Since the Genie is Out of the Bottle..

We can not go back and undo what has been done. The genie is out of the bottle and will never be put back in. Might as well hunker down and deal with it: A bishop of the Roman Catholic Church finally spoke out about a couple of popular history's 'sacred cows,' the first and only member of the Catholic hierarchy, to my knowledge, to have ever done so in the post-war period.

Since that fateful interview in January of 2009, there have been embarrassed disclaimers, expressions of outrage, charges of "grave indiscretion," profuse apologies, recriminations, published "position" statements, a careful avoidance of certain "questions of history," and a general distancing from the bishop who dared to take up some of those questions. Undoubtedly, he has had to make a number of visits to the woodshed for such temerity.

But all that aside, maybe it's about time that we, particularly traditional Catholics, start dealing with 'facts on the ground,' as best they can be understood. Maybe these issues have been forced upon us. Troublesome questions about the Jewish Shoah will just not go away. They seem to resist being simply chucked down history's memory hole. Bishop Williamson gave old Shoah issues new life. He may regret having done so. But sorry, it's too late. The cat is out of the bag.

I went back and dug out an essay I wrote four years ago about the infamous Auschwitz/Birkenau complex. I dusted it off a bit and gave it a little sprucing up here and there. That somewhat revised essay is reproduced below.

By way of introduction: At the Nuremburg MilitaryTribunals in 1945 and '46, the alleged Auschwitz "death camp" became the focus of a great deal of attention. The Soviets charged that the plant had been the scene of the industrialized extermination of "four million" people, mostly Jews; and that, futhermore, this mass killing had been carried out, for the most part, in putative "gas chambers." I'm not a credentialed revisionist scholar by any stretch of the imagination- just an amateur looking for answers . But I do think there is enough available evidence now, accumulated over 60+ years, to equip even the average layman like myself with sufficient understanding about what actually occurred at the Auschwitz/Birkenau facility, and what, essentially, the camp was used for.

(On a slightly different subject: Link to http://revisionistreview.blogspot.com/ for a detailed summary of Bp Williamson's trial in Germany, April 16)

Auschwitz For Dummies

by T. Hollingsworth

We have learned to pronounce the word by first emitting a low, guttural ‘OWWSHH.’ The more menacing the inflection, the better. This is followed phonetically by a great hissing sound, WITZZZ, accompanied, perhaps, by a few involuntary globs of spittle. ‘ AUSCHWITZ ’ is a frightening word, full of dreadful evil.

Holocaust propagandists, slavishly abetted by much of the world media and the movie and entertainment industry, have done quite a number on the general public, (us dummies), in the intervening sixty years separating us from the close of World War II. It’s a fact, after decades of relentless conditioning, there can be nothing quite as horrible in the mind of the average ‘Joe,’ no, nothing, quite as terrifying and diabolical as the word ‘ AUSCHWITZ .’

Auschwitz was a town located near the prewar German-Polish border in Eastern Upper Silesia . It was founded by Germans in the year1270. From 1795 to 1918 Auschwitz was in the Austro-Hungarian empire.

The Auschwitz main camp was built in 1916 by the Austrians. It was a transit camp for seasonal farm workers who lived there between assignments. Auschwitz was chosen as the site of the farm labor camp because it was the largest railroad hub in Europe . Every railroad line in Europe went through Auschwitz . The farm laborers could travel from Auschwitz to anywhere in Europe to harvest the crops on the large estates.

After the First World War, in 1919, When Poland became a country again, the Poles changed the name to Oswiecim . At that time the Auschwitz , (or Oswiecim), main camp was turned into an army base for Polish soldiers. They built the original building, where the infamous “Krema I” was located, and used it as an ammunition storehouse.

When Germany defeated Poland in 1939, they took back the part of Poland that they believed was rightfully theirs because they had been in control of this territory for years, and they had built all the cities there. The Germans changed the name ‘Oswiecim’ back to Auschwitz. In 1940, they established a suburban work/detention facility there, or, if you like, a ‘concentration camp.’ It was known thereafter as Konzentrationslager Auschwitz, and was to become the most infamous of all Nazi detention camps, the one, putatively, most deliberately destructive of human life.

So, Auschwitz has a long history. It did not spring up overnight. Banish any notion that Auschwitz was some remote, mist shrouded outback, located in a stark and eerie Transylvanian-type setting which the Nazis chose to carry off their horrible extermination designs away from the eyes of the world. That popular image violates the truth. Auschwitz was, and had been for many decades, a major railroad transit center and agro business hub. (See Auschwitz 1270 to Present, coauthored by Robert Jan van Pelt Deborah Dwork, 1996)

For years the world was told that four million inmates, (of whom, it is claimed, 2.7 to 3.0 million were Jewish), perished in that one concentration camp alone, victims of a deliberate program of extermination. Most of these poor souls, we understand, were done away with in a relatively short period of time, roughly between early 1942 and late 1944.

The “four million” victims figure can probably be attributed to a single Soviet document, of which the Nuremberg tribunal took “judicial notice,” meaning, simply, the court recognized from the beginning of its deliberations, without the need for supporting evidence, that 4.0 million exterminated individuals was an indisputable fact. The Soviets claimed that 10,000 victims were gassed daily until the figure reached 4.0 million. U.S. and British prosecutors could have dispatched forensic experts to Auschwitz to check and verify these claims. But they did not do so, for whatever reasons. The German defenders at Nuremberg were prevented from sending their own forensic team to the camp, since it lay in the Soviet zone.

The “confession” of Rudolph Höss, Commandant of Auschwitz did much, also, to boost exterminationist claims. He appeared before the International Military Tribunal on April 15, 1946 as a defense witness for Ernst Kaltenbrunner, former head of the Gestapo, who was also in charge of the concentration camp system. Kaltenbrunner requested that Höss appear before the court on his behalf in order to testify that the former had never visited the Auschwitz complex.

In a sworn written statement Commandant Höss said that he had personally received an order from Heinrich Himmler to exterminate the Jews. He estimated that at that center alone 3,000,000 people had been exterminated, 2,500,000 by means of “gas chambers.”

In his essay entitled How the British obtained the confessions of Rudolph Höss, Frenchman Dr. Robert Faurisson, a professor of literature, and among the most famous of contemporary revisionists, challenges those figures. He claims that they are “false,” charging, furthermore, that Höss’ so-called “confessions” had been extorted from him by torture. Indeed, Höss himself had accused his British interrogators, a number of whom were Jewish, of that very thing. “At my first interrogation,” he wrote, “evidence was obtained by beating me. I do not know what is in the record, although I signed it. Alcohol and the (horse) whip were too much for me.” Höss was to receive even rougher treatment on several other occasions. But as it was his word against that of the conquerors of the Reich, this allegation was ignored, or at least not taken seriously.

It wasn’t until 1983 that the Auschwitz Commandant’s words were corroborated. That corroboration came from statements contained in a book published in that year entitled Legions of Death by Rupert Butler, a veteran writer of three other books in the same genre. Mr. Rupert’s book pretty much let the cat out of the bag.

At the beginning of his work, Butler expresses gratitude to, among other institutions and individuals, a certain Bernard Clarke who, history informs us, was the British officer who captured Commandant Höss in March of 1946. Clarke explains quite unremorsefully, as recorded in the book, that “it took three days of torture” to obtain “a coherent statement, (i.e. confession)” from Höss. Dr. Faurisson notes that this “confession would shape decisively the myth of Auschwitz .” He was most certainly right! As Commandant Höss said himself in now well documented remarks: "Certainly, I signed a statement that I killed two and a half million Jews. But I could just as well have said that it was five million Jews. There are certain methods by which any confession can be obtained, whether it is true or not."

By this admission from one of Höss’ chief interrogators, Faurisson declares triumphantly that the “establishment historians” were wrong when they disputed that Höss had been tortured and had confessed under duress. After the publication of Rupert Butler's book, it was no longer possible for them to contest the fact.

Some sets of numbers were even more stupefying than the incredible “four million.” promulgated at Nuremberg. Producers of a 1955 French film documentary, entitled Nuit et Brouillard (Night and Fog), placed the figure at a mind boggling 9,000,000 persons exterminated, mostly Jews, of course. Happily, 13 years or so later, in 1968, historian Olga Wormser-Migot offered at least one seemingly mitigating concession. This one time advisor to the creators of Night and Fog admitted in her own book that Auschwitz I, the main camp in that wartime industrial complex, was “without a gas chamber.” (Le Système concentrationnaire nazi [p. 157]) That little factoid, however, did not invade world consciousness until a number of years later.

The 4,000,000 figure held up pretty well until about 1990. Enter then the clamorous and persistent claims of historical revisionism. These claims finally began to take their toll. To compound the problem for the cause of exterminationism, the Soviets, in 1989, released Auschwitz “death camp” records to the Red Cross. These records would prove to be very damaging to the almost universally accepted exterminationist legend; but more on them below.

The Auschwitz-Birkenau monument up until at least 1990 had inscribed upon it the “four million” figure in nineteen different languages. This number, as we said, was never seriously disputed in the forty some-odd years following the war. Suddenly though, in the light of more compelling data, that monstrous seven digiter, etched in stone over several post-war decades, began to crumble. The new findings reset the slain totals at 1,500,000. After an additional five years of foot dragging in 1995, this new number was duly inscribed on a new set of plates.

