads put him on trial again! Both Zundel trials were breathlessly covered by the Canadian and international press. In the end, Zundel won out. His second conviction was overturned by the Canadian Supreme Court (and the false news law was declared unconstitutional). Zundel was not only free but also an international celebrity. A hated one, to be sure. But a celeb all the same. Following Zundels courtroom victory, Canadian Jewish organizations continued to press the government to find some other way to shut him up. As Zundel had landed only immigrant status in Canada (his attempts to become a citizen had been repeatedly shot down over the years), he decided to throw in the towel and move to the States to live with his equally nutty wife, Ingrid, an American citizen. During this time, the German government, egged on by (wait for it) Jewish organizations, issued a warrant for Zundels arrest. The charge? Denial material he posted on his websitewhile in Tennessee. The German legal theory was that since the internet brought Zundels words into German territory, and since Holocaust denial is illegal in Germany, Zundel had committed a crime on German soil no differently than if hed strangled a guy in Munich. Of course, free-speech advocates the world over rose up in outrage over such a draconian affront to speech rights. Oh wait, no. Free-speech advocates the world over pursed their lips like Don Knotts and ran away. Well done, free-speech advocates the world over. Well done. After three years of living peacefully in the U.S., Zundel was dragged from his home in 2003, accused of violating his visa (a charge later questioned by a district court judge in Knoxville). U.S. authorities shipped him back to Toronto, where the Canadians promptly tossed him into a 6-by-8-foot isolation cellfor two years. Post-9/11 laws had given the Canadian government new powers to indefinitely detain people without charge; no need for a trial this time! In 2005, I arranged an interview with The Hamilton Spectators Bill Dunphy (a longtime Zundel foe), who straight-out stated that Zundels appalling treatment resulted from political pressure from groups that are opposed to Zundel and his ideology (i.e., Jewish organizations). Dunphy admitted that these groups demanded Zundel be locked away, and the government acquiesced. And as Zundel languished in a tomblike cell for denying a past genocide, former Rwandan ruling-party strongman Leon Mugesera, an actual perpetrator of a present-day genocide, was not only allowed to walk free, he even got a teaching job at a prestigious Quebec university (because, from Jim Carrey to Tom Green, Canadians have always loved absurdity). After two years of what can pretty much only be described as torture (his cell lights were never dimmed, he was allowed no hot food, he was deprived of medicine), Zundel was shipped to Germany, where he was immediately declared a security risk and put in yet another cell without bail as a flight risk. See the logic there? Bring a guy against his will into your country, declare that you dont want him there, and then imprison him because youre afraid hell leave. Theres that big-brained Deutsche brilliance Hitler was always going on about. Zundel was sentenced to five years imprisonment for the stuff he legally posted while legally residing in the U.S. The sentence was cheered by (here we go again) Jewish organizations, and, as before, free-speech advocates the world over remained silent. Zundel was released in 2010, a tired, sickly, broken man. Yay, we got im! So why was Zundel in The Washington Post last week? Well, leave it to the exceptionally fair-minded UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh (who Ive previously interviewed for this column on an unrelated matter) to dare to examine the legality of Zundels latest nad-kick. Zundel, now 78, had sought to return to the U.S. to join his 80-year-old wife (she cant join him in Germany, because her ideas traveled to Germany and committed crimes too). Volokhs column deserves to be read in full. The short version is, Homeland Security denied the request, stating: A foreign conviction can be the basis for a finding of inadmissibility only where the conviction is for conduct which is deemed criminal by United States standards. Volokh points out what should be obvious (but, of course, isnt) to any rational American: But as best I can tell from press accounts, Zundels speech that formed the basis of his German conviction would not have been deemed criminal by United States standards. Denying the Holocaust and expressing anti-Semitic sentiments is just not a crime under American law. Indeed, it cant be made a crime, given the First Amendment. Volokh concludes that the ruling appears to have been a violation of American immigration law. Now, heres where Im gonna lose a few readers. One might be tempted to think that the repeated involvement of Jewish organizations, in multiple countries, in the persecution of Ernst Zundel indicates the presence of some vast international conspiracythe Jewish octopus of anti-Semitic lore. But no, Im actually suggesting the opposite. Jewish advocates were able to get their way regarding Zundel because no one on earth gives a shit about him. When Jews whined, Give us Zundel, it was a very cheap and painless bone to throw them to shut them up. Bully Jews picked on a nobody, and politicians, who never give a damn about nobodies anyway, happily threw him under the bus to stop the kvetching. But, my Jewish brider, look what the war on Zundel wrought. Holocaust denial was put on the map, and Zundel became an international figure of note. Was it worth it, going after this rotund little bald man? Is it still worth it? Yes, its a victory in that Zundel is finished. Hell probably die soon, and Jews can dance on his grave. Satisfied? But in a broader sense, it was a terrible defeat, in terms of what Zundels bullies were hoping to accomplish versus what they actually did. In attempting to silence Holocaust denial, Jewish groups gave it a megaphone. Worse still, in trying to squash a man who spreads Jewish conspiracy theories, Jews acted just like the vengeful, world-controlling puppeteers Zundel portrays them as. In trying to suppress Zundels crude stereotypes, Jews ended up personifying them. This is Jewrys Appointment in Samarra, the old fable in which a man, seeking to flee the Reaper, ends up riding straight toward him. The moral of the tale is that sometimes, in our blind desire to avoid an unpleasant fate, we end up bringing it about ourselves. Such is the sad, bitter legacy of Ernst Zundel. SIGN UPDaily updates with TMs latest

Fair Usage Law

October 19, 2017   Posted in: Ernst Zundel  Comments Closed


Fair Use Disclaimer

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Under the 'fair use' rule of copyright law, an author may make limited use of another author's work without asking permission. Fair use is based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism. The fair use privilege is perhaps the most significant limitation on a copyright owner's exclusive rights.

Fair use as described at 17 U.S.C. Section 107:

"Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phono-records or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.

In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

  • (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for or nonprofit educational purposes,
  • (2) the nature of the copyrighted work,
  • (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole, and
  • (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."