ADELAIDE INSTITUTE
PO Box 3300
Adelaide 5067
Online
ISSN
Australia
1440-9828
Tel: 61+88331 0808
Mob: 61+4170 88217
Email: toben@adelaideinstitute.org
Web: http://www.adelaideinstitute.org
April 2009 No 440
_____________________________________________
________________________
years in prison. Töben served time in a German prison in
1999 for the same offense.
German prosecutors sought Töben's arrest on grounds
that the website of Töben's Adelaide Institute published
_____________________________________________
More nonsense from the Auschwitz
front
Holocaust denial statements, including claims that
accounts of Nazi gassings were "outright lies." Over the
past decade, Töben, a schoolteacher, has gained a
number of admirers on the Holocaust-denial circuit. In
2001 and 2003, he spoke out about his beliefs at
"Intifada Conferences" held in Iran, where government
authorities routinely deny the Holocaust.
Not long after Töben was arrested in London, a British
judge ruled that the international warrant for his arrest
was invalid because it contained only "vague and
imprecise" details about Töben's alleged denial. On Nov.
20, German prosecutors dropped their appeal of that
British court ruling, and Töben was released the same
day. Back home in Australia, Töben awaits a contemptof-court hearing for allegedly refusing to comply with a
court order to remove all Holocaust denial claims from
the Adelaide Institute website.
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=1020#
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english/domestic/11076590.asp?gid=244
– blatant lying: imagine, blueprints
found in a rubbish skip!
__________
Rescued Auschwitz plans on show to
that
__________________________________
if
emphasised
I
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article5799457.ece
From The Times
February 25, 2009
1
Holocaust-denial Bishop Richard Williamson takes flight to Britain as expulsion
threat looms
Richard Williamson clashing with a reporter in Buenos Aires
Ruth Gledhill, Religion Correspondent
The English bishop whose excommunication was lifted by the Pope despite the cleric’s denial of the full
extent of the Holocaust flies in to Heathrow this morning after being threatened with expulsion by Argentina.
Richard Williamson, who converted to Roman Catholicism as a young man, has contacted the revisionist
historian David Irving, asking how to present his views on the Holocaust without arousing controversy, The
Times has learnt.
Bishop Williamson, of the ultraconservative Society of St Pius X, scuffled with a reporter at Buenos Aires
airport, raising his fist and apparently shoving him as he hurried to catch his British Airways flight for
London.
The bishop will be met at Heathrow by the socialite Michele Renouf with a legal team. Ms Renouf, a former
beauty queen, denies that she is anti-Semitic but has described Judaism as a “repugnant and hate-filled
religion”.
She found lawyers to defend the Australian Frederick Toben after he was arrested at Heathrow last October at
the request of the German authorities for publishing “anti-Semitic and/or revisionist” material on an internet
site. He was released from Wandsworth prison after a British judge ruled that the arrest warrant was invalid.
Ms Renouf and Dr Toben were appointed to an “international fact-finding committee on the Holocaust” at the
end of Iran’s Holocaust Denial Conference in December 2006, at which she was a speaker. Bishop
Williamson was put in touch with Ms Renouf by Mr Irving.
The row over the bishop’s views erupted after he claimed on Swedish television that there were no gas
chambers and that no more than 300,000 Jews died in the Holocaust, rather than the accepted figure of six
million.
Argentina has one of the largest Jewish populations in the world outside Israel and last Thursday its
Government gave Bishop Williamson ten days to leave the country. It condemned his views on the Holocaust
as “deeply offensive to Argentine society, the Jewish people and humanity”.
Mr Irving, who has served a prison sentence in Austria for “glorifying and identifying with the German Nazi
Party” and who also lost a libel action against Penguin Books and the American historian Deborah Lipstadt
after she accused him of Holocaust denial, said that he first met Bishop Williamson at a garden party at his
house in Windsor last October. Photographs of the bishop at the party were removed from Mr Irving’s website
at the bishop’s request, the historian said.
Mr Irving defended the bishop against the charge of Holocaust denial, saying: “He is not a Holocaust denier.
Like me, he does not buy the whole package.” He said that they had been in e-mail contact. “About a week
ago I sent him a lengthy e-mail telling him what he could safely say. He should not be quoted as saying things
which are not tenable. I sent two pages telling him what is incontrovertible fact. I got a message back thanking
me.”
They have also exchanged other e-mails about the difficulties Bishop Williamson is embroiled in.
Mr Irving said: “He is obviously a very intelligent man who did not realise the danger of talking to the press.”
2
Only days after the Swedish TV interview was broadcast, Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunication on
Williamson and three other bishops of the Society of St Pius X, to widespread incredulity and anger.
Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, criticised the move and called on the Pope to make a “very clear”
repudiation of Holocaust denial.
The Society of St Pius X also sacked Bishop Williamson as head of its seminary outside Buenos Aires.
France’s International League Against Racism and Anti-Semitism also wants to see Bishop Williamson in
court charged with “contesting crimes against humanity”.
Even in the Vatican the affair has exposed divisions among senior cardinals. The Times has learnt that
Cardinal Battista Re, who heads the Holy See’s Congregation for Bishops and who opposed the lifting of the
excommunications, “roared” with anger when he was presented with the document to sign as a fait accompli.
The interview for Swedish television was recorded in Bavaria and prosecutors are considering whether to
press charges. Holocaust denial is a crime punishable by imprisonment in Germany. If charges are brought,
Bishop Williamson could face extradition.
He and the three other bishops were excommunicated automatically in 1988 after they were consecrated
without the sanction of the Holy See.
A hardline history
— Bishop Richard Williamson, 68, is one of four bishops of the ultra-traditionalist Society of St Pius X who
had their excommunications lifted by the Holy See last month
— The society was founded in 1970 by the French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in opposition to the reforms
of the Second Vatican Council (1962-65)
— The bishops incurred automatic excommunication after Archbishop Lefebvre consecrated them in 1988
against Pope John Paul II’s orders
— The society opposed the rendering into the vernacular of the Mass and the council’s reforms in general,
including the seminal council document Nostra Aetate, which repudiated the charge of deicide levelled for
centuries against the Jewish people by Christians
— The society is still not canonically recognised by the Holy See and the bishops cannot function legitimately
as priests or bishops within the Roman Catholic Church
Copyright 2009 Times Newspapers Ltd.
Renouf greets expelled bishop


Paola Totaro in London
February 26, 2009
THE Holocaust-denying bishop Richard Williamson has arrived in London after his expulsion from
Argentina. He was met by a welcoming party which included British socialite Michele Renouf, the
Australian-born former beauty queen who has made a career of vehement anti-Semitism.
Bishop Williamson, a member of the Society of St Pius X, left Buenos Aires wearing a black baseball cap
emblazoned with the sacred heart of Jesus in red embroidery and rock star sunglasses. He pushed past
reporters at Heathrow, refusing to answer questions, and was led out by a phalanx of police.
Ms Renouf, who has described Judaism as a "repugnant, hate-filled religion", has apparently assembled a
legal team to defend Bishop Williamson's right to air his view.
She also found a legal team to defend the Australian Holocaust denier Frederick Toben after he was
arrested at Heathrow in October after a request from German authorities. He had published "anti-Semitic
and/or revisionist" material on a website but was released from prison after a British judge ruled his arrest
warrant was not valid.
It is understood that Bishop Williamson contacted the revisionist historian David Irving, who put him in
touch with Ms Renouf.
Mr Irving defended the bishop against the charge of Holocaust denial: "He is not a Holocaust denier. Like
me, he does not buy the whole package."
3
A spokesman for the Catholic bishops conference of England and Wales told newspapers that he had
"absolutely no idea" what Bishop Williamson could do in Britain.
"He does not fall into the jurisdiction of any of the England and Wales bishops because he is not in full
communion with the Catholic Church," the spokesman said.
It is possible that Bishop Williamson could face an extradition attempt by prosecutors in Germany after an
interview on Swedish television in which he queried the numbers of Jews killed in World War II, and said
that he did not believe the gas chambers existed. Denial of the Holocaust is a criminal offence in
Germany.
http://www.smh.com.au/world/renouf-greets-expelled-bishop-20090225-8i3h.html
Trail of lies ends in judgment
Paul Sheehan The Sydney Morning Herald, February 23, 2009
Illustration: Michael Mucci
At last. On Wednesday the former Federal Court judge and National Living Treasure Marcus Einfeld is
scheduled to be sentenced for perjury and perverting the course of justice. Einfeld has been subverting the
justice system for years.
It may seem punitive that he could be sent to jail for seeking to avoid a $77 speeding fine in 2006, but the
prosecution could note that numerous ethical questions have arisen over the behaviour of Einfeld that
extend well beyond the fine he sought to avoid.
This former judge has been telling lies for a long time. There is also the matter that even judges must be
treated equally before the law.
Einfeld's transgression go well beyond this case, as do the implications of his actions. He strayed from the
path of ethical rigour numerous times. In his entry in Who's Who, a publication which operates on a
system of trust, Einfeld listed his academic credentials as BA, LLB, PhD and LLD. In so doing, he listed
two doctorates that were not conferred by reputable accredited universities.
On the roads, Einfeld broke the law repeatedly, incurring nine traffic fines in four years. He went to great
lengths to avoid some of these fines. On two occasions, in 1999 and 2000, he invoked the name of Dr
Nadine Levick, an Australian pediatrician living in New York, saying she was driving at the time. Both
times the ploy worked.
In 2003 Einfeld was subject to a formal complaint of plagiarism by Professor John Carter of Sydney
University after reproducing Carter's work without attribution. Einfeld's explanation was that the footnotes
had been left out in the printing process. In retrospect, his explanation fits a pattern of deceit.
In 2006, to avoid a speeding fine, Einfeld filled out a false statutory declaration. Had he not contested the
$77 fine, he would have been one demerit from having his licence suspended. When the matter went to
court, Einfeld said he was not driving at the time but had lent his car to a friend visiting from Florida.
When a journalist checked his excuse and found he had referred to a dead person, Einfeld lied again: "This
was not the same person. This was a totally different person … another Professor Brennan."
4
Einfeld later issued a written statement saying contact had been made with a person in the US and it was
hoped it would be possible "in the next few days to reveal who was the driver". However, when journalists
sought access to the full record of his traffic offences, this was contested by his lawyers.
In September 2007, Einfeld, or someone acting on his behalf, made several phone calls to the Manhattan
home of Dr Levick, the same woman he had used to avoid speeding fines in 1999 and 2000.
Last week, another woman, Angela Liati, was found guilty of attempting to pervert the course of justice
by making a false statement to the court to help Einfeld avoid a speeding fine incurred in 2006. Ms Liati
has said she will appeal.
By my count, these are 10 instances of known or apparent deceit.
Then there is his conduct on the bench. Marcus Einfeld was a highly political judge. He was the son of a
Labor politician. He was also a Labor appointment to the bench. He developed a reputation for
partisanship that extended to some of his work on the bench, especially in immigration cases.
When I checked the legal record of immigration cases to see if there was any statistical discrepancy that
would support this view, I found a glaring statistic.
During the time Einfeld was on the Federal Court, the court heard 1856 appeals involving migration
matters. Of these, 170, or 9 per cent, were lodged by the Department of Immigration. In the case of
Einfeld, however, there was a dramatic difference. Of the 21 appeals lodged against his judgments, 14
were by the Department of Immigration.
In other words, on average, just 9 per cent of appeals against Federal Court decisions in migration cases
were made by the government, but this soared to 67 per cent in cases heard by Justice Einfeld. I was able
to access 10 of these appeal court judgments. In four cases, Einfeld's decisions were thrown out and, in the
process, there were some scorching rebuttals given the judicious language used by the bench.
In Department of Immigration v Della Cruz (1992), the court found Einfeld had been in fundamental
error, noting dryly: "The oral evidence may have distracted His Honour from the crucial question."
The crucial question, in this case, was that you can't lie when filling out immigration forms. Einfeld tried
to bypass this requirement.
In Department of Immigration v Buksh (1992), Einfeld's interpretations of the law were demolished by the
higher court in terms such as "it cannot be said" and "such an assumption by the court [Einfeld] is
erroneous".
In Department of Immigration v Petrovski (1997), the higher court gave Einfeld a thrashing: "This appeal
must be allowed because the whole proceedings have proceeded on a false base … the relevant legislative
provisions which apply are so clear and specific that I do not consider that it is open to the court [Einfeld]
to rely on acts or omissions which 'amount to' or should be 'deemed' …"
There is more. These are just the immigration cases. In the end it was not the legal profession but the
media, with its digging and its caustic reference to "Marcus Minefield" and "Justice Seinfeld" and
"Marcus Einfled" which finally brought a stop to this trail of mischief.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/trail-of-lies-ends-in-judgment-20090222-8eoc.html?page=-1 .
Prosecution calls for custodial sentence for Marcus Einfeld
Michael Pelly, The Australian, February 25, 2009
MARCUS Einfeld should go to jail for lying to a court to get out of a traffic fine, the Supreme Court heard
today.
Crown prosecutor Wayne Rosen told Justice Bruce Jones the "only sentence that should be applied is a custodial
one". Mr Rosen also said he would oppose the continuation of bail for the former federal court judge. Justice James
said he would "revisit" the issue before the hearing concluded today.
Einfeld claimed he was not driving his car on January 8, 2006, when it was detected speeding on Sydney's lower
north shore. The 69-year-old retired judge has pleaded guilty to knowingly making a false statement on oath in
Sydney's Downing Centre Local Court on August 7, 2006.
Einfeld also has pleaded guilty to making a false statement in Sydney on August 23, 2006, with the intent of
perverting the course of justice.
The hearing continues. www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25104648-2702,00.html
5
-----Original Message----From: fariborz moshfeghi nejad nejad2000@yahoo.com
Sent: Wednesday, 25 February 2009 3:34 PM
To: info@adelaideinstitute.org
Subject: Marcus Einfeld
"A man claiming to be an aggrieved litigant from a case heard by Einfeld held up a sign
saying "Goodbye Justice Einfeld" and he became involved in a physical contest with two
men, one understood to be related to Einfeld."
===============================
Fredrick Toben comments:
I met Frank in December 1999 when I was visiting Teheran, and he told me how he
had set up ten boutique Gold-Green shops in Sydney for the 2000 Olympic Games but
then was bankrupted as one by one his shops faced closure and were taken over by a
Jewish businessman using the legal system to destroy him.
I feel for Frank who worked so hard to establish himself in Australia but hit the Jewish
business establishment brickwall and the bankruptcy order carries Einfeld's signature.
Anyone interested in following this up is invited to contact Frank at the following email
address - nejad2000@yahoo.com
The wheels of justice grind slowly - perhaps...
Judge Einfeld ordered into dock
Malcolm Brown, The Sydney Morning Herald
February 25, 2009 - 3:05PM
Marcus Einfeld .... ordered into the dock.
Disgraced former Federal Court judge Marcus Einfeld has been told to sit in the dock of the NSW
Supreme Court room where he is facing a sentencing hearing for making false statements over a $77
traffic fine.
The 69-year-old retired judge has pleaded guilty to knowingly making a false statement on oath in
Sydney's Downing Centre Local Court on August 7, 2006.
Einfeld has also pleaded guilty to making a false statement in Sydney on August 23, 2006, with the
intent of perverting the course of justice.
At the start of Einfeld's sentencing hearing in the crowded Sydney court today, his lawyer asked if
Einfeld could sit behind him.
6
But the Crown objected and Justice Bruce James said: "Mr Einfeld, you should go in the dock."
He did.
Einfeld's barrister, top QC Ian Barker, objected to some of the statement of facts which the Crown
wished to tender.
He also described the Crown's written sentencing submissions as falling just short of "recommending
the death penalty".
The charges relate to Einfeld claiming he was not behind the wheel of his car on January 8, 2006,
when a speed camera snapped his silver Lexus doing 60kmh in a 50kmh zone.
The Crown submissions are that the only "possible'' outcome would be a custodial sentence.
Wayne Roser, SC, for the Crown said he was opposing the continuation of bail for Einfeld on that
ground.
Justice James said that he would allow bail to continue for the morning adjournment but that he
would "revisit" the question before 4pm today.
Mr Barker said there was considerable disagreement between himself and the Crown on the
relevance of some of the material that has been submitted as "fact" for the judge to consider.
He said the Crown submission, which he had seen yesterday, "bespeaks considerable passion on
behalf of the author".
He said the submissions were wild and quite unlike the submissions one would expect from a
prosecutor.
Mr Roser said he took offence at Mr Barker's remarks and said that his submissions were "an
objective appraisal of the evidence and relevant law applicable to the case".
Character witness
An Aboriginal elder from the Toomelah community on the NSW/Queensland border was called as a
character witness for Einfeld during sentencing submissions.
Madeline McGrady, an elder of the Toomelah Goomeroi community, said that, when Einfeld visited
the community in 1986 in his capacity as the Equal Opportunities and Human Rights Commissioner,
he had brought about changes that 27 government departments had failed to achieve over many
years.
In an emotional presentation before Justice Bruce James, Ms McGrady said: "I grew up in a mission
where you lived in poverty and you believed that you have got to come out fighting and you believe
that something some day will happen."
Mr Barker asked "Did something happen?"
Ms McGrady: "Yes. Our kids today can wake up in the morning believing they can have a shower, go
to school and get a better education than they were having. That came about through Mr Einfeld,
who came to Toomelah and supported us."
Einfeld wiped his eyes several times and was clearly emotional as he heard the evidence.
The day reached a point of high drama when a scuffle occurred during a mid-morning break as
Einfeld was walking out of court.
A man claiming to be an aggrieved litigant from a case heard by Einfeld held up a sign saying
"Goodbye Justice Einfeld" and he became involved in a physical contest with two men, one
understood to be related to Einfeld.
After the break Mr Barker entered a number of documents including medical reports and "an article
written by Mr [Paul] Sheehan in last Monday's Sydney Morning Herald". He said that the articles
were not exhaustive but they were representative of the sort of things being written about Einfeld.
During Mr Barker's tendering of statements, Justice James said: "There will not be any submissions
that the conduct on this occasion [when Einfeld committed the offences] was an isolated aberration?"
Mr Barker: "No."
Justice James will continue hearing submissions for evidence this afternoon. He has indicated that it
is unlikely that he will proceed to sentencing today.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/judge-einfeld-ordered-into-dock-20090225-8hbm.html?page=-1
FROM THE ARCHIVES:
Former judge faces lengthy jail term
Malcolm Brown
The Sydney Morning Herald, November 1, 2008
Guilty … Marcus Einfeld lied about a $77 driving offence.
7
AFTER nearly three years of wrangling, statutory declarations, surprise witnesses, conflicting accounts and
courtroom manoeuvres, the Marcus Einfeld saga reduced itself yesterday to two words: "guilty" and "guilty" - his
responses to the two indictments read out in the Supreme Court.
Einfeld, appearing before Justice Bruce James, pleaded guilty to having, on August 7, 2006, made a false statement
at the Downing Centre Local Court that he was not the driver of a silver Lexus caught speeding in Mosman on
January 8 that year.
He also pleaded guilty to having on or about August 23, 2006, made a false statement with the intention of
perverting the course of justice.
It was all over in 10 minutes, including discussion between Justice James, the Deputy Senior Crown Prosecutor,
Wayne Roser, SC, and Einfeld's counsel, Ian Barker, QC, about the appropriate date for sentencing submissions.
Einfeld, who turned 70 in September, was immaculately dressed in pinstriped suit and surrounded by family
members. He quietly slipped out of the court, saying: "No, no", to a media request for comment. Some with him
turned aggressively on the media.
Einfeld had initially been charged with 14 offences: three counts of perjury, six of perverting the course of justice,
two of making a false instrument, two of using a false instrument and one of hindering a police investigation, arising
from a series of traffic incidents over six years.
On December 13, Deputy Chief Magistrate Helen Syme found there was "ample evidence" to support a conviction.
She dismissed one charge, of hindering a police investigation.
Einfeld remained defiant, indicating he would vigorously defend the charges. Earlier this month the NSW Court of
Criminal Appeal dismissed five charges of perverting the course of justice, on technical grounds.
The three counts of perjury, which would have each been dealt with at trial had it proceeded next week, became
one count, for the purposes of his plea. The one remaining charge was making a false statement with intent to
pervert the course of justice.
The convictions, however, are sufficient to earn Einfeld a lengthy sentence after Justice James hears submissions on
February 25. Perjury carries a maximum penalty of 14 years' imprisonment. Making a false statement carries a
maximum of 10 years.