One of my sources, a person who has visited and researched a number of the German concentration camp sites, informs me that Lech Walesa, then Polish Solidarity leader, and later elected president of Poland may have suggested the new 1.5 million figure. He may have pulled it out of a hat for all we know. What is certain though is this. An alleged 4.0 million victims slain could no longer survive unchallenged. Accumulating evidence demanded that the number be reduced dramatically.

Dr. Franciszek Piper, Polish historian and curator, and director of archives of the Auschwitz State Museum, confirms the new 1.5 million total. For him it represents a satisfactory maximum. And he might not even complain too strenuously were that figure reduced another 400,000 to 1.1 million persons “gassed.”

The new findings did not at all deter the French exterminationists. They very deliberately forced through an anti-revisionist provision in that same year, 1990, making it punishable by law in France to challenge the scope of “crimes against humanity” as described and evaluated by the Nuremberg tribunal 45 years earlier.

Exterminationists were not about to give in to lighter projections. They can’t afford to! Their macabre universe of death has vastly shrunk in the decades following the end of the war. It will in time, I feel, as the truth comes out, become a mere point of ‘singularity.’

To drive home the fact of a shrinking "Holocaust" universe, I cite the much respected head of the Institute of Contemporary History, Dr. Martin Broszat, the man who, by the way, first published the “confession” of Rudolph Höss. He had to tell his amazed countrymen that there had never been mass gassings in the entire Old Reich (Germany’s 1937 borders). In a letter dated August 19, 1960 he writes: "Neither in Dachau , nor in Bergen-Belsen , nor in Buchenwald , were Jews or other inmates gassed. The gas chamber in Dachau was never completed and put into operation.”

This is not good news for the Holocaustians. They have had to retreat into what Dr. Broszat described as “a small number of selected places, especially in occupied Poland , including Auschwitz and Birkenau but not Majdanek.” In light of these disclosures it becomes absolutely tactically essential that the extermination figures at Auschwitz/Birkenau remain as bloated as possible. There are not many other potential “death camps” left, if any, in wartime German-occupied Europe for which exterminationists dare make similar claims.

By the way Dr. Broszat is not alone. Fifteen years later no less a world figure than the famed “Nazi Hunter” Simon Wiesenthal also admitted that "there were no extermination camps on German soil" in a letter to the editor of Books and Bookmen, page 5, April 1975. He reconfirmed his earlier statement in a letter to the editor published on page 14 of the European Stars and Stripes dated 24 January 1993 .

There are some very important reasons why exterminationists want to keep the “death camp” totals as high as possible. Militant Jewry needs a ‘Holocaust’ to elicit worldwide sympathy in order to fully carry out its Zionist dreams and ambitions. Robert Goldman, a Jew, made a startling admission in 1997. “Without the Holocaust,” he said, “there would be no Jewish state.” (Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 19 December 1997 , p. 9)

Without a terrible Nazi-inpired “Holocaust” of gigantic, death-dealing proportions, there no longer remains any justification for German war reparations to Israel. Nahum Goldman, long time chairman of the Jewish World Congress, made no secret of it. He wrote in 1978: “Without the German reparations that started coming during it first ten years as a state, Israel would not have half of its present infrastructure. All the trains are German, and the same goes for electrical installation and a great deal of Israel ’s industry.” (Dad juedische Paradox, Europaeishe Verlangsanstalt, 1978, p. 171)

In other words, without outside assistance, particularly from Germany , the parasitic Zionist state would not have been viable.

As an example of German “reparation” largess let me cite one instance. In 1999, Germany provided Israel with ultra-modern submarines which can carry nuclear missiles. The Israelis did not have to pay a penny for them. Just another act of atonement for the Jewish “Holocaust,” you see.

But let’s get back to the continuing saga of dwindling death toll statistics: French pharmacist, Jean-Claude Pressac (deceased now, I believe), promoted by the international media as the expert on technical questions surrounding Auschwitz, recognized Holocaust apologist, has in recent years become even more conciliatory about Auschwitz “extermination” totals. His research estimates pared the number down from the new1990 benchmark of 1.5 million perished souls to between 775,000 and 800,000 victims. That was 1993. A year later this same Claude Pressac had cut the totals down even more to between 630,000 and 710,000 victims of gassing, of whom, naturally, the lion’s share were Jews.

In 1989, just before the collapse of the Berlin Wall, Soviet authorities, (as mentioned above), released Auschwitz camp death records to the world. These records reveal sub totals that make even Pressac’s numbers seem awfully large. They were confiscated when Red Army forces captured Auschwitz in January 1945. The Soviets had them archived away for over 40 years. 46 volumes of death certificates, covering the years 1941, 1942, and 1943, (but not 1944) record the deaths of 69,000 Auschwitz inmates.

Mark Weber of the Institute for Historical Review remarks that deaths “were carefully recorded by camp authorities ‘in dozens of camp registry volumes” Weber continues: “Each certificate meticulously records numerous revealing details, including the deceased person's full name, profession and religion, date and place of birth, pre-Auschwitz residence, parents' names, time of death, and cause of death as determined by a camp physician.” Meticulous record keeping is a typically German trait. The New York Times reported on these same records in March of 1991. The Times story indicates that 73,137 persons, from all causes, died at Auschwitz . Of these 73,137 deceased, 38,031 were Jews. In this same NYT report, we learn, (though not from sources released by the Soviets), that the total of all persons who died in the entire German prison camp system from 1935 to 1945 were 403,713. (ed. Note: New York Times reported figures, in fact, make Bp. Williamson’s estimates appear to be much to high) I think that most will agree that those are not exactly ‘Holocaust’-like numbers, at least in the classic sense of the word.

The Times article places the Auschwitz death toll at a number 14,137 inmates higher than the one released by the Soviets in 1989. It may have been that in the intervening two years from 1989 to 1991 more records were found, and a more accurate count was arrived at. I really don’t know. But the point to be made is this: 1) These records reveal totals hundreds of thousands of victim fewer than even the lowest estimates made by Pressac and others. 2) The greatly reduced figures include death from all causes, not just alleged “gassing” victims.

Exterminationists suffered another setback from a major French weekly, L’Express. That paper carried a piece in January, 1995 by Journalist and historian Eric Conan. (Conan is described, by the way, as “a dedicated anti-revisionist.”) Be that as it may, his article probably put the final nail in the coffin of any remaining Auschwitz I ‘death camp’ notions. Conan acknowledged that “everything is false” about the Auschwitz main camp “gas chamber,” or Krema I, as it is known. He affirmed that this perceived house of horrors, which for decades had been shown to tens of thousands of tourists, and passed off as at least one of the primary extermination facilities, was, indeed, a post-war reconstruction, a fake. What the millions of tourists visit is a “krema” built in 1948 under the auspices of the Polish communist government. (Historian Olga Wormser-Migot, cited above, could probably have told us that back in 1968.)

Auschwitz Memorial officials were left with a little egg on their faces. One staff member, Krystyna Oleksy, of the Museum directors’ office, decided that discretion was the better part of valor. She put it this way: "For the time being we are going to leave it, (i.e. the “gas chamber”) in the present state, and not give any specifics to the visitors. It is too complicated. We'll see later on."

Lest there be any doubt about the veracity of this reconstructed “gas chamber” assertion, we are compelled to cite a videotaped interview with Dr. Franciszek Piper, Auschwitz Museum curator and director, already mentioned above. This now famous 1992 interview, as published in The Spotlight (news organ of the Liberty Lobby) in January of 1993, should lay all doubts to rest. Dr. Piper admitted on tape that the alleged “homicidal gas chamber” at the Auschwitz main camp was, in fact, fabricated after the war by the Soviet Union, apparently on direct orders from Josef Stalin.

The maker of this video interview, a young Jew named David Cole, disappeared from the revisionist landscape in 1994. He apparently succumbed to serious threats on his life by the Jewish Defense League, who were none to happy with the quest for truth by a celebrated correligionist. (Ed. Note: Cole’s visit to Auschwitz and video presentation is available online)

In May of 2002, a major German media outlet dealt yet another body blow to the over-inflated exterminationist totals for gassed persons. Fritjof Meyer, a leading journalist, writing for the left-wing Der Spiegel, whittled down Claude Pressac’s already greatly reduced totals to an even skimpier net, (relatively speaking), of 510, 000 victims, 356,000 of whom were Jews. Der Spiegel is no friend of historical revisionism either, it must be added.

Dr. Faurisson has always declared, citing the original plans from the Auschwitz Museum files, that the alleged “gas chamber” was nothing more or less than a room with a single entrance where dead bodies awaiting cremation were stored. So don’t expect even Meyer’s new “extermination” numbers to stand the test of time. They will surely be readjusted downward in the future as it becomes more impossible to sustain the “gas chamber” myth.

It should be mentioned here that in 1989 Dr. Faurisson was set upon by a gang of young Jewish toughs in Vichy , France as he walked his dogs. They half killed him. He spent a good deal of time in the hospital recovering from his injuries. He had already been physically attacked on seven or eight other occasions.

Most Holocaust historians are agreed that the killing agent of choice, to which most Auschwitz “extermination” deaths are attributed, is the extremely lethal pesticide called Zyklon B. Revisionist historians maintain that the product was never used for anything other than its advertised purpose, viz. to kill pests. The disease typhus was killing off hundreds and thousands of camp inmates. Nazi authorities sought to stem the rising death toll. So, Zyklon B gas was used to treat clothes, bedding and mattresses to rid them of typhus-carrying lice.