The saga started on January 8, 2006, when Einfeld was caught speeding by an RTA camera. The penalty was $77,
but Einfeld decided to lie his way out of it.
Einfeld, who had served a term as chairman of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission, had been a
Federal Court judge for 15 years. He had been appointed an Officer of the Order of Australia and proclaimed a
National Treasure.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/former-judge-faces-lengthy-jail-term/2008/10/31/1224956332577.html
Fredrick Toben comments: I never gloat over anyone’s misfortunes, friend or foe, especially when standing charged before a
court and so hesitatingly I raise this matter: Justice Marcus Einfeld was from 1986-1990 president of the Australian Human Rights
and Equal Opportunity Commission, now called the Human Rights Commission. He was patron of many institutions and as a judge
he heavily engaged in propagating Holocaust-Shoah matters. During the 1990s I met him at a pro-Israel-Holocaust meeting at
Flinders University, Adelaide, where he rebuffed my questions by stating that he refused to answer them because “we have no
common ground“ on any matter. I now understand why he said that.
_______________________
-----------------------------------------------
8
----------------------------------------------------------------
<http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5i3lUiDL95FRxeWUNoNhsEFaTG74Q>
-----------------------------------A man with a moral and intellectual crisis on his hand desperately believes in the Holocaust-Shoah – as
if that were life-defining material for a wholesome life! Mario Kaiser is a foolish individual who has not
thought through the problem
http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/02/11/opinion/edkaiser.php
The pope said nothing
By Mario Kaiser
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
BERLIN: I walked into a courthouse and divorced myself from the Catholic Church. That is what you have to
do as a German if you want to leave the church.
I was waiting for the pope to hold me back. I was waiting for him to tell me that it never should have
happened. I was waiting for him to correct his mistake. But he kept me waiting.
When I first heard that the pope had welcomed a once-excommunicated bishop who denies the Holocaust
back into the church, I didn't believe it. I thought that the truth was probably more complicated.
I respected Pope Benedict XVI. As strongly as I disagreed with him on many issues, I admired his intellect.
As a German, I felt a certain pride that such a thoughtful, humble man had become the leader of the church to
which I belonged.
And then he lost me. The man he had virtually absolved, Bishop Richard Williamson, was known to be a
notorious denier of the Holocaust.
Only weeks before, Williamson had given an interview to a Swedish television reporter, in Germany of all
places, in which he had repeated his denial of the Holocaust.
Confronted by the reporter with his earlier statement that not a single Jew had died in a gas chamber, that it
was all "lies, lies, lies," Williamson thought for a moment. Neatly dressed in a black robe, a large cross
hanging from his neck, he nodded his head and said, in a soft, grandfatherly voice, what he believes. "I believe
there were no gas chambers," he said.
Knowing that denying the Holocaust is a crime in Germany, Williamson glanced over his shoulder as if to
make sure that nobody was listening. "You could have me thrown into prison before I leave Germany," he
said and smiled.
This is the man who, after being excommunicated by a pope more than 20 years ago, was reinstated as a
bishop of the Catholic Church - by a German pope who has been to Auschwitz.
9
After days of unbearable silence and outrage around the world, Benedict finally spoke, and that is when he
lost me. He didn't actually speak: The Vatican issued a statement demanding that Williamson "distance
himself from his positions on the Shoah."
I looked at these words and wondered why, in the eyes of the Vatican, denying the Holocaust was a
"position." I wondered why all it required for a Holocaust-denying bishop to remain a bishop was to "distance
himself" from his words.
I couldn't understand why Benedict didn't distance himself and the Catholic Church from Williamson in the
same way he had associated himself with him, with the stroke of a pen. So I distanced myself from the pope.
I know I should have gone to the priest who married me and my wife only a year ago. We chose his church
because we had learned that the church's secretary had hidden Jews in its basement during the days of the
Nazis. I suspect the priest would have asked me not to punish him for the mistakes of the pope. But I was
tired. I took my marriage certificate and went to court.
There are many issues in the Catholic Church that I would like to discuss. I would like to discuss what roles
women could play, why using condoms to prevent AIDS is a sin, why the Catholic Church doesn't consider
the Protestant Church a church. But there are certain issues I do not want to discuss. I don't wish to discuss if
Hitler had a lovely side to him. And I don't ever wish to discuss if the Holocaust really happened.
I am the grandson of two very different men. One came from a family that raised the swastika flag on the
tallest building in my hometown. The other was a tailor who secretly sewed suits for Jews. They both
disappeared in the trenches of World War II. Maybe that is why I'm sensitive when it comes to discussing the
Holocaust. Part of my family has blood on its hands, and the part that doesn't was killed anyway.
I remember the day in 2005 when Joseph Ratzinger unexpectedly became Pope Benedict XVI.
It was the same year when, for the first time, a woman became the leader of my country. Not only that; she
was the daughter of a Protestant pastor who had moved from West to East Germany and refused to be
intimidated by a Communist government that despised faith as much as capitalism.
Being German was beautiful that year.
The pope is not an anti-Semite and has never condoned anti-Semitism. But he chooses to retreat at a time
when he should lead, and that, to me, is not an option for a German pope in the face of anti-Semitism.
Maybe I judge him too harshly. I hope so. That's the beauty of being born in a country with a Nazi past. I can
hold him to a higher standard.
Mario Kaiser is a journalist based in Berlin.
Here are the people that the ADL hates the most. It's a badge of honor to get on this list:
http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/david_duke/default.asp?LEARN_Cat=Extremism&LEARN_SubCat=Extremis
m_in_America&xpicked=2&item=4
------------------------------
10
http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,606956,00.html
02/12/2009 06:04 PM
THIRD REICH FROM THE SUN
Artist Explores Myths of Nazi UFO Technology
By David Gordon Smith in Berlin
Did Hitler develop top-secret flying saucers? One Polish artist is looking at myths of secret Nazi
technology in a new exhibition at the site where the notorious V-2 rocket was developed in the
German coastal city of Peenemünde.
The Nazis weren't defeated at the end of World War II. Instead, they fled to Antarctica in a flying saucer
constructed by Nazi scientists, where the SS continued their struggle against Freemasons from a secret base in
the German colony of New Swabia. The Americans would later launch the Antarctic expedition Operation
Highjump in 1946 in a bid to capture the Nazis' flying saucer technology.
That, at least, is one version of events. Such far-fetched theories about Nazi flying saucers are deconstructed
in a new exhibition by Polish artist Hubert Czerepok which opens Thursday at Peenemünde Historical
Technical Information Center on Germany's Baltic coast.
"I'm concerned with questioning official versions of history, which are not always true," says Czerepok. "I'm
interested in asking which version is really true."
The exhibition is entitled Haunebu, one of several names for the alleged flying saucer project, which are also
referred to as Reichsflugscheiben ("Reich flying discs"), Vril discs or V-7s. According to believers, the disks
were up to 71 meters (230 feet) in diameter and could reach speeds of up to 5,000 kilometers per hour (3,100
miles per hour).
Peenemünde is an appropriate location for exploring such topics, given that it was where the German V-2
rockets were developed during World War II; some ufologists believe the Haunebu project was an offshoot of
the V-2 program. In fact, many aspects of the UFO conspiracy theories in circulation are inspired by real
events relating to the V-2 -- such as the idea that the Allies seized the flying saucer technology at the end of
the war and took the Nazi scientists to the United States to continue their work in secret. However, there is no
historical evidence that any flying saucer program ever existed.
Between Fact and Fiction
One of the strands that feeds into ufologists' fertile imaginations is a peculiar structure located outside the
village of Nowa Ruba in Poland's Owl Mountains, a part of the country which belonged to Germany up until
1945. The mysterious construction consists of a dozen concrete pillars arranged in a circle with a ring around
the top. No one has ever been able to come up with a definitive explanation of what the Nazis used it for -prompting ufologists to speculate it was used in the alleged Haunebu project.
"There's no other structure like it," says Czerepok, who has visited the site, which was featured in a BBC
documentary. "Some believe it was some kind of storage facility or an ammunition factory. Others believe it
was used for an anti-gravity engine." A large-format photograph of the structure forms part of the exhibition,
which also includes a scale model of a Nazi flying saucer and what are alleged to be photographs, some
clearly doctored, and design sketches of the UFOs.
Czerepok, who says he has always been fascinated by urban myths and conspiracy theories, was inspired by
works by the sensationalist Polish historian Igor Witkowski. He also found a wealth of material on the many
Web sites devoted to Nazi secret technology.
11
Some of the sites go into extraordinary detail about the supposed Nazi UFOs, featuring information about
specifications and test flights. "The Vril 1 Jäger (Hunter) was constructed in 1941 and first flew in 1942,"
reads one site. "It was 11.5 meters in diameter, had a single pilot, and could achieve speeds of between 2,900
kilometers (1,800 miles) per hour and 12,000 kilometers per hour!"
The sites are illustrated with -- inevitably blurry -- photos, artists' renditions and technical drawings which
purport to show the advanced technology described. The authors also discuss at length the role of supposed
Nazi secret societies such as the Order of the Black Sun or the Vril Society. "I've met people who really think
it's true," says Czerepok.
However, the artist insists his aim is not to poke fun at people who believe in the theories. "The project deals
with history, which is not like science," he says. "Instead, it consists of several small narratives." He feels
artists often occupy the gray area between fact and fiction. "As an artist, you are in a position to reconstruct
things which did not exist, things which are not certain."
In the past, theories about a Nazi UFO program gained particular traction in Germany's radical right, neo-Nazi
communities. But Czerepok isn't concerned about his exhibition becoming a magnet for the neo-Nazi fringe.
"It's not a show dedicated to them and I am not trying to get their special attention," he says. "It's an exhibition
about history, which has been seen by some people as science fiction and by others as true historical facts. It's
open for all possible interpretations and different audiences."
Does he believe in UFOs himself? "I'm kind of in between. You have skeptical days and days when you
believe in things. As they say, the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that it has
never tried to contact us."
The exhibition "Haunebu" runs at the Peenemünde Historical Technical Information Center from Feb. 12
until April 19, 2009.
-------------------------new trend in attention seeking blame "Fascists" for non existant assaults.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ihY6fOwa_WjYMkfaToxw3AMtM98wD96
ANVCG0
Attacked woman wasn't pregnant, maybe cut herself
21 hours ago
ZURICH (AP) — Investigators say the Brazilian woman who claimed to have lost her unborn twins in a
Swiss skinhead attack was not pregnant and probably cut wounds into herself.
Zurich University forensic medicine chief Walter Baer said Friday that "any experienced forensic doctor
would not hesitate to assume that this was a case of self-infliction."
The 26-year-old lawyer Paula Oliviera claims she was attacked Monday by three skinheads, one with a Nazi
symbol tattooed on the back of his head, outside a Zurich train station. Pictures have shown her stomach and
legs scarred with the initials of Switzerland's main right-wing party.
The alleged details have shocked the Swiss public and prompted condemnation from Brazil's president.
THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is
below.
ZURICH (AP) — Police say the Brazilian woman who claimed to have lost her unborn twins in a Swiss
skinhead attack was not pregnant.
Zurich police said in a statement Friday it was still unclear if 26-year-old Paula Oliviera's wounds were
inflicted by assailants or herself.
The lawyer claims she was attacked Monday by three skinheads, one with a Nazi symbol tattooed on his
forehead, outside a train station in Zurich on her way home. Pictures have shown her stomach and legs scarred
with the initials of Switzerland's main right-wing party.
12
Brazil's Foreign Ministry and media have said she was speaking in Portuguese when accosted, raising the idea
of an anti-foreigner attack.
The alleged details have shocked the Swiss public and prompted condemnation from Brazil's president.
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fiskrsquos-world-a-fairpoint-everyone-is-equal-in-their-suffering-during-wartime-1609206.html
February 14, 2009
Robert Fisk’s World: A fair point: everyone is equal in their suffering during
wartime
The third and very final part of the "normality" of war. I have just finished reading Lyn Smith's Forgotten
Voices of the Holocaust. I admit to a personal interest. Lyn is a friend of mine for whom I have been
recording my memories of Middle East wars for the Imperial War Museum. Nothing I have ever seen can
equal this, however, and I can give only one example from the terrifying, outrageously brave and moving
book this is.
It is the testimony of Leon Greenman, a British Jewish inmate of Auschwitz-Birkenau who arrived at the
extermination camp with his wife and child. It speaks for itself. All other passages pale beside it:
"We were bullied out of the train and stood about waiting. It must have been about half past two in the
morning. It was dark, a blue light was shining on the platform. We saw a few SS men walking up and down.
They separated the men from the women. So I stood right in front of the men and I could see my wife there
with the child in her arms. She threw me a kiss and she showed the baby ... Then one of the prisoners in a
striped uniform commanded us to follow him. Well, we turned to the left and walked a little way for two or
three minutes. A truck arrived, stopped near us and on the truck were all the women, children, babies and in
the centre my wife and child standing up. They stood up to the light as if it was meant to be like that – so that I
could recognise them. A picture I'll never forget. All these were supposed to have gone to the bathroom to
have a bath, to eat and to live. Instead they had to undress and go into the gas chambers, and two hours later
those people were ashes, including my wife and child."
I recalled this searing passage this week when I received a letter from a reader, taking me to task for my
"constant downplaying of the suffering of the Palestinians on the grounds that their deaths and suffering are
minimal when compared with that of the Second World War". Now, I should say at once that this is a bit
unfair. I was especially taking exception to a Palestinian blog now going the rounds which shows a queue of
Palestinian women at one of Israel's outrageous roadblocks and a (slightly) cropped picture of the Auschwitz
selection ramp, the same platform upon which Leon Greenman was separated from his young wife and child
more than 60 years ago. The picture of the Palestinian women is based on a lie; they are not queuing to be
exterminated. Racist, inhumane and, sometimes deadly – Palestinian women have died at these infernal
checkpoints – but they are not queuing to be murdered.
Yet our reader does have a point. The Second World War, she says, "does put it in a category apart ... but
surely if one is caught up in any war and sees one's loved ones killed or maimed, one's home destroyed ... then
that must be the greatest cataclysm in one's life. The fact that a hundred others, a thousand, a hundred
thousand, a million are suffering likewise is immaterial to the individual's suffering. The Second World War
lasted six years. The Palestinian suffering has lasted over sixty..."
And yes, I'll go along with this. If it's an individual being deliberately killed, then this is no less terrible than
any other individual, albeit that this second person may be one of six million others. The point, of course, is
the centrality of the Holocaust and – Israel's constant refrain – its exclusivity. Actually, the Armenian
Holocaust – as I've said on umpteen occasions – is also central to all genocide studies. The same system of
death marches, of camps, of primitive asphyxiation, even a few young German officers in Turkey watching
the genocide in 1915 and then using the same methods on Jews in the occupied Soviet Union. Numbers
matter.
13
But our reader has another point. "After all," she says, "in the Second World War, after the entry of the US
and USSR on our side, people could feel pretty positive about the outcome. But where is such hope for the
Palestinians? And now to cap the horror the BBC is refusing to even show an appeal to help Gaza..." I'm not
at all sure that W Churchill Esq would have entirely placed such confidence in the outcome of the Second
World War – he was initially worried that the Americans would use up their firepower on the Japanese rather
than against Hitler's Germany.
I think, however, there is yet one more point. The rules of war – the Geneva Conventions and all the other
post-Second World War laws – were meant to prevent another Holocaust. They were specifically designed to
ensure that no one should ever again face the destruction of Mrs Greenman and her child. They were surely
not made only for one race of people. And it is these rules which Israel so disgracefully flouted in Gaza. It's a
bit like the refrain from Lord Blair of Kut al-Amara and a whole host of other apparatchiks when the torture at
Abu Ghraib was revealed. Well, yes, they told us, it was bad – but not as bad as Saddam Hussein's regime.
And of course, this argument leads to perdition. True, we were bad – but not as bad as the Baath party. Or the
Khmer Rouge. Or Hitler's Germany and the SS. Or the Ottoman Turks – though I noticed movingly that one
of Lyn's Jewish Holocaust survivors mentions the Armenians. No, the numbers game works both ways. A
thousand Palestinians die in Gaza. But what if the figure were 10,000? Or 100,000? No, no, of course that
wouldn't happen. But the rules of war are made for all to obey. Yes, I know that the Jews of Europe had no
Hamas to provide the Nazis with an excuse for their deaths. But a Palestinian woman and her child are as
worthy of life as a Jewish woman and her child on the back of a lorry in Auschwitz.
-----Original Message----From: Olga Scully [mailto:muffyandbrian@westnet.com.au]
Sent: Thursday, 19 February 2009 7:53 PM
To: muffyandbrian@westnet.com.au; orion_@idl.net.au; a.team@bluebottle.com;
micdor@pb.ozemail.com.au; alanjones@2gb.com
Subject: [Fwd: [Fwd: What is a deficit? Please explain]]
Dear politician, and any interested person,
Here is what I believe about the deficit. If I am wrong, then
please explain
1. The $42Billion stimulus money has not been borrowed from a
foreign bank.
2. It is money that does not exist at the moment.
3. It will be new money freshly created.
4. To whom does new money belong?
5. Doesn't that money belong to all Australians?
6. If it is our money, why should it be repaid to ourselves in the
future?
7. Even if the government wants it repaid as future taxes, etc,
why charge interest?
8. Already the interest bill has been worked out to be $7.6 Million
14
per annum.
9. Who will get the interest [plus principal of $42 Billion] and why
should they get it?
10. Who would suffer if the money was never repaid?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/feb/18/paul-gambaccini-says-sack-chris-moyles
Paul Gambaccini: sack Chris Moyles over Auschwitz comments
Comments (…)
Paul Gambaccini has called for Radio 1 breakfast show host Chris Moyles to be sacked following his recent
comments about Auschwitz.
Gambaccini, who hosts a two-hour show on Radio 2 on Saturday evenings, last night told an audience at
Oxford University – which included the BBC's director of audio and music, Tim Davie – that Moyles should
go following a series of controversial statements on his breakfast show.
"I find his continual presence on Radio 1 unacceptable. Chris Moyles should be gone," Gambaccini said in a
lecture. "His recent comments about Auschwitz involved real people and their ancestors. That is no joking
matter for them. To encourage this or sit by whilst it happens is unprofessional. He has done it so many times.
He has no sense of responsibility."
Moyles caused controversy last month when he told listeners about his adventures filming the BBC1
genealogy show Who Do You Think You Are?.
"Unlike a lot of the Who Do You Think You Are? shows I didn't go to Auschwitz," he said. "Pretty much
everyone goes there whether or not they're Jewish. They just seem to pass through there on their way to
Florida."
The BBC said it regretted Moyles's comments, which "were misjudged and we are speaking to Chris".
Gambaccini also condemned Moyles – who had audience of 7.3 million weekly listeners on average in the last
three months of 2008 for his breakfast show – for his apparent homophobia towards the likes of singer Will
Young, which he said merely reinforced negative stereotypes.
Giving the last of his quartet of lectures as Oxford's News International professor of broadcast media,
Gambaccini also condemned those at Radio 1 who defended Moyles.
"I am nauseated by the Radio 1 press office constantly rationalising his behaviour," he said. "If we do not get
our own house in order, then sooner or later somebody else will and they might break the furniture in the
process."
Davie, who had to deliver the vote of thanks for Gambaccini following his lecture, praised the veteran DJ and
said of Moyles that "picking on people because of their sexuality was not appropriate to broadcasting".
The BBC director of audio and music added that he had made his views on taste clear to Moyles in a face-toface interview.
In October last year Gambaccini strongly criticised Russell Brand and Lesley Douglas, the former Radio 2
controller who hired him, over the "Sachsgate" affair.
• To contact the MediaGuardian news desk email editor@mediaguardian.co.uk or phone 020 3353 3857. For
all other inquiries please call the main Guardian switchboard on 020 3353 2000.
• If you are writing a comment for publication, please mark clearly "for publication".
<http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1065149.html>
Why does Hollywood love the Holocaust?
15
By Rebecca Spence
With "The Reader" garnering five Oscar nominations, and just as many Holocaust-related films playing this
winter, Hollywood's long-simmering romance with one of the greatest tragedies in human history is reaching a
fever pitch.
Even a former official of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum has a certain fatigue. "I find myself
wanting to take my wife out to a non-Holocaust film, and everything is touching on the Holocaust," said
Michael Berenbaum, who now teaches in Los Angeles at the American Jewish University.
Indeed, "The Reader," "Defiance," "Valkyrie," "Adam Resurrected" and the "The Boy in the Striped Pajamas"
all touch in some way - while not necessarily directly - on the slaughter of the six million. In view of this
recent spate of films, how to explain Hollywood's continuing fascination with the Holocaust?
The answer is not a simple one. In interviews with the Forward, film directors and scholars offered a wide
range of views on what compels the movie business to grapple with the myriad facets of Holocaust history,
and the myriad lives shaped by the Holocaust's indignities. Are the reasons primarily commercial? Artistic?
Moral?
"Part of it has to do with the fact that the Holocaust is about ultimate issues," explained Berenbaum, who
served as senior consultant on the 2004 documentary "Imaginary Witness: Hollywood and the Holocaust."
"People face life and death challenges once or twice in their existence, and Holocaust survivors and victims
faced it as an everyday issue," he continued.
In an industry long transfixed by matters of good and evil - think Westerns, where cowboys and Indians were
depicted simply as respective good guys and bad guys - the Holocaust provides fertile ground for a host of
such narratives. And in keeping with Hollywood conventions, including the imperative of a happy ending,
even Holocaust movies often include some element of redemption.
"The Reader," directed by Stephen Daldry and based on the novel by Bernhard Schlink, is yet another
example of this phenomenon. The film centers on an erotic affair between a former concentration camp guard
and an adolescent German boy who initially knows nothing of his lover's past. And while the film attempts to
explore questions of human complicity in a nuanced and complex way, the same conventions of redemption
inevitably play out. In a final act, the former guard - played by Kate Winslet, whose performance earned her a
best actress nomination - leaves her money to a Jewish survivor.
In a January 9 opinion piece in the pages of the Forward, historian Deborah Lipstadt warned of the dangers of
romanticizing the Holocaust. Parsing the case of the recently debunked Holocaust memoir "Angel at the
Fence," which turned out to be fiction, Lipstadt mused on what led publishers and film producers to ignore the
warning signs that Herman Rosenblat's story was utterly implausible. "They all seemingly wanted a story that
made the Holocaust heartwarming, even though, as Waltzer aptly put it, the 'Holocaust experience is not
heartwarming, it is heart rending,'" Lipstadt wrote, referring to historian Ken Waltzer.
Mark Jonathan Harris, director of two Academy Award winning Holocaust documentaries, traced the
abundance of Holocaust films to the idea that people are fascinated by how they themselves might have
behaved. "These are deeply emotional subjects," Harris said. "The fascination and why people keep returning
16
to it is because they keep returning to the question of 'how would they have acted?'"
Up for the Oscar
In "The Reader," which is also up for best picture, the question revolves around how the hero of the story - the
former concentration camp guard's lover, played as an adult by Ralph Fiennes - is later compromised by the
feelings he had for someone who participated in the brutality. That, Harris said, implicates all the Germans
who stood by and allowed the horrors to occur. This sort of existential dilemma is also raised in "Defiance," a
tale about Jewish partisans directed by Edward Zwick. In that film, the question is whether one would have
resisted or gone passively to the death camps.
Others view Hollywood's fascination with the topic in more pragmatic terms. Steven Ross, a University of
Southern California historian, said that commercial concerns trump all else. "The Holocaust is a great drama,
and the bottom line is that Hollywood is ultimately in the profit-making business, not in the consciousnessraising business," Ross said. "They make films that audiences want to see, and what audiences want to see are
compelling dramas and melodramas, and Holocaust films offer that."
But while seminal films such as "Schindler's List" (1993) - which many credit with paving the way for other
Holocaust films - grossed more than $300 million worldwide and about $96 million domestically, there are
plenty of examples of Holocaust films that proved unlucrative.
Even "The Reader," with its cache of Academy Award nominations, has grossed just under $13 million
domestically so far. The film, which has seen almost no box office bump from the Oscars race, cost some $32
million to make.
Aside from this cultural moment, at least one filmmaker argues that Hollywood's so-called obsession with the
Holocaust is vastly overrated.
"I find it to be an anti-Semitic sentiment, because there are not a lot of films about the Holocaust," Anker said.
"There's a degree of anti-Semitism when someone says, 'Another Holocaust movie,' and rolls their eyes,
because there's an implication that another Holocaust movie is one too many. No one rolls their eyes about
Vietnam War movies, or other World War II movies."
<http://uk.reuters.com/article/mediaNews/idUKN1840858920090218>
Author of fake Holocaust love story apologizes
Wed Feb 18, 2009 4:08pm GMT
WASHINGTON, Feb 18 (Reuters Life!) - A Holocaust survivor whose memoir was canceled late last year
after the publisher found out that his love story was not true said he had simply made a mistake.
"I made a mistake and I want America to forgive me for that mistake, but I didn't mean no harm to anybody,"
Herman Rosenblat, 79, said in his first interview since the book was canceled in December.
Speaking from Florida, where he lives, Rosenblat said in a video posted on YouTube on Tuesday night that he
had been confused about what was real.
Video: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tPuEiy3pTs>
For years, Rosenblat told newspapers, magazines and televison programs the story of how he met his wife-tobe when he was a teen-age prisoner in a Nazi concentration camp at Schlieben in Germany and that she had
thrown apples and bread across a fence to him.
"Fifteen years ago, I started to write my memoir and my wife came to me and told me that when she was
hiding in Germany she went ahead and threw an apple over the fence to a boy and I believed it was me. In my
head, I believed it was me ... and I still believe it's me," Rosenblat said in the video.
He added he believed the girl was an angel sent by his mother, who died in the Holocaust.
17
Rosenblat, a Polish-born retired electrical contractor who now lives in North Miami Beach, Florida, said in his
memoir that they had met again by chance on a blind date in New York years later, fallen in love and got
married.
The book, "Angel at the Fence, The True Story of a Love that Survived," was canceled by Berkley Books, an
imprint of the Penguin Group, after Rosenblat's agent, Andrea Hurst, said he had invented part of the book.
The memoir, which had been due to be published in February, came under public scrutiny after several
scholars in an article in The New Republic magazine challenged some of the claims in the book that was also
set to be made into a movie.
Harris Salomon, president of Atlantic Overseas Pictures is pushing ahead with plans to make a feature film,
with shooting due to start in Hungary this summer.
Rosenblat's story will also be made into a fictional book to be published by York House Press. The novel,
entitled "The Apple" is slated for spring.
"His story is basically true. The part that he made up was the part about the apples, about his love story, which
unfortunately was blown out of proportion by the U.S. media," Salomon told Reuters. (Reporting by Sandra
Mahler, Editing by Leslie Gevirtz)
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2009/02/what-does-holocaust-denial-really-mean/
What Does Holocaust Denial Really Mean?
by Daniel McGowan / February 17th, 2009
In April 2007 the European Union agreed to set jail sentences up to three years for those who deny or
trivialize the Holocaust.1 More recently, in response to the remarks of Bishop Richard Williamson, the Pope
has proclaimed that Holocaust denial is "intolerable and altogether unacceptable."
But what does Holocaust denial really mean? Begin with the word Holocaust. The Holocaust2 (spelled with a
capital H) refers to the killing of six million Jews by the Nazis during World War II. It is supposed to be the
German's "Final Solution" to the Jewish problem. Much of the systematic extermination was to have taken
place in concentration camps by shooting, gassing, and burning alive innocent Jewish victims of the Third
Reich.
People like Germar Rudolf, Ernst Zundel, and Bishop Williamson who do not believe this account and who
dare to say so in public are reviled as bigots, anti-Semites, racists, and worse. Their alternate historical
scenarios are not termed simply revisionist, but are demeaned as Holocaust denial. Rudolf and Zundel were
shipped to Germany where they were tried, convicted, and sentenced to three and five years, respectively.
Williamson may not be far behind. etc etc etc - see article itself by clicking on the URL above
+++
DEBATING THE HOLOCAUST: A New Look At Both Sides by Thomas Dalton, PhD
Publisher's Note: This is a non-Revisionist title for Theses & Dissertations Press. It will be the first book on
the Holocaust, in publishing history, that will not take a Traditionalist or a Revisionist point of view. When
you purchase this book, one-third of the proceeds will go to imprisoned scholar Germar Rudolf and his family.
http://www.amazon.com/Debating-Holocaust-Look-Both-Sides/dp/1591480051/
Founded in 2000 the publishing company Theses & Dissertations Press is at the center of a worldwide
network of scholars and activists who are working -- often at great personal sacrifice -- to separate historical
fact from propaganda fiction. The founder of Theses & Dissertations Press is Germar Rudolf. Who is
currently serving prison time for his published works and will be released on July 4, 2009.
As the new director of Germar Rudolf's American publishing division, I wish to express my outrage that the
18
Holocaust, unlike any other historical event, is not subject to critical revisionist investigation. Furthermore I
deplore the fact that many so-called democratic states have laws that criminalize public doubting of the
Holocaust. It is my position that the veracity of Holocaust assertions should be determined in the marketplace
of scholarly discourse and not in our legislatures bodies and courthouses.
Peace.
Michael Santomauro
Editorial Director
Call: 917-974-6367
ReporterNotebook@Gmail.com
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2009/02/18/europe/EU-EU-Jewish-Leader.php
Jewish leader calls for EU action on anti-Semitism
The Associated Press
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
BRUSSELS: The leader of the European Jewish Congress said Wednesday the main blame for growing antiSemitism across the continent was the economic crisis, not the Gaza war.
Congress President Moshe Kantor said that what he believes to be anti-Semitism levels unseen since World
War II had "nothing to do with Middle East things."
"All these problems started before Gaza and continued afterwards," he said in an interview with The
Associated Press.
Some 1,300 Palestinians were killed during the three-week Israeli offensive in Gaza, according to Gaza health
officials. Israel launched the attacks to halt years of rocket fire on southern Israeli communities.
"Economical things trigger humanitarian tragedies," he said. Jews were made scapegoats for economic
difficulties Germany faced in the 1930s, he said. "And this is the lesson."
Kantor met with the European Union Justice Commissioner Jacques Barrot and the EU Parliament President
Hans-Gert Pottering on Wednesday to discuss anti-Semitic attacks and statements across Europe.
A recent survey for the U.S. based Anti-Defamation League conducted in Austria, France, Germany,
Hungary, Poland, Spain and Britain found that 31 percent of respondents blame Jews in the financial industry
at least a little for the global financial meltdown.
Europe is a continent of tolerance, but that tolerance is threatened, Kantor said.
Attacks against Jews and synagogues have been reported in France, Britain and Sweden.
Kantor also referred to a call by a union in Italy for the boycott of Jewish-owned shops in Rome.
There is a "shortage of historical memory," he said. The situation in Europe is "dangerous again, not only for
Jews, for all Europeans."
19
http://www.smh.com.au/national/holocaust-survivor-walks-free-20090215-887o.html
Holocaust survivor walks free
Bellinda Kontominas
February 16, 2009
HE KNOWS better than most the harsh reality of incarceration. In 1945, aged 19, Peter Gabriel Agoston was
freed from a Hungarian concentration camp under Hitler's control.
Now, at 81, his mind is failing him. He has been diagnosed with dementia and suffers from high levels of
anxiety.
It was for these reasons that Mr Agoston walked free from Sydney District Court last week, even though a
judge found that a jury could convict him of attempting to defraud the Australian Tax Office of about $8.8
million. The alleged offences involved tax returns Mr Agoston filed between 1995 and 2000 in relation to four
Australian films, including a soccer documentary narrated by the SBS commentator Les Murray.
Mr Agoston, who was in a partnership with others to attract film investors, was accused of falsely overstating
the claims for spending by more than $2.8 million in one financial year.
He did this by allegedly using the figures for the projected spending, calculated before film production began.
Judge Christopher Geraghty said documents seized from Mr Agoston's office revealed that in the 1995-96
financial year he had overstated the spending on a film called Super Champions Of The World by $800,000.
In 1999-00 Mr Agoston had overstated the spending on the soccer documentary Height Of Passion by more
than $2.8 million, the court heard.
The discrepancies were discovered during a Tax Office audit of the tax returns, so no money was lost by the
commonwealth, Judge Geraghty said.
He said the evidence against Mr Agoston was strong enough for a properly instructed jury to convict him of
the offences.
But in an earlier judicial decision Mr Agoston had been deemed unfit to stand trial because of his mental
health, expected to deteriorate rapidly.
Taking into account his age, his mental health and personal history, it was "inappropriate to inflict any
punishment" on Mr Agoston, Judge Geraghty said.
He accepted that Mr Agoston would have been affected by the "unimaginable cruelty" inflicted by the Nazis
before he was freed on April 13, 1945.
Mr Agoston declined to comment.
20
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2009/feb/18/crackdown-college-extremists-terrorism
Government cracks down on college extremists
Violent radicals have tried to infiltrate further education colleges, says skills secretary John Denham




Jessica Shepherd
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 18 February 2009 16.07 GMT
larger | smaller
Article history
Violent extremists have tried to infiltrate colleges in the UK, the government warned today, as it launched a
crackdown on radicalisation on college campuses.
Its new guidance to colleges says: "There have been examples of groups linked to violent extremism trying to
use college premises for campaigning or other events. Although there are very few instances of young people
being exposed to extremist messages within colleges, this is a risk of which colleges need to be aware."
The skills secretary, John Denham, who was at Newham College in east London to launch the guidance, said
colleges were at the heart of communities. "If there are issues in a community, they are going to end up
coming into a college," he said.
But "only a small number of people" were thought to have been radicalised in colleges, he added.
Several suspected and convicted would-be bombers attended UK colleges. Yassin Omar, who plotted to blow
up London transport passengers in a series of coordinated suicide attacks on 21 July 2005, went to Enfield
College. Omar Khyam, who was convicted in April 2007 of trying to plan attacks in Britain using fertiliser
bombs, went to East Surrey College.
College principals said the main threats of violent extremism came from Islamic fundamentalism and the far
right. But they said the advice covered all forms of violent extremism.
In the government's 50-page guidance, which is not legally binding, colleges are asked to look out for:
• Graffiti symbols, writing or artwork that promotes extremist messages;
• Students accessing extremist material online, including through social networking sites;
• Reports from parents that a student's behaviour, friendships or actions have changed;
• Students voicing extremist opinions or using "hate" terms to exclude others or incite violence;
• Groups or individuals who hold "more rigid doctrinal/ideological and adversarial views" and are becoming
popular in college societies or associations;
• College staff, including temporary staff, expressing views or bringing material into the college that may be
extreme.
If necessary, colleges should liaise with local police or special branch, Denham said.
But the skills secretary recognised that violent extremism could be difficult to spot. "If somebody is trying to
organise a terrorist cell, they are probably not going to tell the college principal," he said.
The guidance recommends colleges appoint a member of staff to advise colleagues and liaise with police and
other organisations. Colleges should promote shared values, create a space for free and open debate and
ensure communities of students do not separate themselves.
They should ensure students are free from bullying, harassment and intimidation, the guidance states.
When the government issued guidance to universities on how to curb violent extremism in 2006, the
universities rejected it. They said it was a threat to freedom of speech and risked demonising Muslims.
Paul Head, principal of the College of North East London and chair of a group of principals advising the
government on preventing violent extremism, said the guidance did not advocate spying.
He said: "We have an absolute duty to promote democratic values. It is a matter of balancing this with
freedom of speech."
Usman Akbar, 19, who is studying for a business Btec at Newham College, said colleges should only raise the
alarm about students with whom "it was impossible to reason".
21
Denham said the guidance would only prove its worth over time. "The real measure is whether as a society we
are resisting extremism and showing young people that there is a different way forward," he said.
A spokesman from the University and College Union (UCU) said: "We recognise that with academic freedom
comes social responsibility and a duty of care to students and staff. However, we must not curb the freedom to
challenge opinion and explore sensitive issues, including those that some people may consider challenging,
offensive and even extreme."
http://jta.org/news/article/2009/02/18/1003085/british-academics-protest-israel-museumexhibit
British academics protest Israel museum exhibit
February 18, 2009
LONDON (JTA ) -- A group of anti-Israel academics chided London's Science Museum for renting space for
an exhibition celebrating Israel's scientific achievements.
In a letter to the Guardian newspaper, the academics called on the museum to cancel the Israel Day of Science
on the grounds that Israel is using science in its attacks on Palestinians, especially during the recent military
operation in Gaza.
The group is mostly supporters of the numerous failed attempts to impose an academic boycott on Israel. They
blamed Israel for "war crimes in Gaza," and attempted to show the close links between Israeli universities and
the military.
The Zionist Federation of Great Britain has invited students aged 16 to 18 to visit the exhibit next month. A
similar exhibition will be held at the Manchester Museum of Science in Industry in North England.
More than 1,000 students from 25 schools around London have confirmed their interest in visiting the
exhibition.
The academics wrote in their letter that the event "is promoted by the Zionist Federation and is designed to
showcase the scientific achievements of seven Israeli universities. But all of these are complicit in the Israeli
occupation and in the policies and weaponry so recently deployed to such disastrous effect in Gaza."
The group also claims that the museum's association with such an event might have a negative effect on young
people.
"What reaction can be expected from the many young people, already disaffected from science, who will
associate the science museum with this Israeli public relations exercise?" its letter said. "The event is being
billed as a celebration of science. In fact, it is an attempted celebration of Israel."
In a statement, the Science Museum said, "The event is scientific, non-political and aimed at the educational
sector." It added that "The Science Museum was chosen as a venue in order to make it more interesting for the
students and to encourage schools to participate."
How is this of great historical importance? He was a human being and had idiosyncrasies like any one else.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/hitlers-bad-habits-revealed-indocuments-1625428.html
Hitler's bad habits revealed in documents
Press Association
Wednesday, 18 February 2009
Adolf Hitler's "uncouth" personal conduct, including biting his nails during meals, have been exposed in
secret intelligence papers discovered in an unknown house in the South West.
22
The documents paint a picture of Hitler based on information from one of his wartime aides, who describes
the Nazi leader as a solitary man "of extremely few but intense emotions" and "shocking" table manners.
The account by the unknown German officer, who kept the war diary at the Wolf's Lair military headquarters
and dined with Hitler at least 30 times, form part of an end-of-war intelligence report, which is to be sold at
auction at Ludlow Racecourse in Shropshire next month.
According to the informant, simply referred to as Lieutenant Colonel PW, Hitler "ate prodigious amounts of
cake", which contributed to a "digestive disorder", and lost himself in thought during meals.
"Hitler eats rapidly, mechanically - for him food is merely an indispensable means of subsistence" he wrote.
"Quite often Hitler will sit there throughout the entire meal, turned to his own thoughts, seemingly without
listening to the talk going on around him.
"However, he does follow the drift of the conversation vaguely, to him the conversation seems to have the
effect that music has on others; it stimulates his thoughts and relaxes him."
Dated May 1945 - the year Hitler died - and marked "must be destroyed within 48 hours of reading", the
report said the Fuhrer spoke "in a mellow baritone, without that raucous, unpleasant stridency of his public
speeches".
But it added: "At the table and in his speech he shows many facets of his rather uncouth behaviour. He
abstractedly bites his fingernails, he runs his index finger back and forth under his nose, and his table manners
are little short of shocking."
Hitler also preferred stewed vegetables and fruit to meat, herbal tea to coffee and banned smoking in his
presence, according to the informant.
http://www.ejpress.org/article/34786
London declaration on anti-Semitism says ‘never again’ to UN’s ‘Durban II’
Original article: www.ejpress.org/article/34786
23
Updated: 17/Feb/2009 16:17
LONDON (EJP)---Parliamentarians meeting in London at the first ever summit on anti-Semitism called Tuesday on
their respective governments and the United Nations “never again to allow the institutions of the international
community to be abused for the purposes of trying to establish any legitimacy for anti-Semitism”.
They also called on the European Union Council of Ministers to address the issue of combating
renewed anti-Semitism on the continent.
23
The call came in a declaration drawn up by around 100 parliamentarians from nearly 40 countriesincluding the president of the Austrian parliament and the vice-president of the German Bundestagwho attended the two-day summit organized by the Inter-parliamentary Coalition for Combating
Anti-Semitism (ICCA) in conjunction with the UK’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office in London.
The conference took place in the Houses of Parliament and at Lancaster House.
The participants declare that the international community “must not be witness or party to another
gathering like Durban in 2001,” the infamous UN anti-racism conference, where the focus on Israel to
the exclusion of all other issues was widely perceived as anti-Semitic.
The “Durban Review Conference on Racism” dubbed “Durban II” is to be held at the Geneva UN
headquarters on April 20-24.
According to British MP John Mann, who chairs the Parliamentary Committee Against Antisemitism,
“the Internet, the globalisation of the media, a resurgence of the extreme right and an anti-Zionist
hard left have combined to create a febrile environment, in which the spread of old and new antiSemitic theories and attitudes have been able to gain traction with alarming ease.”