Heinrich Himmler, Hitler’s head of the Schutzstaffel (SS), which administered the camp system, feared the typhus epidemic as much as anybody else. On December 28, 1942, he ordered that “the death rate in the camps must be reduced at all costs.” (from The Final Solution by Gerald Reitlinger, Jewish historian). Himmler’s chief inspector of the camps, Richard Glucks, answered less than a month later: “Every means will be used to lower the death rates.” (Nuremberg Trial Document No. 1523) Indeed, the death rate was lowered by almost six percentage points between July 1942 and June 1943. Hardly the kind of anxious concern over the preservation of life one might expect from two SS officials dedicated to the goal of human extermination!

Zyklon B was manufactured in the form of small pellets, soaked in liquid hydrocyanic acid (prussic acid). The bluish crystal pellets came packaged in canisters. They were allegedly poured through specially prepared holes in the roof of a “gas chamber.” The holes were allegedly fitted with wire mesh tubes which descended several feet into the chamber. Long, wire-meshed, sleeve-like pellet retrieval baskets were, allegedly, inserted into the tubes. When, under properly induced conditions, hydrocyanide gas had been released into the death chamber, these baskets could be withdrawn, the spent pellets extracted, and then sent back to the factory and recharged, as it were. Which brings up another vital topic for purposes of this discussion- the alleged “holes” in the alleged “gas chamber” roofs. All the popular images presented to the mind by classic ‘Holocaust’ iconography rise or fall, based upon the existence or non-existence of the “holes.” As Dr. Robert Faurisson has repeated many times: No holes, no Holocaust!

From this layman’s perspective, things are not looking very good for the existence of “holes.” There are precious few of them, if any, to observe. But again, as Brian Renck has written in an article entitled Convergence or Divergence: “The holes are…central to the accusation that victims were murdered by gas in a cellar of Crematorium (crematory facility or Krema) II in 1943 and 1944.”

Indeed, they are. Guards didn’t just throw cans of prussic acid into a chamber packed with naked victims, then slam the door and run. Safe to say, exterminationists are in unanimous agreement that “holes” in the roof were the means of introducing the death-dealing substance. That is their story and they’re sticking with it.

Professor Robert Jan van Pelt certainly believes it! Prof. van Pelt is an interesting character, in my mind anyway, more noteworthy for recorded remarks made seemingly against his own interests. (More below) He is a Professor of Cultural History at the University of Waterloo, Ontario Canada, a native of Holland, Jewish on his mother’s side, and a prodigious writer about Auschwitz., Prof. van Pelt, according to Brian Renck, is considered the historical establishment’s leading expert on the design and function of the Auschwitz crematoria.

Since Krema I, discovered now to be a post-war fabrication, has lost much of its luster for purposes of promoting Holocaustian mythology, it would appear that Krema II, lying some three kilometers (two miles) directly west of Auschwitz I at the Birkenau industrial complex, has now become the center of the exterminationist universe, and the primary focus of attention.

Note Prof. van Pelt’s emotional assessment of Krema II: “Crematorium II (Krema II) is the most lethal building of Auschwitz . In the 2,500 square feet of this one room, more people lost their lives than any other place on this planet. 500,000 people were killed (here). If you would draw a map of human suffering, if you created a geography of atrocity, this would be the absolute center.”

Yet van Pelt was forced to acknowledge that the means whereby that huge number of people were gassed has presently evaporated. The professor was called as an “expert” on behalf of the defense in the now famous libel suit in Britain brought against Deborah Lipstadt and Penguin Books in 2000 by historian David Irving. During the trial van Pelt admitted that no holes were visible in the collapsed roof of Krema II. He admitted, furthermore, that the wire-mesh columns, used allegedly to conduct Zyklon B pellets into the death chamber, are also missing. In his expert report he wrote:

"Today, these four small holes that connected the wire-mesh columns and the chimneys cannot be observed in the ruined remains of the concrete slab." (“Small holes,” by the way, is van Pelt’s characterization of them.) “The wire mesh columns,” he continues, “had been totally dismantled after the cessation of gassings and before the demolition of the crematoria, and no remains were found.” How van Pelt knows for a fact that the columns were “totally dismantled” is anybody’s guess. There is, to my knowledge, no existing written or "eyewitness" documentation in support of that claim.

Hon. Mr. Justice Charles Gray, who presided at the trial, reinforced van Pelt’s remarks, declaring: "Van Pelt conceded in one of his supplementary reports that there is no sign of the holes."

To go along with van Pelt and Justice Gray’s remarks, we insert one additional note. In the late 1970s, when Auschwitz was administered by Poland 's Communist government, the Swede Ditlieb Felderer took hundreds of photographs of the remains of the Auschwitz crematoria ruins, and noted the seeming absence of holes for introducing Zyklon B, as described in "eyewitness" testimony.

As to the size of any alleged holes- van Pelt claims they were small, which may help to explain, from his point of view anyway, why they are undetectable now. However, there are military aerial photographs which seem to show holes in the crematoria roof. But relative to the adjacent roof dimensions, as photographed from the air, these alleged holes would have to have been around ten feet in diameter. Such is not likely, leading experts to conclude that the photos were altered.

Exterminationists get around this no-holes problem by advancing variants of the following argument: The four rooftop holes, (actually squares), were simply plugged with concrete. That’s right. Wooden (plywood?) forms were anchored in place on the interior ceiling side of the roof. Concrete was poured into the holes flush to the existing exterior roof surface. Apparently, they got it to match the surrounding concrete perfectly in color and texture so that no sign of it would ever be detected thereafter.

One particularly detested enemy of the Holocaustians is a gentleman named Fred A. Leuchter. Mr. Leuchter, an engineer, was acknowledged at one time to be America’s leading specialist on the design and fabrication of homicidal gas chambers and other equipment used for the execution of convicted criminals. He has been written up in a number of well known journals and periodicals. State governments acknowledged his expertise and used his services. He even appeared once on the Phil Donahue Show. But “powerful special interest groups,” for reasons described below, launched a vicious campaign of slander and vilification and succeeded in destroying Leuchter’s career.

Mr. Leuchter testified as an expert witness for the defense in the Canadian trial of Holocaust denier Ernst Zündel in 1988. (Ed note: See a three 10 minute video summaries of that trial featuring Ernst Zundel and Fred Leuchter: Part 1 , Part 2 , Part 3 ) Canadian officials had charged Zündel with publishing false news about the “Holocaust.” The man was convicted of similar ‘crime’ in 1985 in Canada, but was eventually released on a technicality. This time, however, he was convicted and sentenced to a nine month prison term.

Mr. Zündel was jailed once again in early 2003 by the Canadian government. No specific charges have been filed against him, simply that he might present a “security risk” to the nation. Zündel has been sitting in solitary confinement ever since, awaiting possible deportation to his native Germany where questioning the “Holocaust” is punishable by law. Similar “Holocaust” laws are on the books in Switzerland, France and other European countries. (Ed. Note: Zundel was finally extradited to Germany to stand trial. He spent five years I prison there, and has only recently been released)

We get some fascinating insights from a report compiled by Mr. Leuchter, which was used by the defense in Ernst Zündel’s 1988 trial. It is entitled Inside the Auschwitz ‘Gas Chambers.’ Leuchter was commissioned to travel with a team of experts to Poland in early 1988 in order to undertake a physical inspection and forensic analysis of alleged execution gas chambers at Auschwitz.

He took along the necessary tools of his trade, concealing them from communist authorities in the lining of his valise. Upon arrival in Poland, he focused particular attention on the crematories II, III, IV and V, located at the Birkenau complex, i.e. Auschwitz II. Leuchter made scale drawings of the facilities, took numerous samples, and documented all of his activities with videos and still photos.

“At crematory II,” he writes, “I descended into the depths of the alleged gas chamber, a wet, dank subterranean place not visited by man in almost 50 years..” Here he took sample scrapings from the interior walls, did measurements and made other observations which might help him in determining how the facility had been used.

Mr. Leuchter and his team of assistants had to be very careful that they were not discovered, and their real purposes divulged. In the end, though, the team managed to get away from Poland undetected with twenty pounds of forbidden samples in Leuchter’s suitcase.

Leuchter delivered his forensic samples to a university test laboratory in Massachusetts on March 3, 1988. Chemical analysis of his samples revealed categorically that none of the facilities at Auschwitz/Birkenau “could have supported, or in fact did support, multiple executions utilizing hydrogen cyanide, carbon monoxide or any other allegedly or factually lethal gas.”
He calculated, based upon “very generous maximum usage rates” for all the alleged Nazi gas chambers everywhere, that “it would have required sixty-eight (68) years to execute the alleged number of six millions of persons.

Mr. Leucther made numerous other observations which put the lie to any claims that these facilities were used to gas victims. He noted, for example, that none of the rooms was “sealed or gasketed.” There was no provision to prevent condensation of gas on the interior walls, floors or ceilings; no method to “exhaust the air-gas mixture” from the buildings; no sign of a mechanism designed to “introduce or distribute the gas throughout the chamber;” no “explosion-proof lighting;” and no attempt to prevent gas from entering the (adjacent) crematories, “even though the gas is highly explosive.”

Elsewhere Leuchter makes mention that there was no evidence of a “heating system” in the morgue interior. Zyklon B pellets must be heated to at least 78 degrees before they can release lethal gas.