He added that the Durban conference was amongst the manifestations of this trend.
Over the two days, parliamentarians and experts from nearly forty countries have hammered out a
series of strategies to tackle global anti-Semitism.
Among the ministers attending the conference were Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini and Lord
Malloch-Brown, Britain's Minister for Africa, Asia and the UN.
24
The London Declaration also called for the exposure and isolation of
governments and individual politicians who engage in hate against the
Jews and the establishment of an international taskforce of Internet
specialists to measure racism and anti-Semitism online and propose
international responses.
This should be an utterly
unnecessary conference.
We hoped that the embers
of anti-Semitism were long
since dead and cold. Sadly
they're not. The response
must not just address the
Setting the context for the conference, former Canada’s Attorney-General Muslim-Jewish
relationship. It's part of
and counsel to Nelson Mandela, MP Irwin Cotler MP declared:“There is a
it, but only a part.
new sophisticated, globalising, virulent and even lethal anti-Semitism,
reminiscent of the atmospherics of the 30s, and without parallel or
precedent since the end of the Second World War.”
Johan Mann stressed that "anti-Semitism is a touchstone for other ills
within wider society and unless we move to address its spread now, and
as a matter of the utmost urgency, we will all pay a heavy price."
The broader issue is to
again go back to the basics
of this to remind people of
the extraordinary role Jews
play in so many countries
around the world.
British Foreign Office
minister Lord Mark
Malloch-Brown in an
interview with BBC
television.
-----Original Message----From: Bob Taft
Sent: Feb 18, 2009 2:42 PM
To:
Subject: Social Collapse Best Practices by Dmitry Orlov
Great article Barbie. Americans have been much too insulated from the realities of chaos. Interesting that this author
proposes a Jubilee Year which must come by force if necessary. We've yet to experience such a thing here but, land redistribution as has happened in so many other countries may be coming. Remove the protections of corporate limited
liability and the huge corporate agricultural monopolies will revert to family ownership.
Big problem in the US is unnecessary government which along with the system that created it has to go. This is easily
solved by another return to Old Testament sanity, re-instituting government from the people upwards, via Exodus 18:21. No
more dominance, meaning no more democracy. No more debt-creating banking system which without its supporting
government would collapse. No more Roman judicial system with legions of parasitical lawyers. No more "government by
men" but a return to the simplicity of "government by law," that is the Golden Rule. Un-needed government buildings can
join un-needed educational campuses in seeking productive usage.
25
The transition will be tough, but Jefferson's agrarian society is returning. The lifespan of a civilization on this mudball has
never been great. It starts on water and ends under water. The older it gets the more decadent it becomes. It seems to
fairly adequately plot its own demise. Let 'er rip!
Best regards,
Bob Taft
The Taft Ranch
Upton, Wyoming
(307) 465-2206
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?read=74897
" There are three kinds of men: The ones
that learn by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to
pee on the electric fence and find out for
themselves". Will Rogers
Social Collapse Best Practices by Dmitry Orlov
Posted by: "Barbara Lupien" balup11@msn.com balup11
Tue Feb 17, 2009 3:12 pm (PST)
I just finished reading this and thought I would pass it along.
Long but very interesting.
barbi
http://cluborlov.blogspot.com/2009/02/social-collapse-best-practices.html
ClubOrlov
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Social Collapse Best Practices
The following talk was given on February 13, 2009, at Cowell Theatre in Fort Mason Center, San Francisco, to an audience
of 550 people. Audio and video of the talk will be available on Long Now Foundation web site.
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for showing up. It's certainly nice to travel all the way across the North
American continent and have a few people come to see you, even if the occasion isn't a happy one. You are here to listen to
me talk about social collapse and the various ways we can avoid screwing that up along with everything else that's gone
wrong. I know it's a lot to ask of you, because why wouldn't you instead want to go and eat, drink, and be merry? Well,
perhaps there will still be time left for that after my talk.
I would like to thank the Long Now Foundation for inviting me, and I feel very honored to appear in the same venue as many
serious, professional people, such as Michael Pollan, who will be here in May, or some of the previous speakers, such as
Nassim Taleb, or Brian Eno – some of my favorite people, really. I am just a tourist. I flew over here to give this talk and to
take in the sights, and then I'll fly back to Boston and go back to my day job. Well, I am also a blogger. And I also wrote a
book. But then everyone has a book, or so it would seem.
You might ask yourself, then, Why on earth did he get invited to speak here tonight? It seems that I am enjoying my moment
in the limelight, because I am one of the very few people who several years ago unequivocally predicted the demise of the
26
United States as a global superpower. The idea that the USA will go the way of the USSR seemed preposterous at the time.
It doesn't seem so preposterous any more. I take it some of you are still hedging your bets. How is that hedge fund doing, by
the way?
I think I prefer remaining just a tourist, because I have learned from experience – luckily, from other people's experience –
that being a superpower collapse predictor is not a good career choice. I learned that by observing what happened to the
people who successfully predicted the collapse of the USSR. Do you know who Andrei Amalrik is? See, my point exactly. He
successfully predicted the collapse of the USSR. He was off by just half a decade. That was another valuable lesson for me,
which is why I will not give you an exact date when USA will turn into FUSA ("F" is for "Former"). But even if someone could
choreograph the whole event, it still wouldn't make for much of a career, because once it all starts falling apart, people have
far more important things to attend to than marveling at the wonderful predictive abilities of some Cassandra-like person.
I hope that I have made it clear that I am not here in any sort of professional capacity. I consider what I am doing a kind of
community service. So, if you don't like my talk, don't worry about me. There are plenty of other things I can do. But I would
like my insights to be of help during these difficult and confusing times, for altruistic reasons, mostly, although not entirely.
This is because when times get really bad, as they did when the Soviet Union collapsed, lots of people just completely lose
it. Men, especially. Successful, middle-aged men, breadwinners, bastions of society, turn out to be especially vulnerable.
And when they just completely lose it, they become very tedious company. My hope is that some amount of preparation,
psychological and otherwise, can make them a lot less fragile, and a bit more useful, and generally less of a burden.
Women seem much more able to cope. Perhaps it is because they have less of their ego invested in the whole dubious
enterprise, or perhaps their sense of personal responsibility is tied to those around them and not some nebulous grand
enterprise. In any case, the women always seem far more able to just put on their gardening gloves and go do something
useful, while the men tend to sit around groaning about the Empire, or the Republic, or whatever it is that they lost. And
when they do that, they become very tedious company. And so, without a bit of mental preparation, the men are all liable to
end up very lonely and very drunk. So that's my little intervention.
If there is one thing that I would like to claim as my own, it is the comparative theory of superpower collapse. For now, it
remains just a theory, although it is currently being quite thoroughly tested. The theory states that the United States and the
Soviet Union will have collapsed for the same reasons, namely: a severe and chronic shortfall in the production of crude oil
(that magic addictive elixir of industrial economies), a severe and worsening foreign trade deficit, a runaway military budget,
and ballooning foreign debt. I call this particular list of ingredients "The Superpower Collapse Soup." Other factors, such as
the inability to provide an acceptable quality of life for its citizens, or a systemically corrupt political system incapable of
reform, are certainly not helpful, but they do not automatically lead to collapse, because they do not put the country on a
collision course with reality. Please don't be too concerned, though, because, as I mentioned, this is just a theory. My theory.
I've been working on this theory since about 1995, when it occurred to me that the US is retracing the same trajectory as the
USSR. As so often is the case, having this realization was largely a matter of being in the right place at the right time. The
two most important methods of solving problems are: 1. by knowing the solution ahead of time, and 2. by guessing it
correctly. I learned this in engineering school – from a certain professor. I am not that good at guesswork, but I do
sometimes know the answer ahead of time.
I was very well positioned to have this realization because I grew up straddling the two worlds – the USSR and the US. I
grew up in Russia, and moved to the US when I was twelve, and so I am fluent in Russian, and I understand Russian history
and Russian culture the way only a native Russian can. But I went through high school and university in the US .I had
careers in several industries here, I traveled widely around the country, and so I also have a very good understanding of the
US with all of its quirks and idiosyncrasies. I traveled back to Russia in 1989, when things there still seemed more or less in
line with the Soviet norm, and again in 1990, when the economy was at a standstill, and big changes were clearly on the
way. I went back there 3 more times in the 1990s, and observed the various stages of Soviet collapse first-hand.
By the mid-1990s I started to see Soviet/American Superpowerdom as a sort of disease that strives for world dominance but
in effect eviscerates its host country, eventually leaving behind an empty shell: an impoverished population, an economy in
ruins, a legacy of social problems, and a tremendous burden of debt. The symmetries between the two global superpowers
were then already too numerous to mention, and they have been growing more obvious ever since.
The superpower symmetries may be of interest to policy wonks and history buffs and various skeptics, but they tell us
nothing that would be useful in our daily lives. It is the asymmetries, the differences between the two superpowers, that I
believe to be most instructive. When the Soviet system went away, many people lost their jobs, everyone lost their savings,
27
wages and pensions were held back for months, their value was wiped out by hyperinflation, there shortages of food,
gasoline, medicine, consumer goods, there was a large increase in crime and violence, and yet Russian society did not
collapse. Somehow, the Russians found ways to muddle through. How was that possible? It turns out that many aspects of
the Soviet system were paradoxically resilient in the face of system-wide collapse, many institutions continued to function,
and the living arrangement was such that people did not lose access to food, shelter or transportation, and could survive
even without an income. The Soviet economic system failed to thrive, and the Communist experiment at constructing a
worker's paradise on earth was, in the end, a failure. But as a side effect it inadvertently achieved a high level of collapsepreparedness. In comparison, the American system could produce significantly better results, for time, but at the cost of
creating and perpetuating a living arrangement that is very fragile, and not at all capable of holding together through the
inevitable crash. Even after the Soviet economy evaporated and the government largely shut down, Russians still had plenty
left for them to work with. And so there is a wealth of useful information and insight that we can extract from the Russian
experience, which we can then turn around and put to good use in helping us improvise a new living arrangement here in
the United States – one that is more likely to be survivable.
The mid-1990s did not seem to me as the right time to voice such ideas. The United States was celebrating its so-called
Cold War victory, getting over its Vietnam syndrome by bombing Iraq back to the Stone Age, and the foreign policy wonks
coined the term "hyperpower" and were jabbering on about full-spectrum dominance. All sorts of silly things were happening.
Professor Fukuyama told us that history had ended, and so we were building a brave new world where the Chinese made
things out of plastic for us, the Indians provided customer support when these Chinese-made things broke, and we paid for it
all just by flipping houses, pretending that they were worth a lot of money whereas they are really just useless bits of tickytacky. Alan Greenspan chided us about "irrational exuberance" while consistently low-balling interest rates. It was the
"Goldilocks economy" – not to hot, not too cold. Remember that? And now it turns out that it was actually more of a "Tinkerbell" economy, because the last five or so years of economic growth was more or less a hallucination, based on various debt
pyramids, the "whole house of cards" as President Bush once referred to it during one of his lucid moments. And now we
can look back on all of that with a funny, queasy feeling, or we can look forward and feel nothing but vertigo.
While all of these silly things were going on, I thought it best to keep my comparative theory of superpower collapse to
myself. During that time, I was watching the action in the oil industry, because I understood that oil imports are the Achilles'
heel of the US economy. In the mid-1990s the all-time peak in global oil production was scheduled for the turn of the
century. But then a lot of things happened that delayed it by at least half a decade. Perhaps you’ve noticed this too, there is
a sort of refrain here: people who try to predict big historical shifts always turn to be off by about half a decade. Unsuccessful
predictions, on the other hand are always spot on as far as timing: the world as we know it failed to end precisely at midnight
on January 1, 2000. Perhaps there is a physical principal involved: information spreads at the speed of light, while ignorance
is instantaneous at all points in the known universe. So please make a mental note: whenever it seems to you that I am
making a specific prediction as to when I think something is likely to happen, just silently add “plus or minus half a decade.”
In any case, about half a decade ago, I finally thought that the time was ripe, and, as it has turned out, I wasn’t too far off. In
June of 2005 I published an article on the subject, titled "Post-Soviet Lessons for a Post-American Century," which was quite
popular, even to the extent that I got paid for it. It is available at various places on the Internet. A little while later I formalized
my thinking somewhat into the "Collapse Gap" concept, which I presented at a conference in Manhattan in April of 2006.
The slide show from that presentation, titled "Closing the Collapse Gap," was posted on the Internet and has been
downloaded a few million times since then. Then, in January of 2008, when it became apparent to me that financial collapse
was well underway, and that other stages of collapse were to follow, I published a short article titled “The Five Stages of
Collapse,” which I later expanded into a talk I gave at a conference in Michigan in October of 2008. Finally, at the end of
2008, I announced on my blog that I am getting out of the prognosticating business. I have made enough predictions, they
all seem very well on track (give or take half a decade, please remember that), collapse is well underway, and now I am just
an observer.
But this talk is about something else, something other than making dire predictions and then acting all smug when they
come true. You see, there is nothing more useless than predictions, once they have come true. It’s like looking at last year’s
amazingly successful stock picks: what are you going to do about them this year? What we need are examples of things that
have been shown to work in the strange, unfamiliar, post-collapse environment that we are all likely to have to confront.
Stuart Brand proposed the title for the talk – “Social Collapse Best Practices” – and I thought that it was an excellent idea.
Although the term “best practices” has been diluted over time to sometimes mean little more than “good ideas,” initially it
stood for the process of abstracting useful techniques from examples of what has worked in the past and applying them to
new situations, in order to control risk and to increase the chances of securing a positive outcome. It’s a way of skipping a lot
of trial and error and deliberation and experimentation, and to just go with what works.
28
In organizations, especially large organizations, “best practices” also offer a good way to avoid painful episodes of watching
colleagues trying to “think outside the box” whenever they are confronted with a new problem. If your colleagues were any
good at thinking outside the box, they probably wouldn’t feel so compelled to spend their whole working lives sitting in a box
keeping an office chair warm. If they were any good at thinking outside the box, they would have by now thought of a way to
escape from that box. So perhaps what would make them feel happy and productive again is if someone came along and
gave them a different box inside of which to think – a box better suited to the post-collapse environment.
Here is the key insight: you might think that when collapse happens, nothing works. That’s just not the case. The old ways of
doing things don’t work any more, the old assumptions are all invalidated, conventional goals and measures of success
become irrelevant. But a different set of goals, techniques, and measures of success can be brought to bear immediately,
and the sooner the better. But enough generalities, let’s go through some specifics. We’ll start with some generalities, and,
as you will see, it will all become very, very specific rather quickly.
Here is another key insight: there are very few things that are positives or negatives per se. Just about everything is a matter
of context. Now, it just so happens that most things that are positives prior to collapse turn out to be negatives once collapse
occurs, and vice versa. For instance, prior to collapse having high inventory in a business is bad, because the businesses
have to store it and finance it, so they try to have just-in-time inventory. After collapse, high inventory turns out to be very
useful, because they can barter it for the things they need, and they can’t easily get more because they don’t have any
credit. Prior to collapse, it’s good for a business to have the right level of staffing and an efficient organization. After collapse,
what you want is a gigantic, sluggish bureaucracy that can’t unwind operations or lay people off fast enough through sheer
bureaucratic foot-dragging. Prior to collapse, what you want is an effective retail segment and good customer service. After
collapse, you regret not having an unreliable retail segment, with shortages and long bread lines, because then people
would have been forced to learn to shift for themselves instead of standing around waiting for somebody to come and feed
them.
If you notice, none of these things that I mentioned have any bearing on what is commonly understood as “economic
health.” Prior to collapse, the overall macroeconomic positive is an expanding economy. After collapse, economic
contraction is a given, and the overall macroeconomic positive becomes something of an imponderable, so we are forced to
listen to a lot of nonsense. The situation is either slightly better than expected or slightly worse than expected. We are
always either months or years away from economic recovery. Business as usual will resume sooner or later, because some
television bobble-head said so.
But let’s take it apart. Starting from the very general, what are the current macroeconomic objectives, if you listen to the hot
air coming out of Washington at the moment? First: growth, of course! Getting the economy going. We learned nothing from
the last huge spike in commodity prices, so let’s just try it again. That calls for economic stimulus, a.k.a. printing money.
Let’s see how high the prices go up this time. Maybe this time around we will achieve hyperinflation. Second: Stabilizing
financial institutions: getting banks lending – that’s important too. You see, we are just not in enough debt yet, that’s our
problem. We need more debt, and quickly! Third: jobs! We need to create jobs. Low-wage jobs, of course, to replace all the
high-wage manufacturing jobs we’ve been shedding for decades now, and replacing them with low-wage service sector
jobs, mainly ones without any job security or benefits. Right now, a lot of people could slow down the rate at which they are
sinking further into debt if they quit their jobs. That is, their job is a net loss for them as individuals as well as for the
economy as a whole. But, of course, we need much more of that, and quickly!
So that’s what we have now. The ship is on the rocks, water is rising, and the captain is shouting “Full steam ahead! We are
sailing to Afghanistan!” Do you listen to Ahab up on the bridge, or do you desert your post in the engine room and go help
deploy the lifeboats? If you thought that the previous episode of uncontrolled debt expansion, globalized Ponzi schemes,
and economic hollowing-out was silly, then I predict that you will find this next episode of feckless grasping at
macroeconomic straws even sillier. Except that it won’t be funny: what is crashing now is our life support system: all the
systems and institutions that are keeping us alive. And so I don’t recommend passively standing around and watching the
show – unless you happen to have a death wish.
Right now the Washington economic stimulus team is putting on their Scuba gear and diving down to the engine room to try
to invent a way to get a diesel engine to run on seawater. They spoke of change, but in reality they are terrified of change
and want to cling with all their might to the status quo. But this game will soon be over, and they don’t have any idea what to
do next.
So, what is there for them to do? Forget “growth,” forget “jobs,” forget “financial stability.” What should their realistic new
objectives be? Well, here they are: food, shelter, transportation, and security. Their task is to find a way to provide all of
29
these necessities on an emergency basis, in absence of a functioning economy, with commerce at a standstill, with little or
no access to imports, and to make them available to a population that is largely penniless. If successful, society will remain
largely intact, and will be able to begin a slow and painful process of cultural transition, and eventually develop a new
economy, a gradually de-industrializing economy, at a much lower level of resource expenditure, characterized by a quite a
lot of austerity and even poverty, but in conditions that are safe, decent, and dignified. If unsuccessful, society will be
gradually destroyed in a series of convulsions that will leave a defunct nation composed of many wretched little fiefdoms.
Given its largely depleted resource base, a dysfunctional, collapsing infrastructure, and its history of unresolved social
conflicts, the territory of the Former United States will undergo a process of steady degeneration punctuated by natural and
man-made cataclysms.
Food. Shelter. Transportation. Security. When it comes to supplying these survival necessities, the Soviet example offers
many valuable lessons. As I already mentioned, in a collapse many economic negatives become positives, and vice versa.
Let us consider each one of these in turn.
The Soviet agricultural sector was plagued by consistent underperformance. In many ways, this was the legacy of the
disastrous collectivization experiment carried out in the 1930s, which destroyed many of the more prosperous farming
households and herded people into collective farms. Collectivization undermined the ancient village-based agricultural
traditions that had made pre-revolutionary Russia a well-fed place that was also the breadbasket of Western Europe. A great
deal of further damage was caused by the introduction of industrial agriculture. The heavy farm machinery alternately
compacted and tore up the topsoil while dosing it with chemicals, depleting it and killing the biota. Eventually, the Soviet
government had to turn to importing grain from countries hostile to its interests – United States and Canada – and eventually
expanded this to include other foodstuffs. The USSR experienced a permanent shortage of meat and other high-protein
foods, and much of the imported grain was used to raise livestock to try to address this problem.
Although it was generally possible to survive on the foods available at the government stores, the resulting diet would have
been rather poor, and so people tried to supplement it with food they gathered, raised, or caught, or purchased at farmers’
markets. Kitchen gardens were always common, and, once the economy collapsed, a lot of families took to growing food in
earnest. The kitchen gardens, by themselves, were never sufficient, but they made a huge difference.
The year 1990 was particularly tough when it came to trying to score something edible. I remember one particular joke from
that period. Black humor has always been one of Russia’s main psychological coping mechanisms. A man walks into a food
store, goes to the meat counter, and he sees that it is completely empty. So he asks the butcher: “Don’t you have any fish?”
And the butcher answers: “No, here is where we don’t have any meat. Fish is what they don’t have over at the seafood
counter.”