Furthermore, Leuchter reports, no attempt was made to protect “operating personnel” or “non-participating persons” from exposure to the gas. No exhaust stacks ever existed. In short, from close observation he concluded that no provisions were made “to effect any amount of safe handling” for this extremely dangerous and lethal gas. What is more, the chambers were too small to accommodate “more than a small fraction of the alleged numbers (gassed).” “Plain and simple,” Leuchter reported, “these facilities could not have operated as execution gas chambers.”

At this juncture, we ought to insert a few more sentences from Robert Faurisson, commenting on the popularly accepted notions of “gas chamber” operations at the Auschwitz II facility:

“(I)n the case of Auschwitz II or Birkenau, one could bring 2,000 people into a room measuring 210 square meters in area, and then in this highly crowded situation throw in the very strong pesticide Zyklon B, and then immediately after the deaths of the victims let a work crew without any gas masks enter the room in order to take out the bodies which had been thoroughly saturated with cyanide.

Dr. Faurisson noted that the poisonous residue effects of Zyklon B gas could not be removed from a room even with a “strong ventilator.” Only “natural aeration” over a period of 24 hours would render the area safe enough to enter.

This historical revisionist declares unapologetically that these so-called “gas chambers” were nothing but “simple” mortuaries, built underground to protect them from the heat. He points to a single door, serving “as both an entrance and an exit.” Reasonable people will agree that one small door would hardly have sufficed to serve as an entrance for great numbers of victims at a time, who, upon being gassed en masse, would be evacuated one at a time through that same door just minutes later, dumped one by one into a service elevator, and hauled up to ground level to be burned in an adjacent krema. Totally unworkable and absurd!

This is not to suggest that crematoria were not used to burn bodies and reduce them to ashes. They were! As Dr. Faurisson points out: “Concerning the crematoria of Auschwitz, there is just as there is generally for the entire camp an overabundance of documents and invoices down to the last penny.”

As for the “gas chambers,” however, he continues: “..there is nothing: no contract for construction, not even a study, nor an order for materials, nor a plan, nor an invoice, nor even a photograph. In a hundred war crimes trials, nothing of the sort was ever produced.”

“Gas chambers” are in extremely short supply at Auschwitz , non-existent, it appears. Many of us ‘dummies’ go through life probably oblivious to half the things going on around us at any given time. But, if the Holocaustian “gas chamber” scenario is true, then German army officer Thies Christophersen takes the meaning of obliviousness to unprecedented new levels. This German officer, wounded in battle on the war front, was thereafter reassigned to work at the Auschwitz camp complex. In his memoir published in 1973, entitled Die Auschwits-Lüge (The Auschwitz Lie) he states categorically the following: “During the time I was in Auschwitz , I did not notice the slightest evidence of mass gassings.” Elsewhere he testifies: “I was in Auschwitz and I can assure you that there was no ‘gas chamber’ there.”

Christophersen’s testimony has echoes of the same kind of ignorance expressed by such powerful bodies as the International Red Cross and the Vatican . The IRC prepared a three volume report in 1948 on all of the wartime German camps. There is not a mention of “gas chambers” on any of its 1600 pages. The Church in particular was reputed to be on the cutting edge of most of what was happening in wartime Poland. Both of these great institutions claimed they knew nothing about any “gas chambers” throughout the entire course of the war.

Over the years, the so-called ‘Jewish Holocaust’ has taken on quasi-religious dimensions. It is “a holy mystery,” says Elie Wiesel, “the secret of which is limited to the circle of the priesthood of survivors.” (The Holocaust, Peter Novick,)

“Six Million” supposedly exterminated Jews take on an absurdly Apocalyptic aspect for ‘true believers’ like Simon Wiesenthal: “When each of us comes before the Six Million, we will be asked what we did with our lives…” (Simon Wiesenthal in Response, Vol 20, No. 1)

French Zionist propagandist Claude Lanzmann, producer of the film Shoa, envisioned the new Auschwitz 'religion' threatening to totter ancient Christianity upon its very “foundations.” Because even Christ’s sufferings, reasons Lanzmann, as agonizing as they were, can not be compared to the exponentially greater sufferings of the Jews at Auschwitz . So, Lanzmann concludes, “Christ is false, and salvation will not come from him… Auschwitz is the refutation of Christ.” (Les modernes, Paris, Dec. 1993, p. 132,133)

These are the rantings of a religious fanatic, not to mention, a dedicated anti-Christian. Such a one, if indeed he represents the thinking of the majority of present day exterminationists, would not and could not know or accept the truth about Auschwitz, even if it sat on his lap!

That tens of thousands of untimely deaths from all causes occurred in Nazi concentration camps between 1935 and 1945 cannot be disputed. That Jews, relative to the total Jewish population of Europe at that time, comprised a disproportionate number of inmate deaths from all causes is probably also indisputable. But I have concluded, from the best data I can find anyway, that a systematic, Nazi-sponsored program of extermination, mainly by “gassing,” wiped out five to six million Jews over roughly a two or three year period, is a huge lie. It is sheer and utter baloney! If human extermination in this context can be said to have occurred, it was an unconscious and indeliberate program carried out by the lowly Typhus-carrying louse; and, secondarily, by hunger, disease and neglect in the last months of the war, when camp personnel were forced to flee the Soviet army's advance from the east. By that time the Auschwitz camp's operational infrastructure had totally collapsed, and the remaining abandoned inmates started dying like flies.

Note to SSPX Leaders:

If SSPX leadership can take comfort in little or nothing regarding the Williamson affair, they may at least find some solace and salvaging of reputation by simply recognizing that this senior Society bishop was probably right. I mean, if love covers a multitude of sins, can not truth, in like manner, cover one or two "indiscretions?"

A Jew Who Speaks Out

Gilad Atzmon is not your ordinary locksteppping Jew. This British citizen is a professional musician and writer, but more than that, he is a truth teller, and, I imagine, pays a heavy price among his own for his refreshing candor, coming as it does from such an unlikely source. Read his bio under the heading Early Life on Wikepedia. It begins thus:

"Atzmon was born a secular Jew in Tel Aviv, and trained at the Rubin Academy of Music in Jerusalem.[8] His service as a paramedic in the Israeli Defense Forces during the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon caused him to reach the conclusion that "I was part of a colonial state, the result of plundering and ethnic cleansing."[1][3]......"

In one of Atzmon's latest article, entitled The Boomerang Effect , he let's the British have it, as it touches mandatory, government-sponsored Holocaust education in that country. The opening lines read as follows:

"In case you didn’t know, in Britain the Holocaust is part of the National Curriculum. Thanks to the ‘The Holocaust Educational Trust’ our children are guaranteed to learn how bad the Nazis were. This is probably much easier for our kids to acknowledge than to look into the ways in which the embarrassing legacy of the British Empire reverberates throughout almost every contemporary disastrous conflict on this planet..."

Go to the link provided above for the rest of the story..

The Attacks on Pope Benedict

Thursday, April 08, 2010
The Attacks on Pope Benedict - a Conspiracy of Man - or God?
by Michael Hoffman http://revisionistreview.blogspot.com/

Over the centuries many sorts of masquers have bored deep into the bowels of the Roman Catholic Church. Some of these have even occupied the papal throne; others were content to be the power behind that throne.

King Henry VIII first received the theological justification for his divorce from Catherine of Aragon from the Neoplatonic brotherhood inside the Vatican; out of said fraternity would emerge Dr. John Dee, the Protestant magician who, using the Hermetic and Kabbalistic cunning of the Roman Catholic magician Marsilio Ficino, furnished William Cecil with the mind control keys and mass persuasion techniques that gained him the rule of England through a reanimated goddess Isis who is known to history as Queen Elizabeth I.

Very few believing Catholics ever glimpse this hidden reality, and when they are so privileged as to gain a fleeting vision of it, they run from it, so threatening is it to the papal Caesarism to which they kowtow like the pagan subjects of Kubla Khan. Jesus Christ did not come to institute slavish and cowering obedience to mere men, however elaborately costumed or adored. He came to save souls, which is the highest law, a law recognized by only a few churchmen, such as the late French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, who defied Popes Paul VI and John Paul II for that very reason.

Behind the scenes of the competing Catholic and Protestant churches exists a golden thread, a rainbow bridge if you will, that unites initiates in both camps who, believing they possess godlike powers derived from the secret gnosis of the Corpus Heremeticum, are above the morality they publicly preach, beyond good and evil, and united in processing humankind toward a "higher" destiny without the knowledge or consent of those being processed. This is the age-old mandate of the pagan-occult imperium.

Shortly before the latest uproar over pederasty within the Roman Catholic Church, a Vatican exorcist announced that the devil was active in the Vatican, even at the highest levels. Prior to this not exactly unexpected revelation, Pope Benedict XVI completed the third of his pilgrimages to the Synagogue, the latest, on Jan. 17, at Rome itself, where this papal Judas gave every encouragement to the assembled Pharisees.

Most recently he has appointed a member of the secret society of Opus Dei to head the powerful diocese of Los Angeles, California, after child-molestation enabler and obstructor of justice Cardinal Roger Mahony retires next year with his pension intact and full church honors accorded to this patron of pederasty.

Certain Catholic automatons have marched forth, decrying a purported "media conspiracy" of "gossip" against the pope. But are the troubles that have befallen this pope a conspiracy of man, or a curse of God?

How long do the vassals of Rome imagine that God will be mocked by popes who make common cause with the ideological and spiritual descendants of those who stoned, laid hands upon and conspired in the murder of His Divine Son?

Pope John Paul II, the modern champion of the Synagogue and the first pope in history to enter its precincts as a supplicant, spent the final years of his pontificate as a hunchback, drooling spittle onto his breast. Unless he repents and makes reparation, Pope Benedict XVI can no more escape the wrath of God than did his predecessor.

If Benedict is besieged now, it may be payback for his treason to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, notwithstanding his provisional revival of the old Latin Mass, which he has integrated into a neo-Catholic hybrid Church of Holocaustianity, whereby Auschwitz is rendered more sacred by far than Calvary, a revolutionary betrayal made tolerable now that it is accompanied by Tridentine incense and Gregorian chant.

Those badly deceived persons who make common cause with this pontiff might wish to consider what fate may be in store if they do not switch their allegiance from Benedict to Jesus.

Copyright ©2010 by RevisionistHistory.org

Hoffman is the author of seven books of history and literature, including Judaism Discovered. He edits Revisionist History, a newsletter published six times a year. The latest issue, on "The Money Power," is available for purchase online.

***

Posted by Michael Hoffman at 4/08/2010 12:46:00 PM
Labels: Cardinal Roger Mahony, Corpus Hermeticum, Marsilio Ficino, Opus Dei, pagan imperium, papal Caesarism, pederasty, Pope Benedict XVI, Pope John Paul II, synagogue, Tridentine Mass

What Is the “Federal Republic” of Germany?

I came across the following speech recently. It was made in July of 2002, as can best be determined, by a German named Klaus Weichhaus, a journalist and author, whose credentials I can not vouch for, but whose points seem, nevertheless, to be pretty well taken.

In view of the upcoming trial of Bishop Richard Williamson, scheduled to begin April 16, 2010 in Regensburg Germany, it might help the reader to better understand the real nature of the German “Federal Republic,” (certainly as Mr. Weichhaus views it anyway,). I am inclined to believe him. He describes the sinister political milieu in which, I feel, His Excellency would be immersed, were he to submit to the German federal court summons. Bp. Williamson would have, in the scenario Mr. Weichhaus describes, about as much chance of getting a fair trial in Germany, as a snowball’s chance of surviving in hell.

To properly appreciate the contemporary German state, and to better understand the manner in which the German people (volk) are governed, a number of all but forgotten historical items need to be rehashed. After the defeat and devastation of Germany during WWII, the “Allies” created a new “political caste,” basically a foreign entity, i.e. a relatively small group of “plutocrats” and “money mongers,” many of them U.S.-based, Weichhaus says, who took full advantage of a soundly defeated and humiliated Germany. This new caste has conducted an ongoing plundering of the German nation during the sixty some odd years of post-war “occupation.” Yes, I say, “occupation,” because as Mr. Weichhaus affirms, the German Federal Republic is “a provisional occupation government created by our enemies.” It is, he adds, an “exploitative political entity in which we carry out certain empty ritual, but in which it is impossible for us to really live and exist politically.”

Of course, one can easily surmise the fate awaiting His Excellency were he to hand himself over to this powerful band of “plutocrats,” as Weichhaus describes them. For, as they are the de facto enemies of the German volk in general, one can easily conclude that they are also enemies of The Christian religion, and of our Holy Faith in particular.

Let Mr. Weichhaus spell it out for the reader. As the speech is rather long, I include only those portions which I consider might be of immediate interest to the reader. To view the full address in English go to: http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/HomePage28April2009/klaus_weichhaus_leipzig_10.htm
__________________________________________________________________

Rede anläßlich der Leipziger Montagsdemo
Speech Given at Leipzig Demonstration

By Klaus Weichhaus

Translated by J M Damon
The original is posted in German on several websites including
www.gesundes-deutschland.de/html/klaus_weichhaus.html

THE BEAUTIFUL IS NOT TRUE, AND THE TRUTH IS NOT BEAUTIFUL: LAOZI

Good evening ladies and gentlemen, my name is Klaus Weichhaus.
I am a journalist born in Ketzin, Brandenburg in 1948. Today I would like to discuss some long overlooked truths with you. These are truths that, although unknown to the general public, have been uttered by many courageous Germans, of whom thousands have been incarcerated and continue to be incarcerated…

Today I would like to speak to you about a very ominous situation, about truths that have been uttered by many courageous Germans who are mostly unknown to the public.
Many thousands of these courageous Germans have been incarcerated or are presently incarcerated. I should mention that my topic makes it necessary for the powers-that-be to gather evidence of what I am saying, and this explains the tape recorders being used by several brave protectors of our so-called constitution, to whom I extend cordial greetings.

You too, ladies and gentlemen – and not just the government snoops – are certain to learn some interesting facts this evening. For the sake of exactness I shall stick close to the written speech I have prepared. As Klaus Bednarz, editor and moderator of the political TV magazine MONITOR recently remarked on the Johannes Kerner show: “...and all this is merely the tip of the iceberg! The public does not realize what a pestiferous swamp our government and political caste have become. This is my conviction after more than thirty years’ experience as a journalist.”

History clearly shows that the victorious Allies created this “political caste” to which
Bednarz refers following the total devastation of Germany during World War II. It consisted of German collaborators who facilitated the Allied plundering of our country during the postwar period, in violation of all international law. These German collaborators helped our enemies steal 108,000 square kilometers of our territory east of the Oder/Neisse Line, and they also helped create and administer a notorious occupation “TREUHANDANSTALT” (trust agency), likewise in violation of international law.

These are just two examples of the countless crimes they have committed against Germany.
In 1949 these collaborationist politicians, who swore to selflessly serve the interest of their fellow Germans, were commissioned to govern what was left of the Reich. Needless to say, they (i.e. this Allies-created “collaborationist” political caste) served their own interests instead. In order to facilitate the brainwashing or “re-education” of us Germans, which the Allies had begun as soon as the War began, they dictated the following exclusion in Article 139 of the new GRUNDGESETZ (Basic Law): “The laws and regulations formulated for Germany’s liberation from militarism and National Socialism are not affected by any provisions of the Basic Law.” This exempted them from having to observe whatever restrictions and safeguards were associated with the laws they pretended to be passing for our benefit.

Although it is unnoticed by most Germans, Article 139 is one of the principal measures by which the Allies turned our one-time “Nation of Thinkers and Poets” into the complex-ridden and identity-less society of Fatherland deniers that we know today. Most of us are completely ignorant of what has happened to us.

Article 139 provides real insight into the fact that the Federal Republic is a provisional occupation government created by our enemies. It is an exploitative political entity in which we carry out certain empty rituals but in which it is impossible for us to really live and exist politically. By “living,” my friends, I mean something very different from what we are presently experiencing. The Federal Republic is not Germany, not our Fatherland!
To overthrow this sham government is neither unconstitutional nor a threat to the State, but rather our responsibility as patriotic Germans, even under the Basic Law!....

Here is what the politicians promised us in Article 146 of Basic Law in 1949:
"This Basic Law, which will apply to the entire German nation after attainment of unity and freedom throughout Germany, will become invalid as soon as a genuine constitution goes into effect, a constitution that has been written and approved by the German nation in a free plebiscite." ….

The United Nations has acknowledged the right of self-determination as the foundation of
international law. The UN Charter names self-determination as its “goal” In Article 1 Section 2, and in Article 55 it refers to self-determination as its basis. Since 19 December 1966, Article 1 Section 1 of the UN pact on civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights has provided that every nation has the right to self-determination. This right guarantees that each nation shall freely decide its own political status and determine its own economic, social and cultural development. The same guarantee is found in the Declaration of the UN General Assembly dated 24 Oct 1970 concerning international law, as well as United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2625 (XXV)…

The sad reality is that all the protectors of vested interests who are trying to make us believe they are concerned about our welfare are themselves puppets of the moneyed power mongers. They are lying when they refer to the “sovereignty” of the Federal Republic, as they well know. They are willing collaborators with the enemy in a war that still has not ended.

It is significant and consequential that the Basic Law was not written and adopted by the German people in May 1949, but rather by a so-called Parlamentarischer Rat (parliamentary committee.) This committee had a gravely undemocratic flaw, however: it had nothing to do with the German people, since it was not written in constitutional convention and not approved by the citizenry. Its fifty members comprised a group of intimidated and personally ambitious functionaries commissioned by the American occupation power to act in the name of the German people. They delivered what was expected of them: a Basic Law dictated by the victors FOR the people but not OF or BY the people of Germany. {It should be pointed out that Carlo Schmid, the expert on international law who chaired the committee, carefully explained that the Basic Law was not a constitution. He called it an “Ordnungsform einer Modalität der Fremdherrschung” (Organizational Form of a Modality of Foreign Rule), which is a diplomatic formulation for “puppet regime.” It is very clear that since the defeat of Germany in 1945 and inception of the “Basic Law” in 1949, Germany has not been a sovereign state. (emphasis added)

The Federal Republic

As we have seen, the so-called Federal Republic of Germany is not a sovereign State.
It remains what its architects, the victors of World War II, intended it to be: a provisional occupation government. Let us rummage a bit in our real but not-so-politically-correct history. We’ll begin with our Basic Law – what is “Basic Law” actually? Article 43 of the Hague Convention on Land Warfare defines it as follows: “Basic Law is law created to establish law and order in an occupied country.” (Emphasis added) What!! Occupied Country!?