Poor though it was, the Soviet food distribution system never collapsed completely. In particular, the deliveries of bread
continued even during the worst of times, partly because has always been such an important part of the Russian diet, and
partly because access to bread symbolized the pact between the people and the Communist government, enshrined in oftrepeated revolutionary slogans. Also, it is important to remember that in Russia most people have lived within walking
distance of food shops, and used public transportation to get out to their kitchen gardens, which were often located in the
countryside immediately surrounding the relatively dense, compact cities. This combination of factors made for some lean
times, but very little malnutrition and no starvation.
In the United States, the agricultural system is heavily industrialized, and relies on inputs such as diesel, chemical fertilizers
and pesticides, and, perhaps most importantly, financing. In the current financial climate, the farmers’ access to financing is
not at all assured. This agricultural system is efficient, but only if you regard fossil fuel energy as free. In fact, it is a way to
transform fossil fuel energy into food with a bit of help from sunlight, to the tune of 10 calories of fossil fuel energy being
embodied in each calorie that is consumed as food. The food distribution system makes heavy use of refrigerated diesel
trucks, transforming food over hundreds of miles to resupply supermarkets. The food pipeline is long and thin, and it takes
only a couple of days of interruptions for supermarket shelves to be stripped bare. Many people live in places that are not
within walking distance of stores, not served by public transportation, and will be cut off from food sources once they are no
longer able to drive.
Besides the supermarket chains, much of the nation’s nutrition needs are being met by an assortment of fast food joints and
convenience stores. In fact, in many of the less fashionable parts of cities and towns, fast food and convenience store food
is all that is available. In the near future, this trend is likely to extend to the more prosperous parts of town and the suburbs.
Fast food outfits such as McDonalds have more ways to cut costs, and so may prove a bit more resilient in the face of
30
economic collapse than supermarket chains, but they are no substitute for food security, because they too depend industrial
agribusiness. Their food inputs, such as high-fructose corn syrup, genetically modified potatoes, various soy-based fillers,
factory-farmed beef, pork and chicken, and so forth, are derived from oil, two-thirds of which is imported, as well as fertilizer
made from natural gas. They may be able to stay in business longer, supplying food-that-isn’t-really-food, but eventually
they will run out of inputs along with the rest of the supply chain. Before they do, they may for a time sell burgers that aren’t
really burgers, like the bread that wasn’t really bread that the Soviet government distributed in Leningrad during the Nazi
blockade. It was mostly sawdust, with a bit of rye flour added for flavor.
Can we think of any ways to avoid this dismal scenario? The Russian example may give us a clue. Many Russian families
could gauge how fast the economy was crashing, and, based on that, decide how many rows of potatoes to plant. Could we
perhaps do something similar? There is already a healthy gardening movement in the United States; can it be scaled up?
The trick is to make small patches of farmland available for non-mechanical cultivation by individuals and families, in
increments as small as 1000 square feet. The ideal spots would be fertile bits of land with access to rivers and streams for
irrigation. Provisions would have to be made for campsites and for transportation, allowing people to undertake seasonal
migrations out to the land to grow food during the growing season, and haul the produce back to the population centers after
taking in the harvest.
An even simpler approach has been successfully used in Cuba: converting urban parking lots and other empty bits of land to
raised-bed agriculture. Instead of continually trucking in vegetables and other food, it is much easier to truck in soil,
compost, and mulch just once a season. Raised highways can be closed to traffic (since there is unlikely to be much traffic
in any case) and used to catch rainwater for irrigation. Rooftops and balconies can be used for hothouses, henhouses, and
a variety of other agricultural uses.
How difficult would this be to organize? Well, Cubans were actually helped by their government, but the Russians managed
to do it in more or less in spite of the Soviet bureaucrats, and so we might be able to do it in spite of the American ones. The
government could theoretically head up such an effort, purely hypothetically speaking, of course, because I see no evidence
that such an effort is being considered. For our fearless national leaders, such initiatives are too low-level: if they stimulate
the economy and get the banks lending again, the potatoes will simply grow themselves. All they need to do is print some
more money, right?
Moving on to shelter. Again, let’s look at how the Russians managed to muddle through. In the Soviet Union, people did not
own their place of residence. Everyone was assigned a place to live, which was recorded in a person’s internal passport.
People could not be dislodged from their place of residence for as long as they drew oxygen. Since most people in Russia
live in cities, the place of residence was usually an apartment, or a room in a communal apartment, with shared bathroom
and kitchen. There was a permanent housing shortage, and so people often doubled up, with three generations living
together. The apartments were often crowded, sometimes bordering on squalid. If people wanted to move, they had to find
somebody else who wanted to move, who would want to exchange rooms or apartments with them. There were always long
waiting lists for apartments, and children often grew up, got married, and had children before receiving a place of their own.
These all seem like negatives, but consider the flip side of all this: the high population density made this living arrangement
quite affordable. With several generations living together, families were on hand to help each other. Grandparents provided
day care, freeing up their children’s time to do other things. The apartment buildings were always built near public
transportation, so they did not have to rely on private cars to get around. Apartment buildings are relatively cheap to heat,
and municipal services easy to provide and maintain because of the short runs of pipe and cable. Perhaps most importantly,
after the economy collapsed, people lost their savings, many people lost their jobs, even those that still had jobs often did
not get paid for months, and when they were the value of their wages was destroyed by hyperinflation, but there were no
foreclosures, no evictions, municipal services such as heat, water, and sometimes even hot water continued to be provided,
and everyone had their families close by. Also, because it was so difficult to relocate, people generally stayed in one place
for generations, and so they tended to know all the people around them. After the economic collapse, there was a large
spike in the crime rate, which made it very helpful to be surrounded by people who weren’t strangers, and who could keep
an eye on things. Lastly, in an interesting twist, the Soviet housing arrangement delivered an amazing final windfall: in the
1990s all of these apartments were privatized, and the people who lived in them suddenly became owners of some very
valuable real estate, free and clear.
Switching back to the situation in the US: in recent months, many people here have reconciled themselves to the idea that
their house is not an ATM machine, nor is it a nest egg. They already know that they will not be able to comfortably retire by
selling it, or get rich by fixing it up and flipping it, and quite a few people have acquiesced to the fact that real estate prices
are going to continue heading lower. The question is, How much lower? A lot of people still think that there must be a lower
31
limit, a “realistic” price. This thought is connected to the notion that housing is a necessity. After all, everybody needs a place
to live.
Well, it is certainly true that some sort of shelter is a necessity, be it an apartment, or a dorm room, a bunk in a barrack, a
boat, a camper, or a tent, a teepee, a wigwam, a shipping container... The list is virtually endless. But there is no reason at
all to think that a suburban single-family house is in any sense a requirement. It is little more than a cultural preference, and
a very shortsighted one at that. Most suburban houses are expensive to heat and cool, inaccessible by public transportation,
expensive to hook up to public utilities because of the long runs of pipe and cable, and require a great deal of additional
public expenditure on road, bridge and highway maintenance, school buses, traffic enforcement, and other nonsense. They
often take up what was once valuable agricultural land. They promote a car-centric culture that is destructive of urban
environments, causing a proliferation of dead downtowns. Many families that live in suburban houses can no longer afford to
live in them, and expect others to bail them out.
As this living arrangement becomes unaffordable for all concerned, it will also become unlivable. Municipalities and public
utilities will not have the funds to lavish on sewer, water, electricity, road and bridge repair, and police. Without cheap and
plentiful gasoline, natural gas, and heating oil, many suburban dwellings will become both inaccessible and unlivable. The
inevitable result will be a mass migration of suburban refugees toward the more survivable, more densely settled towns and
cities. The luckier ones will find friends or family to stay with; for the rest, it would be very helpful to improvise some solution.
One obvious answer is to repurpose the ever-plentiful vacant office buildings for residential use. Converting offices to
dormitories is quite straightforward. Many of them already have kitchens and bathrooms, plenty of partitions and other
furniture, and all they are really missing is beds. Putting in beds is just not that difficult. The new, subsistence economy is
unlikely to generate the large surpluses that are necessary for sustaining the current large population of office plankton. The
businesses that once occupied these offices are not coming back, so we might as well find new and better uses for them.
Another category of real estate that is likely to go unused and that can be repurposed for new communities is college
campuses. The American 4-year college is an institution of dubious merit. It exists because American public schools fail to
teach in 12 years what Russian public schools manage to teach in 8. As fewer and fewer people become able to afford
college, which is likely to happen, because meager career prospects after graduation will make them bad risks for student
loans, perhaps this will provide the impetus to do something about the public education system. One idea would be to scrap
it, then start small, but eventually build something a bit more on par with world standards.
College campuses make perfect community centers: there are dormitories for newcomers, fraternities and sororities for the
more settled residents, and plenty of grand public buildings that can be put to a variety of uses. A college campus normally
contains the usual wasteland of mowed turf that can be repurposed to grow food, or, at the very least, hay, and to graze
cattle. Perhaps some enlightened administrators, trustees and faculty members will fall upon this idea once they see
admissions flat-lining and endowments dropping to zero, without any need for government involvement. So here we have a
ray of hope, don’t we.
Moving on to transportation. Here, we need to make sure that people don’t get stranded in places that are not survivable.
Then we have to provide for seasonal migrations to places where people can grow, catch, or gather their own food, and then
back to places where they can survive the winter without freezing to death or going stir-crazy from cabin fever. Lastly, some
amount of freight will have to be moved, to transport food to population centers, as well as enough coal and firewood to keep
the pipes from freezing in the remaining habitable dwellings.
All of this is going to be a bit of a challenge, because it all hinges on the availability of transportation fuels, and it seems very
probable that transportation fuels will be both too expensive and in short supply before too long. From about 2005 and until
the middle of 2008 the global oil has been holding steady, unable to grow materially beyond a level that has been
characterized as a “bumpy plateau.” An all-time record was set in 2005, and then, after a period of record-high oil prices,
again only in 2008. Then, as the financial collapse gathered speed, oil and other commodity prices crashed, along with oil
production. More recently, the oil markets have come to rest on an altogether different “bumpy plateau”: the oil prices are
bumping along at around $40 a barrel and can’t seem to go any lower. It would appear that oil production costs have risen to
a point where it does not make economic sense to sell oil at below this price.
Now, $40 a barrel is a good price for US consumers at the moment, but there is hyperinflation on the horizon, thanks to the
money-printing extravaganza currently underway in Washington, and $40 could easily become $400 and then $4000 a
barrel, swiftly pricing US consumers out of the international oil market. On top of that, exporting countries would balk at the
idea of trading their oil for an increasingly worthless currency, and would start insisting on payment in kind – in some sort of
32
tangible export commodity, which the US, in its current economic state, would be hard-pressed to provide in any great
quantity. Domestic oil production is in permanent decline, and can provide only about a third of current needs. This is still
quite a lot of oil, but it will be very difficult to avoid the knock-on effects of widespread oil shortages. There will be
widespread hoarding, quite a lot of gasoline will simply evaporate into the atmosphere, vented from various jerricans and
improvised storage containers, the rest will disappear into the black market, and much fuel will be wasted driving around
looking for someone willing to part with a bit of gas that’s needed for some small but critical mission.
I am quite familiar with this scenario, because I happened to be in Russia during a time of gasoline shortages. On one
occasion, I found out by word of mouth that a certain gas station was open and distributing 10 liters apiece. I brought along
my uncle’s wife, who at the time was 8 months pregnant, and we tried use her huge belly to convince the gas station
attendant to give us an extra 10 liters with which to drive her to the hospital when the time came. No dice. The pat answer
was: “Everybody is 8 months pregnant!” How can you argue with that logic? So 10 liters was it for us too, belly or no belly.
So, what can we do to get our little critical missions accomplished in spite of chronic fuel shortages? The most obvious idea,
of course, is to not use any fuel. Bicycles, and cargo bikes in particular, are an excellent adaptation. Sailboats are a good
idea too: not only do they hold large amounts of cargo, but they can cover huge distances, all without the use of fossil fuels.
Of course, they are restricted to the coastlines and the navigable waterways. They will be hampered by the lack of dredging
due to the inevitable budget shortfalls, and by bridges that refuse to open, again, due to lack of maintenance funds, but here
ancient maritime techniques and improvisations can be brought to bear to solve such problems, all very low-tech and
reasonably priced.
Of course, cars and trucks will not disappear entirely. Here, again, some reasonable adaptations can be brought to bear. In
my book, I advocated banning the sale of new cars, as was done in the US during World War II. The benefits are numerous.
First, older cars are overall more energy-efficient than new cars, because the massive amount of energy that went into
manufacturing them is more highly amortized. Second, large energy savings accrue from the shutdown of an entire industry
devoted to designing, building, marketing, and financing new cars. Third, older cars require more maintenance,
reinvigorating the local economy at the expense of mainly foreign car manufacturers, and helping reduce the trade deficit.
Fourth, this will create a shortage of cars, translating automatically into fewer, shorter car trips, higher passenger occupancy
per trip, and more bicycling and use of public transportation, saving even more energy. Lastly, this would allow the car to be
made obsolete on the about the same time scale as the oil industry that made it possible. We will run out of cars just as we
run out of gas.
Here we are, only a year or so later, and I am most heartened to see that the US auto industry has taken my advice and is in
the process of shutting down. On the other hand, the government’s actions continue to disappoint. Instead of trying to solve
problems, they would rather continue to create boondoggles. The latest one is the idea of subsidizing the sales of new cars.
The idea of making cars more efficient by making more efficient cars is sheer folly. I can take any pick-up truck and increase
its fuel efficiency one or two thousand percent just by breaking a few laws. First, you pack about a dozen people into the
bed, standing shoulder to shoulder like sardines. Second, you drive about 25 mph, down the highway, because going any
faster would waste fuel and wouldn’t be safe with so many people in the back. And there you are, per passenger fuel
efficiency increased by a factor of 20 or so. I believe the Mexicans have done extensive research in this area, with excellent
results.
Another excellent idea pioneered in Cuba is making it illegal not to pick up hitchhikers. Cars with vacant seats are flagged
down and matched up with people who need a lift. Yet another idea: since passenger rail service is in such a sad shape,
and since it is unlikely that funds will be found to improve it, why not bring back the venerable institution of riding the rails by
requiring rail freight companies to provide a few empty box cars for the hobos. The energy cost of the additional weight is
negligible, the hobos don’t require stops because they can jump on and off, and only a couple of cars per train would ever
be needed, because hobos are almost infinitely compressible, and can even ride on the roof if needed. One final
transportation idea: start breeding donkeys. Horses are finicky and expensive, but donkeys can be very cost-effective and
make good pack animals. My grandfather had a donkey while he was living in Tashkent in Central Asia during World War II.
There was nothing much for the donkey to eat, but, as a member of the Communist Party, my grandfather had a
subscription to Pravda, the Communist Party newspaper, and so that’s what the donkey ate. Apparently, donkeys can digest
any kind of cellulose, even when it’s loaded with communist propaganda. If I had a donkey, I would feed it the Wall Street
Journal.
And so we come to the subject of security. Post-collapse Russia suffered from a serious crime wave. Ethnic mafias ran
rampant, veterans who served in Afghanistan went into business for themselves, there were numerous contract killings,
muggings, murders went unsolved left and right, and, in general, the place just wasn’t safe. Russians living in the US would
33
hear that I am heading back there for a visit, and would give me a wide-eyed stare: how could I think of doing such a thing. I
came through unscathed, somehow. I made a lot of interesting observations along the way.
One interesting observation is that once collapse occurs it becomes possible to rent a policeman, either for a special
occasion, or generally just to follow someone around. It is even possible to hire a soldier or two, armed with AK-47s, to help
you run various errands. Not only is it possible to do such things, it’s often a very good idea, especially if you happen to have
something valuable that you don’t want to part with. If you can’t afford their services, then you should try to be friends with
them, and to be helpful to them in various ways. Although their demands might seem exorbitant at times, it is still a good
idea to do all you can to keep them on your side. For instance, they might at some point insist that you and your family move
out to the garage so that they can live in your house. This may be upsetting at first, but then is it really such a good idea for
you to live in a big house all by yourselves, with so many armed men running around. It may make sense to station some of
them right in your house, so that they have a base of operations from which to maintain a watch and patrol the
neighborhood.
A couple of years ago I half-jokingly proposed a political solution to collapse mitigation, and formulated a platform for the socalled Collapse Party. I published it with the caveat that I didn’t think there was much of a chance of my proposals becoming
part of the national agenda. Much to my surprise, I turned out to be wrong. For instance, I proposed that we stop making
new cars, and, lo and behold, the auto industry shuts down. I also proposed that we start granting amnesties to prisoners,
because the US has the world’s largest prison population, and will not be able to afford to keep so many people locked up. It
is better to release prisoners gradually, over time, rather than in a single large general amnesty, the way Saddam Hussein
did it right before the US invaded. And, lo and behold, many states are starting to implement my proposal. It looks like
California in particular will be forced to release some 60 thousand of the 170 thousand people it keeps locked up. That is a
good start. I also proposed that we dismantle all overseas military bases (there are over a thousand of them) and repatriate
all the troops. And it looks like that is starting to happen as well, except for the currently planned little side-trip to
Afghanistan. I also proposed a Biblical jubilee – forgiveness of all debts, public and private. Let’s give that one… half a
decade?
But if we look just at the changes that are already occurring, just the simple, predictable lack of funds, as the federal
government and the state governments all go broke, will transform American society in rather predictable ways. As
municipalities run out of money, police protection will evaporate. But the police still have to eat, and will find ways to use
their skills to good use on a freelance basis. Similarly, as military bases around the world are shut down, soldiers will return
to a country that will be unable to reintegrate them into civilian life. Paroled prisoners will find themselves in much the same
predicament.
And so we will have former soldiers, former police, and former prisoners: a big happy family, with a few bad apples and
some violent tendencies. The end result will be a country awash with various categories of armed men, most of them
unemployed, and many of them borderline psychotic. The police in the United States are a troubled group. Many of them
lose all touch with people who are not "on the force" and most of them develop an us-versus-them mentality. The soldiers
returning from a tour of duty often suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder. The paroled prisoners suffer from a variety of
psychological ailments as well. All of them will sooner or later realize that their problems are not medical but rather political.
This will make it impossible for society to continue to exercise control over them. All of them will be making good use of their
weapons training and other professional skills to acquire whatever they need to survive. And the really important point to
remember is that they will do these things whether or not anyone thinks it legal for them to do be doing them.
I said it before and I will say it again: very few things are good or bad per se; everything has to be considered within a
context. And, in a post-collapse context, not having to worry whether or not something is legal may be a very good thing. In
the midst of a collapse, we will not have time to deliberate, legislate, interpret, set precedents and so on. Having to worry
about pleasing a complex and expensive legal system is the last thing we should have to worry about.
Some legal impediments are really small and trivial, but they can be quite annoying nevertheless. A homeowners’
association might, say, want give you a ticket or seek a court order against you for not mowing your lawn, or for keeping
livestock in your garage, or for that nice windmill you erected on a hill that you don’t own, without first getting a building
permit, or some municipal busy-body might try to get you arrested for demolishing a certain derelict bridge because it was
interfering with boat traffic – you know, little things like that. Well, if the association is aware that you have a large number of
well armed, mentally unstable friends, some of whom still wear military and police uniforms, for old time’s sake, then they
probably won’t give you that ticket or seek that court order.
Or suppose you have a great new invention that you want to make and distribute, a new agricultural implement. It's a sort of
34
flail studded with sharp blades. It has a hundred and one uses and is highly cost-effective, and reasonably safe provided you
don’t lose your head while using it, although people have taken to calling the “flying guillotine.” You think that this is an
acceptable risk, but you are concerned about the issues of consumer safety and liability insurance and possibly even
criminal liability. Once again, it is very helpful to have a large number of influential, physically impressive, mildly psychotic
friends who, whenever some legal matter comes up, can just can go and see the lawyers, have a friendly chat, demonstrate
the proper use of the flying guillotine, and generally do whatever they have to do to settle the matter amicably, without any
money changing hands, and without signing any legal documents.
Or, say, the government starts being difficult about moving things and people in and out of the country, or it wants to take
too much of a cut from commercial transactions. Or perhaps your state or your town decides to conduct its own foreign
policy, and the federal government sees it fit to interfere. Then it may turn out to be a good thing if someone else has the
firepower to bring the government, or what remains of it, to its senses, and convince it to be reasonable and to play nice.