The key to understanding our present impasse is to be found in an international agreement commonly called the “Two Plus Four Treaty” that accompanied the merging of the occupation governments of what were called “West Germany” and “East Germany” during the Cold War. It is formally called the EXCHANGE OF NOTES CONSTITUTING AN AGREEMENT CONCERNING THE CONVENTION ON RELATIONS BETWEEN THE THREE POWERS AND THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY OF 26 MAY 1952 AND THE CONVENTION ON THE SETTLEMENT OF MATTERS ARISING OUT OF THE WAR AND OCCUPATION OF 26 MAY 1952, DATED IN BONN 27 SEPTEMBER AND 28 SEPTEMBER 1990.
{It is posted on the Internet at {}. It specifies a long list of provisions of the Agreement of 1952 that are not affected by the Agreement of 12 September 1990, which provided for the merging of the so-called Federal and Democratic Republics of Germany. .. (ed. Note: Provisions herein omitted here, but available in full speech)
We are particularly concerned with Article 1 of Chapter Nine, which includes the phrase “Subject to the provisions for establishment of a peace settlement with Germany....”
Here it is in black and white, my friends - how plain does it have to be? The German Chancellor knows perfectly well that Germany still has no peace treaty with the USA. The German Chancellor understands perfectly well that the USA reserves the right to resume attacking Germany without bothering to declare war. The present Chancellor understands perfectly that she, like all her predecessors, continues to be subject to the dictates of the USA. She understands also that the US President, or more precisely the moneyed power mongers behind him, has the power over the German Chancellor. (emphasis added)

The story gets even more interesting. Article 2 of the above mentioned Exchange of Notes states that in German law, all rights and obligations based on legislative, judicial or executive measures of the occupation government remain in effect regardless of whether they are in accord with “other rights and obligations.” (Ed. Note: i.e. What the right hand gives, the left hand takes away) It is clear that the laws and directives of the USA and its allies still override the laws and directives of the allegedly sovereign Federal Republic. This international “Catch 22” brings to mind Zbiegniew Brzezinski’s book THE GRAND CHESSBOARD. In that book Brzezinski categorically states that the Germans are “obligatory vassals of the USA.”(emphasis added) When in a speech in Vienna he applied this thesis to Austria as well, the Austrian foreign minister gently interrupted him, saying “But Mr. Brzezinski, we are supposed to be partners.” Brzezinski responded, “All right then, you are PARTNERS who are obligated to pay tribute!”

Let us go even father back in history, to 1945. In those days some particularly clever American Jews published the occupation guidebook WHAT TO DO WITH GERMANY. 1945. DISTRIBUTED BY SPECIAL SERVICE DIVISION, ARMY SERVICE FORCES, U.S. ARMY. The directive was based on a book of the same title by Louis Nizer, which was published in 1944 and is posted on the Internet at www.archive.org/stream/whattodowithgerm00nizerich/whattodowithgerm00nizerich_djvu.txt {Nizer, a wealthy Jewish lawyer from New York with close ties to the White House, was a colleague of Theodore Kaufmann, author of GERMANY MUST PERISH, and of Henry Morgenthau, FDR’s Secretary of the Treasury and the author of the Morgenthau Plan. In a version of “Hard Cop – Soft Cop” Nizer argued that instead of de-industrializing Germany and reducing its population through starvation and sterilization, the USA should benevolently lobotomize the Germans culturally, educationally and psychologically.}

Let me quote from the official DIRECTIVES FOR RE-EDUCATION of 1945:
“Re-education will be compulsory for young and old alike, and must not be restricted to the classroom. We should employ the great power of conviction that goes with dramatic presentation in its service - movies can be used to greatest effect here. We should employ the greatest authors, producers and stars under the auspices of an “International University” to dramatize the limitless evils of Nazism, and contrast these evils with the simple beauty of a Germany that is no longer obsessed with marching and shooting. These movies will have the mission of creating an appealing picture of democracy. In addition, radio broadcasts will be used to penetrate German homes with formal lectures and informal discussions.

German authors, dramatists and publishers should be subjected to constant examination through this “International University” as well, since they are all educators. Undemocratic publications must of course be suppressed from the beginning. Only after German thinking has been strengthened in the new democratic ideals should we allow opposing views, when we are confident that the Nazi virus has been eliminated. This way, we will gain immunity for the future. The re-education process must penetrate all of German society. During their leisure time, the working classes should also receive simple lessons in democracy. Summer outings and popular educational events can help accomplish this.

Many German prisoners of war will remain in Russia after the war is over - not voluntarily, of course, but because Russia needs their labor. This is completely legal and it lessens the danger that returning prisoners might form the nucleus of a new national movement. Even if we do not wish to keep German prisoners after the War, we should send them to Russia.

The “International University” provides the best vehicle for monitoring and controlling the details of the German educational system, including schools, lesson plans, selection of teachers and textbooks - in short, all pedagogical institutions and materials. In addition, we need a “High Command” for our re-education offensive. Particularly gifted German students should be given opportunity to further their education in our schools; they should then return to Germany as teachers and found a new democratic tradition that combines a sense of international citizenship. Whenever possible, their professors should be liberal and democratic. The intervention of “foreigners” could have an agitating effect and it must be kept to a minimum, but should not cause us to lose control.

Every imaginable kind of democratic influence should be employed in the service of re-education. This calls for the efforts of churches, movies, theatre and radio as well as the press and labor unions. Re-education should take the place of military service. Every German should be required to participate, just as they were formerly conscripted.

The task has fallen to us of protecting world peace and freedom. This is the freedom that was born on Mount Sinai, lay in its cradle in Bethlehem, spent its early youth in England and whose stern schoolmaster was France. It is the freedom that spent its early manhood in the United States, the freedom that is destined to spread all over the world – if we do our duty.” (Ed. Note: One may question Weichhaus’ personal historical veiw, but it is difficult to dispute the authenticity and clear meaning of the document he cites above.)

The chief editor of the “New York World,” prominent Jewish journalist Walter Lippmann, was quoted in DIE WELT on 20 November 1982 as follows: “A war can only be considered won when its territory is occupied by its enemy, its leaders convicted of war crimes trials by military tribunals and its people subjected to a program of re-education. One obvious means to the end of re-education is planting the victor’s point of view and depiction of history and point of view in the brain of the vanquished. In this regard, it is of decisive importance to implant the victor’s moral categories of war propaganda in the consciousness of the defeated nation. Not until the victor’s propaganda has entered the history books of the vanquished and is believed by the next generation can we consider re-education as truly successful.” (Ed. Note: Not only has the “victor’s propaganda” entered the history books, it message repeated ad nauseum down through the years, IMHO, has contributed directly to our good bishop’ present troubles. For all intents and purposes, that very effective propaganda campaign of “re-education” has turned even the leadership of his own apostolate into his virtual enemies)…

Just a few months after the War began, the US War Department began training large numbers of specialists for the lavishly funded German Re-education Program. Camp Ritchie in the state of Maryland was designated as “Military Intelligence Training Center.” The trainees had to speak German, be familiar with German history, and be willing to participate in rewriting German history. Thus the Americans began their program of de-Nazification very early in the War. Given our present knowledge, we can say that at this time Washington was preparing to convert postwar Germany into a self-service emporium for the moneyed power mongers in the United States. The seeds of self-destruction were already planted so that in our time, Germans young and old would reflexively scream “Down with Germany!”…

In the book by Helen Lombard, “While they Fought,” (1947), the showing of one such movie, (i.e. an example of propaganda films described in material omitted) is described on page 313. Lombard writes:
“Shortly after the occupation of Germany by American troops, the Information Branch of
the US Army began producing indoctrination films for American soldiers in Germany.
Although they were not intended for distribution in the USA, one of these films was shown after a party in honor of an undersecretary in the War Department named Patterson and his wife. The propaganda film presented the Germans as having started both the First and Second World Wars. A man’s voice accompanied the film admonishing the troops to hate all Germans young and old and then stated: ‘Of course, the German people will have to be re-educated. They will have to be taught how to live in a democracy. But this will be done by one of our allies.’” The film did not say who this ally was.

Today we know that toward the end of the War an “Israeli Legion” officially fought on the side of the Allies and that many of the “education commissars” were Jews wearing American uniforms. The dinner party watching this film, which consisted primarily of officials from the War Department, and other government agencies “applauded enthusiastically.” That party is described in greater detail in my book DAS VERBREITEN FALSCHER REALITÄTEN ALS MACHTFAKTOR (Disseminating False Information as a Power Factor) which is available from www.deutschlandluegen.de

As part of the “de-Nazification” program, German prisoners of war were compelled to sign a sworn statement. However, around a million of them who had been alive at the end of the War were unable to fill out these forms. It was because they were dead. They had been murdered by Allied soldiers after the War had ended. On the orders of General Eisenhower and in violation of the Geneva Convention, which the Germans strictly observed in their treatment of captured Americans, these German POWs were interned during the cold wet summer of 1945 in open fields with no food or shelter. They were allowed to starve as their bodies sank in the bottomless mud of the vast Rhine meadows such as Remagen, to name just one of Eisenhower’s notorious death camps. (Ed. Note: I hate to say it, as one growing up in the “I like Ike” era. But I think this account has some legs.)