Or perhaps you want to start a community health clinic, so that you can provide some relief to people who wouldn’t
otherwise have any health care. You don’t dare call yourself a doctor, because these people are suspicious of doctors,
because doctors were always trying to rob them of their life’s savings. But suppose you have some medical training that you
got in, say, Cuba, and you are quite able to handle a Caesarean or an appendectomy, to suture wounds, to treat infections,
to set bones and so on. You also want to be able to distribute opiates that your friends in Afghanistan periodically send you,
to ease the pain of hard post-collapse life. Well, going through the various licensing boards and getting the certifications and
the permits and the malpractice insurance is all completely unnecessary, provided you can surround yourself with a lot of
well-armed, well-trained, mentally unstable friends.
Food. Shelter. Transportation. Security. Security is very important. Maintaining order and public safety requires discipline,
and maintaining discipline, for a lot of people, requires the threat of force. This means that people must be ready to come to
each other’s defense, take responsibility for each other, and do what’s right. Right now, security is provided by a number of
bloated, bureaucratic, ineffectual institutions, which inspire more anger and despondency than discipline, and dispense not
so much violence as ill treatment. That is why we have the world’s highest prison population. They are supposedly there to
protect people from each other, but in reality their mission is not even to provide security; it is to safeguard property, and
those who own it. Once these institutions run out of resources, there will be a period of upheaval, but in the end people will
be forced to learn to deal with each other face to face, and Justice will once again become a personal virtue rather than a
federal department.
I’ve covered what I think are basics, based on what I saw work and what I think might work reasonably well here. I assume
that a lot of you are thinking that this is all quite far into the future, if in fact it ever gets that bad. You should certainly feel
free to think that way. The danger there is that you will miss the opportunity to adapt to the new reality ahead of time, and
then you will get trapped. As I see it, there is a choice to be made: you can accept the failure of the system now and change
your course accordingly, or you can decide that you must try to stay the course, and then you will probably have to accept
your own individual failure later.
So how do you prepare? Lately, I’ve been hearing from a lot of high-powered, successful people about their various highpowered, successful associates. Usually, the story goes something like this: “My a. financial advisor, b. investment banker,
or c. commanding officer has recently a. put all his money in gold, b. bought a log cabin up in the mountains, or c. built a
bunker under his house stocked with six months of food and water. Is this normal?” And I tell them, yes, of course, that’s
perfectly harmless. He’s just having a mid-collapse crisis. But that’s not really preparation. That’s just someone being
colorful in an offbeat, countercultural sort of way.
So, how do you prepare, really? Let’s go through a list of questions that people typically ask me, and I will try to briefly
respond to each of them.
OK, first question: How about all these financial boondoggles? What on earth is going on? People are losing their jobs left
and right, and if we calculate unemployment the same way it was done during the Great Depression, instead of looking at
the cooked numbers the government is trying to feed us now, then we are heading toward 20% unemployment. And is there
any reason to think it’ll stop there? Do you happen to believe that prosperity is around the corner? Not only jobs and housing
equity, but retirement savings are also evaporating. The federal government is broke, state governments are broke, some
more than others, and the best they can do is print money, which will quickly lose value. So, how can we get the basics if we
don’t have any money? How is that done? Good question.
As I briefly mentioned, the basics are food, shelter, transportation, and security. Shelter poses a particularly interesting
35
problem at the moment. It is still very much overpriced, with many people paying mortgages and rents that they can no
longer afford while numerous properties stand vacant. The solution, of course, is to cut your losses and stop paying. But
then you might soon have to relocate. That is OK, because, as I mentioned, there is no shortage of vacant properties
around. Finding a good place to live will become less and less of a problem as people stop paying their rents and mortgages
and get foreclosed or evicted, because the number of vacant properties will only increase. The best course of action is to
become a property caretaker, legitimately occupying a vacant property rent-free, and keeping an eye on things for the
owner. What if you can’t find a position as a property caretaker? Well, then you might have to become a squatter, maintain a
list of other vacant properties that you can go to next, and keep your camping gear handy just in case. If you do get tossed
out, chances are, the people who tossed you out will then think about hiring a property caretaker, to keep the squatters out.
And what do you do if you become property caretaker? Well, you take care of the property, but you also look out for all the
squatters, because they are the reason you have a legitimate place to live. A squatter in hand is worth three absentee
landlords in the bush. The absentee landlord might eventually cut his losses and go away, but your squatter friends will
remain as your neighbors. Having some neighbors is so much better than living in a ghost town.
What if you still have a job? How do you prepare then? The obvious answer is, be prepared to quit or to be laid off or fired at
any moment. It really doesn’t matter which one of these it turns out to be; the point is to sustain zero psychological damage
in the process. Get your burn rate to as close to zero as you can, by spending as little money as possible, so than when the
job goes away, not much has to change. While at work, do as little as possible, because all this economic activity is just a
terrible burden on the environment. Just gently ride it down to a stop and jump off.
If you still have a job, or if you still have some savings, what do you do with all the money? The obvious answer is, build up
inventory. The money will be worthless, but a box of bronze nails will still be a box of bronze nails. Buy and stockpile useful
stuff, especially stuff that can be used to create various kinds of alternative systems for growing food, providing shelter, and
providing transportation. If you don’t own a patch of dirt free and clear where you can stockpile stuff, then you can rent a
storage container, pay it a few years forward, and just sit on it until reality kicks in again and there is something useful for
you to do with it. Some of you may be frightened by the future I just described, and rightly so. There is nothing any of us can
do to change the path we are on: it is a huge system with tremendous inertia, and trying to change its path is like trying to
change the path of a hurricane. What we can do is prepare ourselves, and each other, mostly by changing our expectations,
our preferences, and scaling down our needs. It may mean that you will miss out on some last, uncertain bit of enjoyment.
On the other hand, by refashioning yourself into someone who might stand a better chance of adapting to the new
circumstances, you will be able to give to yourself, and to others, a great deal of hope that would otherwise not exist.
Posted by kollapsnik at 3:30 AM
From J. Bruce Campbell:
Simon Sheppard published an article that I edited for my late friend, Heinz Weichardt.
It was originally titled "Under Two Flags" but he published it in England under the
title "Nazi Terror," which was meant to be sarcasm. It's probably one of the pieces
that got him and his partner in trouble. Heinz was a German Jew who was also an ardent
supporter of Hitler. He taught me most of what I know about the subject. He left
Germany because he was not allowed to join the army and was declared an enemy alien in
the US! His story is very interesting and poignant.
Under Two Flags by Heinz Weichardt
http://www.gnosticliberationfront.com/under_two_flags.htm
http://revisionistreview.blogspot.com/2009/02/muslims-fight-occupiers-with-methodsof.html
36
SSPX gives Bishop Williamson until the end of the
month to recant or be
expelled from the society
Translated from a report in German at kath.net
MAINZ, February 18 - A representative of the Society of St. Pius X
(SSPX) has announced that Holocaust denier Richard Williamson
could be
expelled from the priestly fraternity unless he withdraws his
statements
on the Holocaust by the end of February.
Fr. Matthias Gaudron said in a program on ZDF German Television
that the
SSPX has given the English-born bishop until the end of February
to make
his retraction.
37
"As traditional Catholics, we have no reason to downplay Hitler's
crimes
or in any way to describe the Nazi regime as any less horrible
than it
was," Fr. Gaudron said, adding that "Fr. Williamson has caused
great
harm to our society" [by his statements on the Holocaust].
Israel launches covert war against Iran
By PHILIP SHERWELL
The Daily Telegraph, London Monday, 16 February 2009
TEL AVIV — Israel has launched a covert war against Iran as
an alternative to direct military strikes against Tehran's nuclear
program, US intelligence sources have revealed.
It is using hitmen, sabotage, front companies and double agents
to disrupt the regime's illicit weapons project, the experts say.
The most dramatic element of the "decapitation" program is the
planned assassination of top figures involved in Iran's atomic
operations.
Despite fears in Israel and the US that Iran is approaching the
point of no return in its ability to build atom bomb, Israeli officials
are aware of the change in mood in Washington since President
Barack Obama took office.
They privately acknowledge the new US administration is unlikely
to sanction an air attack on Iran's nuclear installations and
Mr. Obama's offer to extend a hand of peace to Tehran puts any
direct military action beyond reach for now.
The aim is to slow down or interrupt Iran's research program,
without the gamble of a direct confrontation that could lead to
a wider war.
A former CIA officer on Iran told The Daily Telegraph: "Disruption
is designed to slow progress on the program, done in such a way
that they don't realize what's happening. You are never going
to stop it.
Campaign focuses on assassination
"The goal is delay, delay, delay until you can come up with some
other solution or approach. We certainly don't want the current
38
Iranian government to have those weapons. It's a good policy,
short of taking them out militarily, which probably carries
unacceptable risks."
Reva Bhalla, a senior analyst with Stratfor, the US private
intelligence company with strong government security connections,
said the strategy was to take out key people.
"With cooperation from the United States, Israeli covert operations
have focused both on eliminating key human assets involved in
the nuclear program and in sabotaging the Iranian nuclear supply
chain," she said.
"As US-Israeli relations are bound to come under strain over the
Obama administration's outreach to Iran, and as the political
atmosphere grows in complexity, an intensification of Israeli covert
activity against Iran is likely to result."
Mossad was rumored to be behind the death of Ardeshire Hassanpour,
a top nuclear scientist at Iran's Isfahan uranium plant, who died in
mysterious circumstances from reported "gas poisoning" in 2007.
Other recent deaths of important figures in the procurement and
enrichment process in Iran and Europe have been the result of Israeli
"hits", intended to deprive Tehran of key technical skills at the head
of the program, according to Western intelligence analysts.
Front companies used to infiltrate
"Israel has shown no hesitation in assassinating weapons scientists
for hostile regimes in the past," said a European intelligence official,
speaking on condition of anonymity. They did it with Iraq and they
will do it with Iran when they can."
Mossad's covert operations cover a range of activities. The former
CIA operative revealed how Israeli and US intelligence cooperated
with European companies working in Iran to obtain photographs
and other confidential material about Iranian nuclear and missile sites.
"It was a real company that operated from time to time in Iran and
in the nature of their legitimate business came across information
on various suspect Iranian facilities," he said.
Israel has also used front companies to infiltrate the Iranian
purchasing network that the clerical regime uses to circumvent
United Nations sanctions and obtain so-called "dual use" items —
metals, valves, electronics, machinery – for its nuclear program.
The businesses initially supply Iran with legitimate material, winning
Tehran's trust, and then start to deliver faulty or defective items
that "poison" the country's atomic activities.
"Without military strikes, there is still considerable scope for
disrupting and damaging the Iranian program and this has been
done with some success," said Yossi Melman, a prominent Israeli
journalist who covers security and intelligence issues for the
Haaretz newspaper.
Ex-CIA chief doubts long-range effectiveness
39
Mossad and Western intelligence operations have also infiltrated
the Iranian nuclear program and "bought" information from
prominent atomic scientists. Israel has later selectively leaked
some details to its allies, the media and United Nations atomic
agency inspectors.
The Iranian government has become so concerned about penetration
of its program that it has announced arrests of alleged spies in an
attempt to discourage double agents. "Israel is part of a detailed
and elaborate international effort to slow down the Iranian program,"
said Mr. Melman.
But Vince Canastraro, the former CIA counter-terrorism chief,
expressed doubts about the efficacy of secret Israeli operations
against Iran. "You cannot carry out foreign policy objectives via
covert operations," he said. "You can't get rid of a couple of people
and hope to affect Iran's nuclear capability."
Iran has consistently asserted that it is pursuing a nuclear capability
for civilian energy generation purposes. But Israeli and Western
intelligence agencies believe the 20-year-old program, which
was a secret until 2002, is designed to give the ruling mullahs an
atom bomb.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/4640052/Israel-launches-covert-waragainst-Iran.html
http://www.kreuz.net/bookentry.3948.html
http://www.kirchenlehre.com/wider.htm
Verfolgung Unschuldiger mit dem Joker "Wider besseres Wissen"
- Pressemitteilung Zu den Lieblingsvorwänden der BRD bei der Verfolgung Unschuldiger gehört
die Verleumdung, das Justizopfer hätte "wider besseres Wissen" (wbW)
eine Straftat begangen. Diese Formulierung erscheint mehrfach wörtlich
im StGB, s. § 145d (Vortäuschen einer Straftat) und § 164 (Falsche
Verdächtigung). Sie wird aber auch sonst gerne zur Verfolgung
Unschuldiger missbraucht, etwa beim § 132a (Mißbrauch von Titeln,
Berufsbezeichnungen und Abzeichen).
Zunächst ist zuzugeben, dass das Kriterium "wbW" an sich ein sinnvoller
und notwendiger Aspekt bei der Beurteilung von Straftaten ist, denn dies
entscheidet z.B., ob beim Erstatten einer Strafanzeige (§ 164) ein
Gebrauch oder ein Missbrauch der staatlichen Ordnung vorliegt.
Absolut unerlässlicher Prüfstein sind dabei allerdings die objektiven
Kriterien, um eine Handlung als Straftat "wbW" erkennen zu können.
Exemplarisch veranschaulicht sei dies anhand des o.g. § 132a, zumal die
BRD hartnäckig behauptet, der Autor würde sich "wbW" "als
römisch-katholischer Priester ausgeben".
Um römisch-katholischer Priester zu sein, muss man sowohl a)
römisch-katholisch als auch b) Priester sein. Zu a): Zur
römisch-katholischen Kirche gehören alle Getauften, sofern sie sich
nicht z.B. durch Häresie, d.h. Leugnung eines unfehlbar definierten
Glaubenssatzes (Dogma), von der kirchlichen Gemeinschaft getrennt haben.
Wer also z.B. zum Verein von "Vatikanum 2" gehört, der ist damit
objektiv von der katholischen Kirche getrennt, denn bereits in den
Texten des sog. "Zweiten Vatikanischen Konzils" sind bewiesenermaßen
unleugbar objektiv Häresien enthalten. Zu b): Priester wird man alleine
durch eine gültige Weihe und bleibt es dann auf ewig.
Der Autor beweist u.a. auf seiner Homepage fortwährend und für jeden
sofort unwiderlegbar ersichtlich, dass er a) in keiner Weise zum
40
"Vatikanum-2"-Verein gehört und dass ihm auch sonst keine Häresie
nachgewiesen werden kann, und dass er b) eine zweifelsfrei gültige
Priesterweihe besitzt. Die BRD ignoriert nun diese beide Fakten
kurzerhand ohne jede Begründung und "verurteilt" statt dessen gegen alle
Fakten und wiederum ohne jede Begründung den Autor immer wieder wegen
"Missbrauchs von Titeln" - einzig und allein mit dem durch nichts
rechtfertigbaren Joker "Wider besseres Wissen".
Als besonderes Dilemma kommt hinzu, dass der Autor sich trotzdem nicht
dem Zwang der BRD unterwerfen darf, seinen Status als
römisch-katholischer Priester selbst zu bestreiten, denn damit würde er
tatsächlich selbst zum Häretiker, d.h. aufhören, katholisch zu sein. Er
würde damit nämlich u.a. gegen Dogmen aus der Sakramentenlehre
verstoßen. Ferner würde der Autor damit u.a. behaupten, dass die Kirche
dem Staat unterwerfen wäre - was ebenfalls eine ausdrücklich verurteilte
Häresie ist.
Dies ist nur ein symptomatisches Fallbeispiel für die rettungslos
wuchernde "WbW-Justiz" der BRD, worüber Tausende laut jammern und
Hunderttausende heimlich stöhnen. Wer dabei Beweise für Rechtsbeugungen
- welcher Art und aus welchem Bereich auch immer - veröffentlicht, der
wird zusätzlich verurteilt, weil er "wbW" die Justiz "beleidigt" und
"verleumdet"; und wer gar wegen bewiesener Rechtsbeugung Strafanzeige
erstattet, der wird zusätzlich verurteilt, weil er sich "wbW" der
"falschen Verdächtigung" schuldig gemacht hat.
Ein Auweg aus dieser permanenten allumfassenden Justiz-Katastrophe
scheint nur möglich durch Rückbesinnung auf das Widerstands- und
Notwehrrecht.
Mit christlichem Gruß
Pater Rolf Hermann Lingen
römisch - katholischer Priester
Goldbrink 2a
46282 Dorsten
Trial of Iraq journalist who threw shoes postponed
By SINAN SALAHEDDIN (Associated Press Writer)
From Associated Press
February 19, 2009 5:08 AM EST
BAGHDAD - The trial of an Iraqi journalist who gained cult status for
throwing his shoes at former President George W. Bush was
adjourned Thursday until next month as supporters said he should be
praised for standing up to the U.S. "occupier," not punished.
Muntadhar al-Zeidi walked into the courtroom in western Baghdad
and was handed a scarf printed with a red, black and green Iraqi flag,
which he kissed. Relatives and supporters applauded and chanted
"Imam Ali is with you hero," in reference to a revered Shiite Muslim
saint.
The 30-year-old television journalist's expression of anger at a joint press conference with Bush and Iraqi Prime
Minister Nouri al-Maliki on Dec. 14 energized many in the Middle East who opposed the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq
in 2003.
But al-Maliki was deeply embarrassed by the act against a U.S. president who had stood by him during the
worst of the violence in Iraq when some Arab leaders were quietly urging Washington to oust him.
41
Al-Zeidi's attorneys say he has been charged with assaulting a foreign leader, which carries a maximum penalty
of 15 years in prison. The defense has tried to get the charge reduced, saying the act doesn't merit such harsh
punishment.
Defense attorney Dhia al-Saadi Thursday asked the court to call social experts to testify because of what he
called the political and psychological nature of the act.
Judge Abdul-Amir al-Rubaie then held a closed session before announcing the trial was postponed until March
12 because the court needs time to ask the Iraqi Cabinet whether Bush's visit was "formal or informal."
Dozens of relatives and supporters gathered outside the courtroom before the trial began, waving banners and
calling for al-Zeidi's release.
"We are proud of what Muntadhar has done," said al-Zeidi's sister Doniya, as she stood outside the court
Thursday with about 60 other supporters. "Bush was not a guest in Iraq or came by invitation of the Iraqi
people. He came as an occupier."
Karim al-Shujeiri, one of al-Zeidi's lawyers, said he met with his client Wednesday and found "his spirits and
morale were high, and he was confident in the independence of the Iraqi legal system."
The journalist's aunt, Nawal Lazim, who handed him the scarf as he entered the court, said Iraqis should be
proud of al-Zeidi's act.
"What Muntadhar has done is revenge for Iraqi widows and for the bloodshed caused by the occupation and
policy of Bush," Lazim said.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/02/18/2495248.htm?section=entertainment
Controversial celebrations underway for Norway's Nazi outcast
Posted Wed Feb 18, 2009 7:26pm AEDT
Updated Wed Feb 18, 2009 7:25pm AEDT
Norwegian Nobel literature laureate Knut Hamsun, who fell from grace after World War II for his
Nazi sympathies, is gingerly moving centrestage as Norway celebrates his authorship.
But his past continues to taint his legacy.
For the 150th anniversary celebrations of Mr Hamsun's birth this year, which begin tomorrow, Norway will
honour the author in a way it refused to do for his centennial.
"It is understandable that some people, especially the generation that lived through the war, are reacting but it
is the literary work, not the political ideas, that we're celebrating," ceremony coordinator Knut Listerud says,
admitting however, "it can be difficult to separate the two".
"His books are incredible, among the best," he said.
"He is one of the greatest Norwegian authors and there is a reason that he is also so popular abroad."
The literary heights the self-taught Mr Hamsun reached were only equalled by the depths to which he plunged
under the weight of his political opinions.
Hamsun was barely 30 when he won acclaim for his semi-autobiographical Hunger.
In 1920 his epic Growth of the Soil was awarded the Nobel Literature Prize, making him one of only three
Norwegians to ever win the prestigious award.
But the pride Norwegians felt that his descriptions of Norway's dramatic nature and the lives of Norwegian
farmers and peasants could earn such international acclaim, were dashed - when the author later decided to
give his Nobel medal to none other than Adolf Hitler's propaganda chief Joseph Goebbels.
In 1940 Mr Hamsun appealed to his fellow citizens in a newspaper piece to "throw down your weapons and
go home, the Germans are fighting for all of us and are breaking down England's tyranny over us all".
42
Embarrassed by his continued outspoken support for the Nazis, Norway declared him to have weakened
mental capacities.
He died, destitute and disgraced in 1952.
More than half a century later, his name can still have a toxic affect.
Otto Homlung, the theatre chief in Norway's third largest city Trondheim has gone so far as to declare his
theatre a "Hamsun-free zone" for the entire commemoration year.
"Before speaking out about the Hamsun jubilee, one should read the obituary the poet wrote for Hitler," Mr
Homlung wrote in an opinion piece titled Celebrating a Nazi.
Mr Hamsun did indeed describe, perhaps the world's most hated man, as "a warrior, a warrior for mankind,
and a prophet of the gospel of justice for all nations".
But many Norwegians today feel the country cannot simply write off one of its greatest writers due to his
offensive political beliefs.
"Hamsun is one of Norway's three literary Nobel laureates and his work has had a strong influence on both
Norwegian and international literature," the country's central bank said last month on announcing that, for the
first time, it would make a commemorative coin in the author's honour.
The celebrations, which begin with an exhibit in Oslo attended by Queen Sonja, are expected to remain low
key.
Mr Listerud hopes nonetheless that Mr Hamsun eventually will be accorded a more prominent place in Oslo's
cultural heritage.
"Ibsen started out lending his name to a parking garage in Oslo. Now he also has a street. Maybe the same
thing can happen with Hamsun," he said.
- AFP
http://globalfire.tv/nj/09en/jews/obos_team.htm
http://www.bollyn.info/home/articles/polphil/rahm-emanuel-and-barack-obama/
The Israeli Who Runs the
Obama White House
Written by Christopher Bollyn
Thursday, 06 November 2008
Who is
Peter Orszag?
43
One of the key players in the Obama administration’s $900
billion economic stimulus package is Obama’s new budget
director Peter R. Orszag.
Peter Orszag
Orszag, 40, is the director of the Office of Management and
Budget, the arm of the White House responsible for crafting the
federal budget and overseeing the effectiveness of federal
programs. He worked closely with Rahm Emanuel in the
Clinton administration - when the disastrous NAFTA was
passed - and was one of the first Obama appointees to be
approved.
”In the coming years, no bureaucrat will be as decisive as
Peter Orszag,” Ezra Klein wrote recently in The American
Prospect. So, who is Peter Richard Orszag and what kind of
decisions will he make with the budget he controls?
Oddly, Orszag’s background has received virtually no attention
in the media. At this critical moment, however, it would be
foolish to ignore the troubling background of Obama’s budget
director, which deserves to be looked at very carefully. Orszag,
for example, could start by explaining exactly what
happened to the Icelandic economy. Orszag was, after all,
the founder and president of the economic consultancy
firm which advised the Central Bank of Iceland - before it
went bankrupt. How did Icelandic banks become so
indebted? Ask Peter Orszag.
The CV of Obama's Budget Director:
- Advisor, Russian Finance Ministry During the
Reign of the Jewish Oligarchs
- Advisor, Central Bank of Iceland -- Before the
Crash
- Advisor, Rahm Emanuel and Bill Clinton on
the disastrous NAFTA bill.
Orszag is an economist who served six years in the Clinton
administration (1993-8) under Robert E. Rubin, the former
treasury secretary who recently resigned from his senior position at the woefully mismanaged and nearly
bankrupt Citigroup. The fact that Orszag was a protege of the now disgraced Rubin certainly does
not bode well for the Obama administration.
Rubin strongly opposed the regulation of derivatives when such regulation was proposed in 1997.
Credit derivatives of mortgage-backed securities were the key reason for the recent failure of a number
of large financial institutions, including AIG and Citigroup.
In 1999, Rubin joined Citigroup as a board member and a participant "in strategic managerial and
operational matters of the Company.” The Wall Street Journal noted that Citigroup shareholders
suffered losses of more than 70 percent since Rubin joined the firm and that he encouraged
changes that led the firm to the brink of collapse. In December 2008, investors filed a lawsuit
contending that Citigroup executives, including Rubin, sold shares at inflated prices while concealing the
firm’s risks.
Orszag, a Jew, served on the president’s Council of Economic Advisers in 1993, under Rubin, when the
Israeli Rahm Emanuel, Clinton’s senior adviser, was pushing the disastrous NAFTA legislation
through Congress. Prior to joining the Clinton team Orszag was an economic adviser for the
Russian Ministry of Finance in Moscow from 1992-93. This was a period of rampant financial
criminality during which many Russian mineral assets came under the control of the so-called
Jewish oligarchs who became instant billionaires. Most of these oligarchs fled Russia when their
crimes were exposed and now live in Britain or Israel, where they obtained citizenship.
Born in Boston on December 16, 1968, Orszag graduated from Princeton University in 1991. He then
attended the London School of Economics, where he earned a degree in 1992 and where he obtained
his PhD in 1997. The London School of Economics was established by members of the Fabian Society,
who believed in advancing socialism through gradual reforms.
The Fabian Society is a British socialist movement, whose purpose is to advance the principles of Social
44
democracy via gradualist and reformist, rather than revolutionary means. The ideology of the Fabians is
said to be described in the quote, "Fabianism feeds on Capitalism, but excretes Communism."
In 1998, after serving in the Clinton administration, Orszag co-founded an economic consulting group
company with his brother and Joseph Stiglitz called Sebago Associates, where he served as president
through 2007. The firm's clients have included the World Bank, the Nordic Council of Ministers, and most
notably, the Central Bank of Iceland. The once prosperous economy of Iceland has been devastated by
the current economic crisis, which its citizens say was carried out by a gang of financial criminals who
followed disastrous policies and advice - provided by Peter Orszag and Company.
Americans need to be vigilant with dangerous "Young Turks" like Peter
Orszag and Rahm Emanuel running the Obama White House and the U.S.
budget.
REFLECTIONS ON ZIMBABWE
By
Stephen Goodson
(The author lived in Rhodesia during the 1970’s)
The Victoria Falls was the venue of numerous political conferences during the twentieth century, but it was the one
held in June 1963, that would determine the fate of Zimbabwe.
On 1 August 1953 the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland was established in order to realize a more viable
economic entity, by combining the copper resources of the north with the agricultural and industrial sectors of the
south. During its ten years of existence the economy prospered, with one of its most notable achievements being
the construction of the Kariba dam, which was the largest dam in the world at that time.
In the middle of the 1950’s the European powers decided that the cost of maintaining their colonies had become too
expensive and that it would be far more advantageous to grant “independence”, and thus abandon their obligations
to assist the indigenous populations in their economic development. Instead a far more sinister and devastating
form of exploitation would be introduced, viz. the international loan with its never ending debt and payments of
interest. For example the Democratic Republic of Congo and Nigeria currently allocate 100% of their export
earnings to interest payments.
For the recalcitrant whites in southern Africa various “liberation” movements were promoted and financed by the
international bankers with arms coming from the communist countries. In this regard it should be recalled that
communism/Marxism has always been a Rothschild project, and that the Bolshevik revolution was financed by the
international bankers based in Wall Street, New York.
In order to dissolve the Federation the agreement of Southern Rhodesia, as a high-contracting party, was essential1.
However, the prime minister of Southern Rhodesia, Winston Field, a man of immense naiveté and incompetence,
threw away this trump card by attending the Victoria Falls conference.
At this conference Field obtained a verbal undertaking from the British foreign secretary, Lord Butler, that Southern
Rhodesia would be granted her independence shortly after dissolution. This undertaking was repeated in the
presence of his successor, Ian Smith, who asked that it be given in writing, but Field said that it was not necessary
and that Butler had given his word2. Not unexpectedly perfidious Albion later denied all knowledge of this
undertaking.
On 31 December 1963 the Federation was dissolved with Northern Rhodesia (Zambia) and Nyasaland (Malawi)
obtaining independence the following year.
Having lost the best opportunity of obtaining independence, Rhodesia had the second option of remaining a selfgoverning colony, which status had been granted in 1923. Rhodesia was independent in everything but name. She
45
received no financial assistance from Britain and had her own civil service and police and defence forces. The only
role the British government performed was in the appointment of the governor.
Ivor Benson, who was information adviser to the Rhodesian government, recommended that the status quo should
be retained. Benson not only wrote Prime Minister Ian Smith’s speeches (he had succeeded Field in April 1964), but
had drafted the manifesto of the Rhodesian Front party.
Instead the third option was pursued, viz. the unilateral declaration of independence (UDI) on 11 November 1965.
This was the most dangerous and risky step to take. Being a land-locked state, Rhodesia was totally dependent on
the goodwill of its neighbours for the free flow of its imports and exports.
Both Dr Hendrik Verwoerd and Antonio de Salazar, the prime minister and president of South Africa and Portugal
respectively, were staunch supporters of Rhodesian independence. However, this would not last long. Within eight
months Verwoerd was assassinated, while Salazar suffered a stroke in September 1968 from which he never
recovered. In April 1974 the Portuguese Empire collapsed and in an act of great treachery Prime Minister B J
Vorster of South Africa started to withdraw military and economic assistance, culminating in the temporary closure
of the border in 1978.
Between 1973 – 79 a destructive bush war was fought and all hope of an enduring partnership between whites and
blacks perished. Diplomatic and financial support from the international bankers ensured that the major “liberation”
movement Zimbabwe African National Union (Patriotic Front) ZANU(PF) assumed power.
In 1980 the African population of Zimbabwe had increased from an estimated 300 000 in 1890 to 7 million. This
phenomenal increase was the result of the development of a modern infrastructure, first world health standards and
the bountiful crop harvests produced by the white Rhodesian farmers.
By July 2005 the population had almost doubled to 13 million; highlighting a symbiotic relationship that had been
forged between the 4 500 commercial farmers and the country’s inhabitants.
In February 2000 Robert Mugabe decided to entrench his position as president by altering the constitution. This was
opposed by a trade unionist, Morgan Tsvangirai, who had established the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC)
in 1999 and defeated Mugabe in the constitutional referendum. In view of the fact that some of the white farmers
had supported the MDC, Mugabe retaliated by seizing all their farms without paying compensation. (About 300
farmers remain, working small portions of their former estates).
There is compelling evidence, which indicates that both parties are the victims of an elaborate set up. Zimbabwe is
one of the richest endowed countries in the world with minerals. There are vast deposits of chrome (second largest
in the world), gold, nickel and platinum principally concentrated around the Great Dyke region, which extends for
530km across the centre of Zimbabwe.
Having permanently ruined the agricultural sector, Zimbabwe will be perpetually dependent on international loans
(money created out of nothing) in order to import food and survive. Thus the interest payments will ensure that the
minerals are in effect obtained for nothing. Currently the Chinese are very active and have reopened a number of
dormant mines.
As the economy has imploded and inflation has reached unrecordable heights, approximately 4 million Zimbabweans
have emigrated. With the average life expectancy of 37 years for a man and 34 years for a woman, the population
will continue to contract dramatically.
Notwithstanding an election defeat in March 2008, Mugabe persists in clinging to power, which it seems he will only
relinquish on his death. As a revered icon of the “liberation” struggle, he continues to enjoy the protection and
patronage of the African National Congress (ANC) government in South Africa. He may eventually be replaced by
the generals who surround him, but whatever the outcome the future of Zimbabwe remains bleak.
In December 2008 the author spent a few days at the Victoria Falls Hotel, and had a nostalgic look at the conference
room, where such a great act of betrayal was perpetrated. He was frequently asked if he had been there before.
When informed that his last visit was in 1978, the reply was invariably on the lines of “Oh, that was the good time.”
Notes
46
1
J R T Wood, The Welensky Papers, Graham Publishing, Durban, 1983, p. 1199.
2
J R T Wood, op.cit., pp. 1208-9.
Illustrations
1)
Map highlighting wealth of Zimbabwe
2)
Gas station, Victoria Falls
Text:
1 100
Notes:
Total:
16
1 116
'No swastikas' for Nato mittens
By Laura Sheeter
BBC News, Riga
Latvians have been asked to
knit mittens as gifts to
delegates at a Nato summit
later this year - but without
a traditional swastika motif.
Local craftspeople have been
asked to make the mittens in
an attempt to showcase
Latvian culture ahead of the
November summit, the first in
Latvia.
It was thought the design might offend
delegates unfamiliar with local folklore
Three hundred knitters are being asked to make 4,500
mittens.
The swastika design is not a Nazi symbol - it is a traditional
Latvian motif from local folklore.
Unique designs
Latvia joined Nato in 2004, just 13 years after it regained its
independence from the Soviet Union, and the country regards
hosting the Nato summit this November as an unparalleled
chance to boost its international profile.
As well as a welcome pack containing a taster of Latvia's
national spirit - Riga Black Balsams - each delegate will be
presented with a hand knitted pair of traditional Latvian
mittens.
With their distinctive pointy tips, and complex decorations,
each pair of mittens is guaranteed to be unique.
The summit organisers say the mittens will show the world
the richness and diversity of Latvian culture, as each region
of the country, and sometimes even individual villages, have
47
their own mitten designs.
These are often based on patterns inspired by nature and the
pagan traditions of Latvia's past.
Swastikas have featured in traditional Latvian knitwear for
centuries, variously known as the Thunder Cross or Fire
Cross, but its feared that delegates, unfamiliar with local
folklore, may take mittens decorated with swastikas amiss.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5268950.stm
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1063345.html
Thu., February 12, 2009 Shvat 18, 5769 |
Haaretz.com
| Israel Time: 03:58 (EST+7)
Last update - 11:26 11/02/2009
Why does Hollywood love the Holocaust?
By Rebecca Spence, The Forward
Tags: Jewish World, Holocaust
With "The Reader" garnering five Oscar nominations, and just as many
Holocaust-related films playing this winter, Hollywood?s long-simmering
romance with one of the greatest tragedies in human history is reaching a
fever pitch. Even a former official of the United States Holocaust
Memorial Museum has a certain fatigue.
"I find myself wanting to take my wife out to a non-Holocaust film, and
everything is touching on the Holocaust," said Michael Berenbaum, who now
teaches in Los Angeles at the American Jewish University.
Indeed, "The Reader," "Defiance," "Valkyrie," "Adam Resurrected" and the
"The Boy in the Striped Pajamas" all touch in some way - while not
necessarily directly - on the slaughter of the 6 million. In view of this
recent spate of films, how to explain Hollywood's continuing fascination
with the Holocaust?
Advertisement
The answer is not a simple one. In interviews with the Forward, film
directors and scholars offered a wide range of views on what compels the
movie business to grapple with the myriad facets of Holocaust history,
and the myriad lives shaped by the Holocaust's indignities. Are the
reasons primarily commercial? Artistic? Moral?
"Part of it has to do with the fact that the Holocaust is about ultimate
issues," explained Berenbaum, who served as senior consultant on the 2004
documentary "Imaginary Witness: Hollywood and the Holocaust." "People
face life and death challenges once or twice in their existence, and
Holocaust survivors and victims faced it as an everyday issue."
In an industry long transfixed by matters of good and evil - think
Westerns, where cowboys and Indians were depicted simply as respective
good guys and bad guys - the Holocaust provides fertile ground for a host
of such narratives. And in keeping with Hollywood conventions, including
the imperative of a happy ending, even Holocaust movies often include
some element of redemption.
"The Reader," directed by Stephen Daldry and based on the novel by
48
Bernhard Schlink, is yet another example of this phenomenon. The film
centers on an erotic affair between a former concentration camp guard and
an adolescent German boy who initially knows nothing of his lover's past.
And while the film attempts to explore questions of human complicity in a
nuanced and complex way, the same conventions of redemption inevitably
play out. In a final act, the former guard - played by Kate Winslet,
whose performance earned her a best actress nomination - leaves her money
to a Jewish survivor.
In a January 9 opinion piece in the pages of this newspaper, historian
Deborah Lipstadt warned of the dangers of romanticizing the Holocaust.
Parsing the case of the recently debunked Holocaust memoir "Angel at the
Fence," which turned out to be fiction, Lipstadt mused on what led
publishers and film producers to ignore the warning signs that Herman
Rosenblat's story was utterly implausible. "They all seemingly wanted a
story that made the Holocaust heartwarming, even though, as Waltzer aptly
put it, the 'Holocaust experience is not heartwarming, it is heart
rending,'" Lipstadt wrote, referring to historian Ken Waltzer.
Mark Jonathan Harris, director of two Academy Award winning Holocaust
documentaries, traced the abundance of Holocaust films to the idea that
people are fascinated by how they themselves might have behaved. "These
are deeply emotional subjects," Harris said. "The fascination and why
people keep returning to it is because they keep returning to the
question of 'how would they have acted?'"
In "The Reader," which is also up for best picture, the question revolves
around how the hero of the story - the former concentration camp guard?s
lover, played as an adult by Ralph Fiennes ? is later compromised by the
feelings he had for someone who participated in the brutality. That,
Harris said, implicates all the Germans who stood by and allowed the
horrors to occur. This sort of existential dilemma is also raised in
"Defiance," a tale about Jewish partisans directed by Edward Zwick." In
that film, the question is whether one would have resisted or gone
passively to the death camps.
Others view Hollywood's fascination with the topic in more pragmatic
terms. Steven Ross, a University of Southern California historian, said
that commercial concerns trump all else.
"The Holocaust is a great drama, and the bottom line is that Hollywood is
ultimately in the profit-making business, not in the
consciousness-raising business," Ross said. "They make films that
audiences want to see, and what audiences want to see are compelling
dramas and melodramas, and Holocaust films offer that."
But while seminal films such as "Schindler's List" (1993) - which many
credit with paving the way for other Holocaust films ? grossed more than
$300 million worldwide and about $96 million domestically, there are
plenty of examples of Holocaust films that proved unlucrative. Even "The
Reader," with its cache of Academy Award nominations, has grossed just
under $13 million domestically so far. The film, which has seen almost no
box office bump from the Oscars race, cost some $32 million to make.
Aside from this cultural moment, at least one filmmaker argues that
Hollywood's so-called obsession with the Holocaust is vastly overrated.
"I find it to be an antisemitic sentiment, because there are not a lot of
films about the Holocaust," said Daniel Anker, the director of "Imaginary
Witness." "There's a degree of antisemitism when someone says, 'Another
Holocaust movie,' and rolls their eyes, because there?s an implication
that another Holocaust movie is one too many. No one rolls their eyes
about Vietnam War movies, or other World War II movies.
49
12. Februar 2009, 13:26 Uhr
STREIT ÜBER WILLIAMSON
Papst nennt Leugnung des Holocaust inakzeptabel
Klare Worte in einer hitzigen Debatte: Benedikt XVI. hat die Leugnung des Holocaust als untragbar und
inakzeptabel bezeichnet. Dies gelte besonders für einen Geistlichen, sagte der Papst vor einer
Delegation amerikanischer Juden - und kündigte eine Israel-Reise an.
Rom - Papst Benedikt XVI. hat sich erneut strikt gegen jede Leugnung des Holocaust gewandt und dabei
ausdrücklich auch ein Herunterspielen der Judenvernichtung verurteilt. Das gelte insbesondere dann, wenn der
millionenfache Mord der Nazis an den Juden von Geistlichen bestritten oder in seinen Ausmaßen kleingeredet werde,
sagte Benedikt bei seinem ersten Treffen mit Vertretern des Judentums seit Beginn der Williamson-Affäre.
REUTERS
Papst Benedikt: "Dieses fürchterliche Kapitel unserer Geschichte darf nie in Vergessenheit geraten"
"Der Hass und die Verachtung für Männer, Frauen und Kinder, die sich in der Shoah manifestiert haben, waren ein
Verbrechen gegen die Menschheit. Das sollte allen klar sein, insbesondere denen, die in der Tradition der Heiligen
Schrift stehen", sagte der deutsche Papst.
Die katholische Kirche lehne grundsätzlich und unumstößlich alle Formen von Antisemitismus ab, betonte Benedikt.
"Dieses fürchterliche Kapitel in unserer Geschichte darf nie in Vergessenheit geraten", sagte der Papst.
Vor der Delegation amerikanischer Juden bestätigte Benedikt gleichzeitig, dass er eine Reise nach Israel plant. Nach
früheren israelischen und italienischen Medienberichten ist die Reise des Papstes voraussichtlich für Mai geplant.
Benedikt hatte den britischen Geistlichen Richard Williamson und drei weitere Bischöfe der ultrakonservativen
Piusbruderschaft im Januar teilweise rehabilitiert - und weltweite Proteste ausgelöst. In einem Interview mit dem
schwedischen Fernsehsender SVT hatte der Brite gesagt, es seien nur 200.000 bis 300.000 Juden in
nationalsozialistischen Konzentrationslagern umgekommen - "aber keiner von ihnen in Gaskammern".
Die Piusbruderschaft hat Williamson am 31. Januar als Leiter eines Priesterseminars in Argentinien abgesetzt und
sich von seinen Äußerungen distanziert. Gegenüber dem SPIEGEL sagte der Generalobere der Piusbruderschaft,
Bernard Fellay: "Ich habe ihn sofort, nachdem ich dieses Interview sah, aufgefordert, diesen Unsinn zu korrigieren."