In Summary

The Basic Law of the Federal Republic that was adopted on 23 May 1949 was created as a temporary and provisional document. In a ruling dated 12 October 1987, the BUNDESVERFASSUNGSGERICHT (“Federal Constitutional Court”) very specifically states this. Document Az:2 BvR, page 8, reads:

“...The Parliamentary Committee did not intend for the Basic Law to serve as the basis of a new State. Rather, it was intended as a document that would create order during a transitional period, (Emphasis added) until such time as ‘Unification, Self-determination and Freedom’ should be achieved in Germany.” Thus reads the Preamble to the Basic Law. Alas, that blessed state of “Unification, Self-determination and Freedom” has still not arrived in Germany.

(One court document read):
“...1. The Court remains of the opinion (see Opinion BVerfG 1956-08-17, 1BvB 2/51, BVerGE 5, 85 <126>) that the German Reich survived the military collapse of 1945 and has never ceased to exist, either through capitulation or through the foreign exercise of power in Germany by the Allies or through any subsequent event. Legally, the Reich continues to possess legitimacy even though it is incapable of carrying out its state functions. Thus the Federal Republic cannot be considered a legitimate heir or successor to the Reich.”(Emphasis added) This reaffirms precisely that we Germans do have a valid and legitimate Constitution, namely that of the German Reich in the version of 1919….

Our enemies’ manipulation of our minds, the reality of which I have tried to demonstrate to you, attempts to bully and intimidate the German nation and make Germans appear small and malicious before the entire world. There is no reason why the Federal Republic should have so many debts - certainly not in such an immense sum as FOUR TRILLION Euros!

It is quite clear that all Germans who are German in the sense of Article 116 of the Basic Law that was forced upon us by our enemies, are not responsible for these monstrous debts, since we were born too late. The Basic Law precisely identifies those responsible for the debts and reparations: “In the sense of this Basic Law, the designation ‘German’ applies to anyone who possessed German citizenship, or was married to a German, or was a descendant of a citizen of the Reich residing in the territories of the Reich as of 31 December 1937.” (Ed. Note: In other words, the Basic Law clearly states that no German born after 1937 is responsible for war debts and reparations)

We Germans have had it constantly hammered into our heads that we are a nation of murderers, criminals and outlaws! (Ed. Note: I am almost 73 years old. In my own experience, the foregoing statement is absolutely true . This kind of propaganda was pounded relentlessly into my head as a child). For over 60 years our politicians have been telling us over and over again that we have a "notorious past." They repeat this phrase like a prayer wheel whenever it is time to pay out more billions for alleged "crimes against humanity."

We awful Germans, who started the War and caused mankind so much misery and suffering! Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer, to whom the Jewish World Congress awarded an honorary degree from the University of Haifa, declared at the JWC banquet in New York on 11 September 2002: “To this very day, it is incredibly difficult for us Germans to live with our country’s moral and historical guilt for Shoa. This is true even for us of the younger generation, who have to accept our national heritage.” The German politicians appointed to rule over us are obviously responsible for the present disorders. It is very clear that they encourage chaos and the dissolution of our culture and traditional values. For them, chaos means money. It means money for the 20 percent of the population who are growing wealthier every day because 80 percent are growing poorer!

What can we do? Is there a way out of our misery? Can the middle class – indeed, mankind be saved? We, the German Volk, have justice and the law on our side! We have the Basic Law, International Law, the United Nations and the International Court on our side, yet we still hesitate. As Jürgen Möllemann expressed it, “Some of us have their pants so full that they see nothing but brown, everywhere they look.” Why have we Germans, the onetime “Nation of Thinkers and Poets,” allowed our enemies to (this) do to us? I often think of a witticism made by a German South African who remarked during my lecture in Port Elisabeth: “The sun is smiling upon South Africa but the whole world is laughing at Germany!” Only the entire German nation as a whole can change the situation. We must finally recognize that as long as the many individuals and groups do not stick together, we will always be a ball that is kicked about by the powerful few. The countless citizen and activist organizations marching separately will never bring about change.

…. I advise you to say loudly and clearly to these representatives of the federal nod (meaning unclear) state parliaments that were not elected by the people / as well as to all party bigwigs: NOW WE HAVE HAD ENOUGH! WE ARE FED UP! WE WANT TO DETERMINE OUR OWN FUTURE! WE WANT A CONSTITUTION AND WE WANT IT NOW! I urge you to accept the invitation to these demonstrations taking place in Leipzig every Monday. See to it that our demands continue thundering from the throats of a hundred thousand of our countrymen!

The present time is propitious for our effort to take back our country. Today, not even the most politically correct television news program is able to continue broadcasting rosy financial reports. They no longer deny that the critical tax structure for financing the federal, state and local government is collapsing. Our accumulated debts have reached the unpayable amount of over five trillion Euros, and they are increasing by over three thousand Euros PER SECOND. In states like Brandenburg the interest on the debt is increasing by thirty percent every twelve months. All in all, Germany is paying over a quarter of a billion Euros EVERY DAY, in interest alone.

Our falling tax receipts barely cover interest payments plus salaries of government workers. Very soon these receipts will not even cover that, my friends, and then our hour will come. The regime will no longer (be) able to pay its debts – it will simply be bankrupt! That time is obviously very near, and so it is now necessary to make plans for the period following the collapse.

When the collapse comes (because of the accumulation of 5 trillion dollars of debt), all of yesterday’s lies will become today’s realty. One of the principal lies of the politicians is that Germany is a sovereign state. The truth obviously is that Germany is still occupied by its World War II enemy. Therefore we demand a peace treaty between all combatants. We also demand the convening of a national convention to write a constitution that shall be adopted by our people in a free plebiscite, as provided by in Article 146 of our Basic Law.

Everyone must participate and help spread the news of our movement, since the moneyed power mongers who own the media do not support a peace treaty. Keep in mind that at the beginning of every revolution, even a peaceful revolution such as ours, only a few individuals were involved. But these were always the best! We must have the best because, in the stirring words of Pierre Bourdieu at the Gare de Lyon in 1995: “We can combat the international technocracy only by challenging them in those fields where they have the advantage. In the field of scientific economics, we must oppose their deformed system with an economics that shows respect for human beings and human realities.”

Rabbi Given Bum's Rush at Notre Dame Cathedral

No time is a good time for a Jewish rabbi to be asked to speak at a Catholic Church, especially on Passion Sunday, especially in a Catholic cathedral with the vaunted history and tradition of Notre Dame in Paris. But that is what almost happened. Just as the rabbi got up to speak to the congregation, a group of young traditional Catholics stood and began chanting the Rosary in unison. This demonstration created enough havoc and confusion in the sanctuary to drive the rabbi off the pulpit and back into the sacristy of the Church, from whence, reportedly, he made his speech over a microphone hookup. These young traditional Catholics were quite rude, many will undoubtedly judge. Oh, that such acts of rudeness might be the rule rather than the exception!

A typical reaction from the "vile media" can be found here.

Catch Michael Hoffman's gloves-off summary of the event. It can not be said any better. See also the accompanying one minute video on Mr. Hoffman's blog.

What the Spanish Civil War Was Really About

Most histories of The Spanish Civil War portray that struggle from a decidedly leftwing point of view . Wikepedia describes it as a “working-class” revolution for the establishment of a democratic “Republican government,” “brutally put down” by a fascist Spanish military regime. Here

Another such piece concludes that the Spanish Civil War “was the culmination of a prolonged period of national political unrest—unrest in a country that was increasingly polarized and repeatedly unable to ameliorate the conditions of terrible poverty in which millions of its citizens lived.” Here

Still another history records the tragic military overthrow by General Fracisco Franco of a popularly elected Republican government, orchestrated by By the leftist Popular Front Party – (Read ‘Stalin-supported Communist Party’) Here

We discover here that the church, “age-old enemy of all working class radicalism and indeed, openly pro-fascist, was dismantled (by the revolution), and its property confiscated; established political institutions disintegrated or were taken over by workers' committees. (Read ‘Communists’)

The Columbia Encyclopedia tell us: This new Republican government “began a broad-ranging attack on the traditional, privileged structure of Spanish society: Some large estates were redistributed; church and state were separated; and an antiwar, antimilitarist policy was proclaimed. Here

We learn from most popular histories of the civil war that the tillers of the soil, and the majority of the “impoverished” Spanish working class in both the cities and rural countryside, were the real heroes in the struggle, and that the ruling Spanish aristocracy, a corrupt "fascist" dictatorship, together with a "fascist" Spanish military and the Catholic Church, (especially the Church), were the bad guys. These characterizations, in brief, comprise almost universally the historical recounting of the Spanish Civil War.

But, let's take another look.

The following ten minute pictorial

video show us, in essence,

what that War

was really all about

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjIZqK7vlPY

Let Bishop Williamson's voice yet be heard..