Papst Benedikt XVI. hatte Williamson am 4. Februar offiziell aufgefordert, die Leugnung des Holocaust zu revidieren.
Er solle sich "eindeutig und öffentlich" von seinen Äußerungen distanzieren, hieß es in einer Erklärung des Vatikans.
Dies müsse geschehen, bevor er als Bischof wiedereingesetzt werden könne.
50
In einem Interview mit dem SPIEGEL hatte Williamson dies zunächst abgelehnt.
han/dpa/AP
URL:

http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/gesellschaft/0,1518,607191,00.html
ZUM THEMA AUF SPIEGEL ONLINE:

Streit über Holocaust-Leugner: Oberster Piusbruder fordert Williamson zur Umkehr auf
(10.02.2009)
http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/gesellschaft/0,1518,606683,00.html

Fragen an Williamson: "Nach Auschwitz werde ich nicht fahren" (09.02.2009)
http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/0,1518,606164,00.html

Pius X.: Der heilige Papst und eine unselige Tradition
http://einestages.spiegel.de/static/topicalbumbackground/3636/in_unseliger_tradition.html

Entlarvende Schriften: Auch deutsche Piusbrüder hetzen gegen Juden (09.02.2009)
http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/gesellschaft/0,1518,606518,00.html

Fall Williamson: Kardinal Lehmann fordert Kirchenausschluss (09.02.2009)
http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/gesellschaft/0,1518,606558,00.html

Papst-Machtwort: Vatikan fordert Holocaust-Leugner Williamson zum Widerruf auf (04.02.2009)
http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/gesellschaft/0,1518,605498,00.html
© SPIEGEL ONLINE 2009
Alle Rechte vorbehalten
Vervielfältigung nur mit Genehmigung der SPIEGELnet GmbH
www.lematin.ch/flash-info/argentine-plainte-deposee-justice-contre-mgr-williamson
<http://www.lematin.ch/flash-info/argentine-plainte-deposee-justice-contre-mgr-williamson>
Argentinien: Strafanzeige gegen Bischof Williamson gestellt
Am Dienstag ist bei der argentinischen Bundesstaatsanwaltschaft eine Strafanzeige gegen den
negationistischen Bischof Richard Williamson wegen der Leugnung des Holocaust gestellt worden. Der
Bischof lebt im Seminar La Reja, 40 km westlich von Buenos Aires.
Die Strafanzeige ist durch den Verantwortlichen der argentinischen Ausgabe des US-amerikanischen
Magazins NewsWeek gestellt worden.
Außerdem wird Bischof Williamson (68) dem Nationalen Institut gegen die Diskriminierung (INADI)
antworten müssen, der ihn offiziell aufgefordert hat, „seine Aussagen zu dementieren oder zu bestätigen“, so
die Direktorin diese Bundesbehörde, Frau Maria José Lubertino.
51
Der Bischof „muß die Tatsächlichkeit seiner Aussagen aufklären, und wenn er sie bestätigt, werden wir eine
Klage einreichen, die in einer Verurteilung von drei Jahren enden könnte“, präzisiert Frau Lubertino
gegenüber der Nachrichtenagentur AFP.
(…)
++++++++++
Argentine: une plainte déposée en justice contre Mgr Williamson
Une plainte devant la justice fédérale argentine pour apologie du négationnisme a été déposée mardi à
l'encontre de l'évêque négationniste Richard Williamson. L'évêque vit au séminaire de La Reja, à 40 km à
l'ouest de Buenos Aires.
La plainte a été déposée par le responsable de l'édition argentine du magazine américain "Newsweek".
Par ailleurs, Mgr Williamson, 68 ans, devra également répondre à l'Institut national contre la discrimination
(INADI) qui lui a officiellement demandé "d'infirmer ou de confirmer ses propos", selon la directrice de cet
organisme gouvernemental, Maria José Lubertino.
L'évêque "se doit de clarifier la véracité de ses propos, et s'il les confirme, nous déposerons une plainte, ce qui
pourrait déboucher sur une condamnation à trois ans de prison", a précisé à l'AFP Mme Lubertino.
La levée de l'excommunication par Benoît XVI de Mgr Williamson le 24 janvier - et de trois autres évêques
intégristes - a provoqué un tollé et déclenché une crise qui a compromis les relations du Vatican avec le
judaïsme et brouillé l'image du pape.
Deux jours avant le décret pontifical, Richard Williamson avait déclaré à une télévision suédoise: "Je crois
qu'il n'y a pas eu de chambres à gaz (...) Je pense que 200 000 à 300 000 Juifs ont péri dans les camps de
concentration mais pas un seul dans les chambres à gaz".
Le Vatican, selon lequel le pape ignorait tout des propos négationnistes de l'évêque britannique, avait exhorté
cette semaine Williamson à "prendre sans équivoque et publiquement ses distances" avec ses déclarations sur
la Shoah.
Or, Mgr Williamson a refusé de renier ses propos négationnistes dans une interview publiée samedi en
Allemagne par l'hebdomadaire "Der Spiegel", estimant qu'il lui fallait étudier d'abord les "preuves" historiques
avant d'éventuellement retirer ses déclarations niant l'existence des chambres à gaz.
Le 31 janvier, la communauté intégriste de la Fraternité Saint Pie X, à laquelle appartient Mgr Williamson, a
relevé le prélat de sa charge de directeur au séminaire de La Reja.
Source Le Matin (Suisse) <http://www.lematin.ch/flash-info/argentine-plainte-deposee-justice-contre-mgrwilliamson> <http://www.lematin.ch/flash-info/argentine-plainte-deposee-justice-contre-mgr-williamson>
+++++++
Gruß AvL
-----Original Message----From: Adelaide Institute [mailto:info@adelaideinstitute.org]
Sent: Sunday, 22 February 2009 9:10 AM
To: Adelaide Institute
Subject: Holocaust-Shoah believers are sanctioning the Palestinian Holocaust because they support the
existence of the State of Israel
52
1. Holocaust-Shoah believers are sanctioning the Palestinian Holocaust because believers in this
myth support the existence of the State of Israel - read below items.
2. Anyone who believes in the Holocaust-Shoah, such as Peter Myers, who from being a
Holocaust skeptik has now become a Holocaust-Shoah believer, is sanctioning what the Jewish
State of Israel is doing to Palestinians. Norman Finkelstein, et al, are also included in this because
they believe in the Holocaust-Shoah myth, which gives the Jewish state of Israel its greatest
propaganda weapon - "never again!"
3. Remember, anyone who believes in the Holocaust-Shoah, and claims it is an historical fact that
Germans 1. systematically exterminated - state policy - 2. six million Jews mainly in 2. homicidal
gas chambers, has to prove their case to the world because they are making a horrendous
accusation against Germans.
4. To date no one has shown to the world a model or a drawing of the murder weapon - a
homicidal gas chamber.
5. Revisionists do not have to prove their case that the Holocaust-Shoah DID NOT HAPPEN - you
cannot prove that which did not happen.
6. Revisionists take up the Holocaust-Shoah believers' stories, then test them for truth-content.
To date most of these stories have proven to be the product of a feverish mind's delusions,
distortions, exaggerations and outright lies.
7. The fact that legal force is used to silence those who refuse to believe in this myth-making
process, proves that those who believe in the Holocaust-Shoah have a political agenda to protect.
In our western democracies nothign is sacred, even disputing/defaming/blaspheming the
existence of God is permissible, except the questioning, the reviewing, the revising of the Jewish
Holocaust-Shoah is sacrilige punishable by social, economic and legal sanction. Why?
8. The two state solution to Palestine is unrealistic and needs to be abandoned. The logic of the
argument propounded by the two-state solution advocates rests on the lies/myths of the
HolocaustShoah, which has been shattered by the happenings in Palestine perpetrated by the
Jewish state of Israel.
53
9. Anyone who believes that Auschwitz was a death camp where gassings occurred has not read
the evidence presented by Italian Revisionist, Carlo Mattogno.
10. Anyone who believes the highly civilized and moral German war machine gassed anyone
during the war is either ignorant of the physical facts or an outright liar and/or a moral and
intellectual coward.
11. FT comments on Peter Myers' conversion to a Holocaust-Shoah believer: ' I wonder if such
rubbish below convinced him to believe?'
"Finally, Holocaust-deniers intentionally confuse the solid support columns for the gas chamber
roof with the wire-mesh columns. As obvious evidence of their crimes, the latter would have been
removed by the Nazis from the gas chambers before they were blown up. Ludicrously, deniers
show photos of the solid columns as proof that the wire-mesh columns never existed." - in his
email of 20 February 2009.
12. Remember the Jewish myth of enforced exile ... During the 1980s an earthquake shook these
founding myths. The discoveries made by the "new archaeology" discredited a great exodus in
the 13th century BC. Moses could not have led the Hebrews out of Egypt into the Promised Land,
for the good reason that the latter was Egyptian territory at the time. And there is no trace of
either a slave revolt against the pharaonic empire or of a sudden conquest of Canaan by
outsiders. Nor is there any trace or memory of the magnificent kingdom of David and Solomon.
Schlomo Sand http://mondediplo.com/2008/09/07israel
13. Strong Neo-Nazi Showing in Dresden Heightens Concerns
Der Spiegel Monday, 16 February 2009
DRESDEN, Germay — Neo-Nazis were outnumbered by counter-demonstrators in Saturday's
marches to mark the 64th anniversary of the firebombing of Dresden. Still, some 6,000 far-right
demonstrators turned up, far more than last year. It's a sign of the growing neo-Nazi threat in
Germany, warns a Jewish leader.
54
NOT FORGOTTEN—Thousands of young Germans march to honor the memory of those
who died in the DRESDEN HOLOCAUST, in which hundreds of thousands
were deliberately burnt alive by US and British bombers in just one night—at Jewish
instigation—in history's worst massacre.
Saturday's demonstration by around 6,000 neo-Nazis in Dresden to mark the anniversary of the
destruction of the city by Allied warplanes in February 1945 was a "dramatic sign" of the growing
strength of the far right in Germany, a leading member of the country's Jewish community said.
There were almost twice as many far-right demonstrators as last year and police said they were
surprised the far right had managed to mobilize so many supporters this time to mark the 64th
anniversary of the air raids that devastated the city on Feb. 13 and 14, 1945.
It was one of the biggest far-right demonstrations in Germany since the war. Still, they were
outnumbered by around 10,000 counter-demonstrators who converged on Dresden to protest
against the far right.
An estimated 25,000 people* died in the bombing which caused a firestorm and left one of
Europe's most beautiful baroque cities in ruins.
Holger Apfel, the deputy leader of the far-right National Democratic Party,earned cheers and
applause from the crowd when he described the bombing as a "unique Holocaust perpetrated on
the Germans."
'Growing danger of the far right'
55
The demonstrators, flanked by thousands of police officers to keep them apart from anti-Nazi
activists bent on disrupting their march, walked through the city in a long column. Most of them
were clad in black and they kept silent as they marched. Some carried banners that said:
"Grandfather, We Thank You" and "Honor to Whom Honor is Due."
Germany's far-right regularly seizes on the bombing of Dresden to portray Germans as victims of
the war they started.
"The demonstration is a dramatic sign and shows that we aren't sowing unnecessary hysteria and
panic when we warn about the growing danger of the far right," Stephan Kramer, the general
secretary of the Central Council of Jews in Germany, told Berliner Zeitung in an interview
published on Monday.
About 6,500 people held a counter-demonstration on Dresden's Theater Square to protest against
the neo-Nazis' attempt to seize on the bombing to promote their [nonformist] view of history.
Several thousand militant anti-Nazi fascists gathered at other locations in the city.
The leader of the center-left Social Democrats, Franz Müntefering, and politicians from the Left
Party and the Greens attended the Theater Square demonstration.
Conservatives distance themselves from Communist colleagues
Politicians from Chancellor Angela Merkel's conservative Christian Democrats and from the
opposition liberal Free Democrats stayed away, apparently because they didn't want to be seen
alongside members of the former Communist Left Party in this election year.
"I find it very regrettable that no senior conservative or liberal politicians turned up," said
Kramer.
Hundreds of militant anti-Nazi activists clashed with police during Saturday afternoon and police
said they detained 86 people and that 30 officers were slightly injured. Two unoccupied police
vehicles were overturned.
Later on Saturday, five anti-Nazi demonstrators were injured during a chance encounter with
neo-Nazis at a motorway service station. They had been in separate coaches that had both
stopped at the service station on the way back from the Dresden demonstrations.
Police said the 40 neo-Nazis had hurled abuse at the group of 40 trade unionists and Left Party
members before assaulting them. Two of the victims had to be treated at a hospital.
Alarm at growing popular resistance
"I'm alarmed at the increasingly frequent and brutal acts of violence by neo-Nazis," Ulrich Wilken,
the head of the Left Party in the state of Hessen, said in a statement. "People who look on at the
increasing far-right violence without doing anything are indirectly making themselves responsible
for what is happening."
While far-right attacks on immigrants, anti-Nazi activists and Jewish sites are commonplace —
especially in the economically depressed east — the near-fatal stabbing of the police chief in the
Bavarian town of Passau by [an alleged] neo-Nazi last December fueled public concern about the
far right.
The government of Bavaria last month announced a package of measures to tackle neo-Nazis
including reviewing a fresh attempt to ban the National Democratic Party and requiring schools to
take children on visits of concentration camps.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,607821,00.html
56
*This ridiculously low figure represents but a 10th or 20th of those who actually died and is to be
seen as a crude attempt by the Zionist establishment in Germany to deny the full extent of the
Dresden Holocaust, while at the same time criminalizing those who challenge the gross inflation
of Jewish wartime casualties by a similar factor of 10 to 20!
-----Original Message----From: Alexander Klein [mailto:alexander.klein8@freenet.de]
Sent: Saturday, 21 February 2009 4:17 AM
Subject: Israel führt weiter Krieg gegen Zivilisten!
Zur Kenntnisnahme und Weiterleitung!!!
Mit reichstreuen GrüSSen
Alexander Klein - Heil Euch!!!
"Nur aus den Werten des Heimatgedankens kann die Liebe zur Heimat erwachsen!!!"
Gerhart Hauptmann
KOMMENTAR:
Israelische Panzer, unterstützt von Kampfhubschraubern, sind erneut nach Gaza-Stadt eingefallen,
haben sich jedoch zurückgezogen, als palästinensisches Militär Panzerabwehrwaffen einsetzte. Als
Ziel der erneuten Offensive gegen das zerstörte Land wird vermutet, Israel wolle einen Zustand der
Anarchie im Gaza-Gebiet erzeugen, um freie Hand für Ausmordung und Vertreibung zu haben.
Deshalb haben die Israelis während der Weihnachts-Offensive besonders Schulen, Universitäten,
Regierungsgebäude, Moscheen und Kirchen, kulturelle Einrichtungen zerstört.
Israel hat einen 1km breiten Grenzstreifen zum militärischen Sperrgebiet erklärt. Schon während der
Bombardierung des Gaza-Streifens hat Israel in diesem fruchtbaren Streifen Landes die Dörfer mit
Bulldozern niedergewalzt, die Höfe zerstört, die Bauern getötet und vertrieben, alle Infrastruktur
vernichtet. Um den Hunger zu mildern, versuchen Fischer, in der 12 Seemeilen breiten Fischereizone
zu fischen. Israelische Kampfboote verhindern das, indem sie die (natürlich unbewaffneten)
Fischerboote beschießen und möglichst versenken. Mehrere Fischer wurden in den letzten Tagen
durch heimtückische (und sogar als Kriegswaffen verbotene!) Dum-dum-Geschoße verletzt. Die
Geschoße lassen Tausende von Metallsplittern in den Wunden zurück, die nicht entfernt werden
können. Fischen ist also nur in weniger als einem Hundertstel der Küstengewässer möglich, stets
unter der Bedrohung durch israelisches Militär.
57
Die palästinensische Regierung (Hamas) versucht erfolgreich, die brennende Not zu lindern. 800.000
Palästinenser haben sich an die UN um Soforthilfe gewandt. Die Bevölkerung der Türkei verlangt den
islamischen „Heiligen Krieg“ gegen Israel. Auf einer Massenveranstaltung sagte ein Geistlicher,
niemand solle wegen der ermordeten Kinder verzweifeln: während der israelischen Offensive seien
doppelt so viele Babies geboren worden, als die Israelis mit Kriegswaffen hätten ermorden können.
Zunehmend kommen die Vasallen-Regime der arabischen Länder unter Druck ihrer Bevölkerung, die
Spaltung des Islam in Sunna (arab. Staaten) und Schia (u.a. Persien) tritt gegenüber der Bedrohung
durch Israel zurück.
Israeli tanks enter Gaza City
Thu, 19 Feb 2009
Israeli tanks crossed the border into the Gaza Strip.
Israeli tanks backed by helicopters have crossed the border with the
Gaza Strip, triggering clashes in Gaza City.
Witnesses told AFP that the military forces entered Gaza City early
Thursday with Palestinian fighters exchanging fire with them.
The military forces however left the strip after the fighters fired
antitank rockets at them.
No casualties have been reported in the attack.
There was no comment by the Israeli military on the incident.
===
Clerics urge new jihad over Gaza
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7895485.stm?lss
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7895485.stm?lss>
Turkey witnesses some of the most passionate demonstrations in support
of Gaza
At a weekend meeting in Istanbul, 200 religious scholars and clerics met
senior Hamas officials to plot a new jihad centred on Gaza.
The BBC's Bill Law was the only Western journalist at the meeting.
In a hall crowded with conservative Sunni Muslim sheikhs and scholars,
in a hotel close to Istanbul's Ataturk Airport speaker after speaker
called for jihad against Israel in support of Hamas.
The choice of Turkey was significant. Arab hardliners were keen to put
aside historic differences with the Turks.
As one organiser put it: "During the past 100 years relations have been
58
strained but Palestine has brought us together."
Many delegates spoke appreciatively of the protest by Turkish Prime
Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who stormed out of a Davos debate on Gaza
two weeks ago.
Gaza gives us power, it solves our differences... Palestine is a
legitimate theatre of operations for jihad
Mohsen al-Awajy, Saudi religious scholar
The conference, dubbed the Global Anti-Aggression Campaign, also gave
impetus to Sunni clerics concerned about the growing power of Hezbollah,
the Shia movement backed by Iran, which rose to international prominence
in its own war with Israel in 2006.
"Gaza is a gift," the Saudi religious scholar Mohsen al-Awajy told me.
He and other delegates repeatedly referred to the Gaza war as "a
victory".
"Gaza," he continued, "gives us power, it solves our differences. We are
all now in a unified front against Zionism."
In closed meetings after sessions delegates focussed on the creation of
a "third Jihadist front" - the first two being Afghanistan and Iraq. The
intensity of the Israeli attack had "awakened all Muslims," Mr Awajy
claimed.
"Palestine is a legitimate theatre of operations for jihad (holy war),"
he added.
Road to liberation
Mohammed Nazzal, a senior Hamas leader based in Damascus, challenged
Arab governments to "open their borders and allow the fighters to come."
Delegates from all over the Middle East, and from Somalia, Sudan,
Pakistan and Indonesia applauded as he stabbed the air with a raised
finger and declared: "There will be no agreement with Israel... only
weapons will bring respect."
Gaza has opened a gulf between Arab people and their regimes, clerics
say
Mr Nazzal told his audience: "Don't worry about casualties."
The 23 days of bombardment of Gaza, in which some 1,300 people, many of
them civilians and nearly 300 of them children, are believed to have
died, was "just the beginning" of the struggle, Mr Nazzal said.
59
To laughter in the audience, another speaker noted that twice as many
babies were born as children were killed during the war.
Every death, I was told, was a martyrdom on the road to liberation.
For the hardline sheikhs, it was an opportunity to underline what they
see as the growing gulf between Arab regimes who are hesitant to back
Hamas and the people of the region who, they say, embrace Hamas as
heroes fighting against overwhelming odds.
More importantly, this conference represented something of a coup for
Hamas. They were promised weapons, money and fighters.
The question remains whether such rhetoric can or will be translated
into action. Israel keeps a tight blockade on the Gaza Strip, where
Hamas exercises de facto control, and Israel's other borders are also
heavily guarded.
But at the very least this statement of intent from Sunni hardliners
poses new challenges, not just to the Israelis and to Western efforts to
broker a peace deal but to Arab regimes as well.
===
60