For well over 20 year, Bishop Richard Williamson of the Society of St. Pius X has been a powerful and consistent voice among traditional Catholics worldwide. That voice was effectively silenced by SSPX leadership after his infamous January 2009 interview for Swedish TV. Since then, truth be told, they have made every effort to expunge his memory from the collective Catholic consciousness. Just try securing any of his tapes or writings from any of the Society's chapel bookstores or seminaries. Even more difficult to obtain from these same sources, I am told, are any of the four volumes of the good bishop's Letters From the Rector, first published in 2008. To order copies of them, the reader will have to go to True Restoration Press at http://www.truerestorationpress.com/catalog/1. Otherwise, forget it! They are as scarce as hen's teeth. I know of at least one active Society priest who is unaware that these books even exist. Think I'm exaggerating?
In any case, let me introduce a sampling of one of these "Letters" for those who may lack a basic acquaintance with them, and for others, as well. The four volumes cover a period beginning in 1988 and ending in 2003. The letters were written monthly, updating the faithful about political, social and cultural issues from a Catholic point of view, and providing them with practical instruction and enlightenment in the maintenance of their Faith. The letter reprinted below is from February 4, 1993 (#112) It is entitled:

The American Patriot's Catechism.

The enclosed Verbum is hardly controversial, but its pre­decessor, headlined "Discovering America's Roots," pre­sented a picture of the Founding Fathers of the United States which did not gain everyone's approval. In particu­lar, a long-standing friend of the Society here in the USA, who has rendered the Society great service, made a series of reasonable objections which deserve a reply. Let me at­tempt the "Catechism of a Patriot." ..

Patriot: By concerning themselves with questions like the founding of the USA, don't priests risk being diverted or distracted from the saving of souls?

Reply: If any man had two heads, he might keep his reli­gion in one and his politics in the other, but inside any one head at any one time, the two things necessarily interact on one another. A man cannot be Liberal in politics without more or less contaminating his Catholic Faith and so en­dangering his soul.

Patriot: But Archbishop Lefebvre wisely left such worldly matters alone, and kept to the Doctrine of the Faith.

Reply: Archbishop Lefebvre may not have explicitly ques­tioned the founding of the American Republic, perhaps because he was never permanently stationed in the USA, but against the ideas of American churchmen he had to fight hard at Vatican II, in particular, against religious liberty. Michael Davies' latest book, The Second Vatican Council and Religious Liberty, shows clearly the part played by the compatriots of the Founding Fathers in the fatal establishing of the principle of religious liberty within the Catholic Church at that Council. Its "Declaration on Religious Liberty" is Americanism infecting the Universal Church. The result is that to defend the Faith anywhere in the world today, a priest must fight these ideas of the Founding Fathers.

Patriot: But Pope Leo XIII about one hundred years ago, with reservations, commended the USA political system. Why should Society of St Pius X priests be more demand­ing than the Pope?

Reply: Pope Leo XIII came before Vatican II; Society priests all come after. The full devastating effect of Americanism (as the Pope called it) upon Catholicism that he then feared, we now know. In Leo's time, the American churchmen could pretend that the Americanism he condemned did not even exist, but by the time of Vatican II, they were posi­tively proud of having "converted" the Catholic Church to the American way-see Michael Davies' book.

Patriot: But the Founding Fathers were decent, God-fear­ing men.

Reply: By no means all of them believed Jesus Christ is God, but let us suppose they were all, as the world goes, honorable men. That does not change the principles on which they built their Republic, which are Freemasonic principles, profoundly harmful to Religion.

Patriot: But not all the Founding Fathers were Masons, and those that were, were Masons-only in name, not in Wickedness like the French Masons who caused the blood-­drenched French Revolution.

Reply: Firstly, the Catholic popes have never distinguished a benevolent Anglo-Saxon Masonry from a malevolent Masonry of the countries of Latin origin. They have always condemned Masonry without distinction, as a whole, and many times. Secondly, Benjamin Franklin, an American Mason, was a close friend and colleague of the French Masons when they were preparing the French Revolution. Thirdly, however many or few American Revolutionaries were Masons, the founding principle of their new Republic- religious liberty- is a key Masonic principle.

Patriot: But the Founding Fathers' idea of liberty was the Catholic idea of liberty, only they left out the authority of the Catholic Church. How can you blame Protestants for that?

Reply: Firstly, their subjective innocence or ignorance God alone can ultimately judge. Here we are questioning their objective achievement. Secondly the opposition between true liberty, centered on God, and Masonic liberty, centered on man, is radical. The difference is not "only" the omis­sion of the Catholic Church (quite an omission!) but two wholly different concepts of God, man, life and law, as Leo XIII makes clear in his Encyclical Libertas, freely quoted in Michael Davies' book.

Patriot: Well, the religious liberty established in the First Amendment has given a marvelous freedom for the Catholic Church to thrive in the USA, ever since the founding of the Republic.

Reply: Freedom, yes, as Leo XIII acknowledges, but a marvelous freedom, no. The problem, in a few words, is that when men found a republic (as they do today all over the world) not just on the practice but on a principle of re­ligious freedom, they are obviously putting the interests of their republic above the interests of anyone religion, other­wise that religion would have primacy in their republic, as today Islam has primacy in Mohammedan republics. Now men are social as well as individual animals. Hence in a re­public of religious liberty, a man may be a pious Catholic individually, but all the social institutions of his inter-reli­gious State are preaching to him that his Catholicism is of secondary importance. At this point he may try to split his politics from his religion, but that is no more possible than to split man from God. So one of two things must happen: either his liberal politics contaminate his Catholic religion, which is how the American bishops at Vatican II ended up "converting" the Catholic Church to the American way, and which is why USA freedom is after all not so good for the Faith; or by the light of his one true Faith he condemns his country's religious liberty and sets out seriously to con­vert his fellow countrymen.

Patriot: But given the mixed religions of the inhabitants of the thirteen colonies, how could the Founding Fathers have founded their republic on any other principle than religious liberty? Impossible!

Reply: No intelligent engineer builds a bridge on sand, but if, for whatever reason, he is forced to do so, at least he does not glorify his bridge. On the contrary, he puts up a no­tice: "DANGER: YOU CROSS THIS BRIDGE AT YOUR PERIL." No intelligent Catholic glorifies a republic built on religious liberty, even if it is his own country. Otherwise politics are going to become his real religion, i.e., what he believes in first and foremost for the welfare of mankind.

Patriot:But the Founding Fathers had no intention of ex­cluding God, or of making liberty into their religion.

Reply: "The way to hell is paved with good intentions." You cannot, however good your intentions, lay down cer­tain principles and not expect their consequences. You cannot establish religious liberty in politics and not expect to undermine all religion wherever those politics apply, at which point religious liberty becomes your real religion.

Patriot: Well, the Founding Fathers may have wanted no State Church, but they did want a country based on Christian principles. The country was Christian, and they assumed it would remain so.

Reply: In that case their right hand did not know what their left hand was doing, which is typical of decent Liberals: their decency is at war with their Liberalism and their Liberalism with their decency. Poor pro-lifers! Many of them seem still to believe in democracy, petitions, letters to editors, etc., etc., but in fact President Clinton's sweep­ing away the Reagan-Bush roadblocks to abortion within two days of becoming president was not in defiance of, but in radical compliance with, democracy, petitions, etc., etc. Where religious liberty takes social precedence over the Catholic Faith or any faith, then implicitly my country's way takes precedence over any law of God, then my coun­trymen's votes entitle the president that they elect to do as he wishes, and any minority that still objects to abortion, for instance, should graciously admit defeat and stop rais­ing the issue, because the people have spoken. And if such a minority insists, the State must be turned loose on it!

Patriot:But the Founding Fathers would be aghast at the present-day development of their Republic.

Reply: No doubt the large majority of them, but that mere­ly shows that, like the Council Fathers of Vatican II who voted for the documents that would serve to destroy the Church, they did not know what they were doing. Liberals are blinded by their illusions. When it comes to building bridges, or republics, no amount of good intentions will make up for ignorance of the laws of engineering.

Patriot: But the situation is no worse in the USA than in many European countries, so the problem is not the Founding Fathers of the USA.

Reply: It is most true that the situation is in significant ways worse in Europe than in the USA. The problem everywhere is Liberalism, or the shaking off of God's truth and God's law. So, true, the problem in the United States is not the Founding Fathers as founding fathers, a task to which they brought many good qualities, but the Founding Fathers as Liberals. In establishing religious liberty, they laid the cor­nerstone of their Republic in Liberalism.

Patriot:But what else could they do?

Reply: You may appeal to historical circumstances, but if these forced the engineers to build on sand, sand is still sand.

Patriot:Are you claiming all Americans are Americanists?

Reply: By no means. Michael Davies' book (available from Angelus Press) is dedicated to the American church­man, Msgr. Joseph C. Fenton, editor of the American Ecclesiastical Review from 1944 to 1963, "whose clear, consistent and courageous defense of papal teaching on Church and State must once again be vindicated as the au­thentic Catholic position."

Patriot: Then the only reason why President Clinton has prevailed over the Catholics is because time ran out for the Catholics before they could convert the Republic.

Reply: No. The reason is because too many American Catholics aligned themselves with the Masonic principles of the Republic instead of condemning them, which is why their bishops "converted" Vatican II. God bless American pro-lifers, the movement is stronger in the USA than in any other country. However let them throw the best of their tal­ents and energies into purely supernatural action because it is only by the purity of their Catholic Faith, not by any hu­man means, that they can prevail.

Patriot:Do you love America?

Reply: Whoever loves Americans will tell them the truth. Whoever would flatter them with pleasing lies, scorns them.

Patriot: I still think Society priests would do better to leave all such questions alone.

Reply: Any Catholic priest must ask St Paul's question: "Do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? If I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ" (Gal. 1: 10). May God bless the America needing and waiting to be converted to the fullness of the Catholic Faith!