Fredrick Toben (Australia, Germany, England)

[Alex Linder]

http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/images/photos2007/toben_light.jpg

Toben jailed in Germany over Holocaust website


Thursday, 11 November , 1999 00:00:00

MARK COLVIN: An Australian who questions the Nazi Holocaust was sentenced to gaol in Germany today.

Frederick Toben was found guilty in a German court of incitement of the people and insulting the memory of the dead.

Mr Toben alleges the Holocaust was grossly exaggerated. He used his Australian-based website to publish his views.

The court found he'd been spreading this information, including via the Internet and sentenced him to ten months gaol.

As Bronwyn Adcock reports, some experts are saying the decision shows that what happens in cyberspace can fall within the jurisdiction of any country.

BRONWYN ADCOCK: According to Julie Eisenberg, a media lawyer with the Communications Law Centre, the gaoling of Frederick Toben shows that the nebulous concept of cyber space can be tied down to a jurisdiction. It also illustrates how different countries deal with the content of cyber space differently.

JULIE EISENBERG: Well it's a good illustration of how Internet law isn't one single thing. Obviously different countries are putting in place their own laws which reflects how they think the Internet should be regulated.

The law under which Toben has been convicted in Germany is quite different to the way that laws apply in Australia and I suppose it's a good illustration of the fact that even though people think they're doing things in cyber space they may well be caught under the laws of a particular country.

BRONWYN ADCOCK: Irene Zeitler is a partner of the Intellectual Property and Technology section of the law firm Free Hills. She says there are risks involved when cyber space allows you to cross jurisdictions.

IRENE ZEITLER: Oh there is absolutely a risk in communicating over the Internet because it isn't limited by boundaries so you need to be very careful when you do communicate over the Internet particularly where you make that communication available publicly to step back and ask yourself well, you know, is that communication, does it contain subject matter that is potentially going to fall foul of local laws.

BRONWYN ADCOCK: According to Irene Zeitler governments are now working together to overcome problems created by the Internet applying to different jurisdictions.

IRENE ZEITLER: Countries are becoming very aware of the problem of jurisdictional boundaries with respect to communication over the Internet and countries are meeting on an international level to work out protocols for handling these types of communications and recently there's been some discussion about coming to an agreement on a common set of rules for trading over the Internet, because that of course raises jurisdictional issues as well when someone purchases, when someone in Australia, for example, purchases goods in the US or somewhere in Asia, questions which laws apply.

So there are moves afoot on an international basis to try and work out common sets of rules and conduct.

MARK COLVIN: Irene Zeitler, a lawyer from Free Hills talking to Bronwyn Adcock.

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/stories/s65901.htm

[Robert Bandanza]

http://youtube.com/user/FredrickToben

[Alex Linder]

Dr. Frederick Toben Persecuted in Australia for Thought Crimes

Friday, December 7, 2007

Thought criminal Fredrick Toben [who appears in the DVD "Judea Declares War on Germany"] has apologized to a judge for publishing banned material, while fiercely defending his beliefs outside the court.

Backing down from plans to contest allegations that his Adelaide Institute website had published offensive material, Dr Toben apologised to the Federal Court for breaching a previous court order.

In 2002, judge Catherine Branson ruled Dr Toben had breached the Racial Discrimination Act, and banned him from publishing material implying the Holocaust did not happen and doubting the existence of gas chambers at Auschwitz.

She also restrained him from publishing articles implying Jews who were offended or challenged by Holocaust denial were of limited intelligence, and that some Jewish people had - for financial gain - exaggerated the number of Jews killed in World War II and the circumstances.

Jeremy Jones, former president of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, had asked the Federal Court to jail Dr Toben for breaching Justice Branson's orders after the material reappeared on the website.

The case was due to be heard in Adelaide yesterday, but lawyers for each side told judge Michael Moore they had agreed to end the matter, with Dr Toben apologising and undertaking to remove the offensive material and not republish it.

Paul Charman, appearing for Dr Toben pro bono, said his client "did not want to cause any undue distress" and accepted there was material that "clearly breached" the court order. Dr Toben told the court he apologised "unreservedly" and would remove all the material by the end of next week.

Outside the court, Dr Toben denied the apology was a backdown and said he would continue to run his controversial website. "I have a very firm belief on Holocaust matters and I should be able to express it," he said.

"Anyone who disagrees should then, in fact, engage me in a debate ... the other side who holds on to the Holocaust does not debate. There are so many contentious issues on this so-called Holocaust that it still needs to be looked at and investigated."

Dr Toben said it was a "very sad" day for Germans who found it "extremely hurtful when an allegation is made against them - that they did all these things called the Holocaust to the Jews - without having the freedom to research the topic."

Mr Jones said he hoped Dr Toben would comply and that no more legal proceedings would be necessary. "All we sought was for a person who was causing upset and offence to other people within the Australian community in principle to stop doing it," he said.

http://newsfromthewest.blogspot.com/2007/12/dr-frederick-toben-persecuted-in.html

[yankee jane]

Documentary "Judea Declares War On Germany" from Dr. Toben, at Google Video:

JUDEA DECLARES WAR ON GERMANY

[Alex Linder]

ISSN 1440-9828
February 2008
No 372

Form 27

(Order 19, rule 2)

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY No. N327 of 2001

Jeremy Jones

Applicant

Fredrick Töben

Respondent

NOTICE OF MOTION

The above named Respondent will at 9:30 am on the 28th day of February 2008 at Law Courts Building, Queens Square, Sydney, NSW move the Court for Orders that:

1. The operation and effect of some or all of paragraphs 5, 6, and 7 of the FCA Order made by Moore J on 27 November 2007 be wholly suspended.

2. The operation and effect of some or all of Paragraph 3 of said Order be wholly suspended.

3. The Respondent be relieved from the compliance with the undertaking contained in Paragraph 6 of said Order.

4. The Consent Orders made on 27 November 2007 be set aside.

5. There be such further or other Order as the Court may consider appropriate.

DATED: Adelaide

02 January 2008

……………………..

Dr Fredrick Töben

Respondent

To: Jeremy Jones

Slater & Gordon

11/51 Druitt Street

Sydney 2000

______________________________________________________________________

Filed by Dr F Töben Tel: 08.83310808

PO Box 3300 Mob: 0417088217

Adelaide Norwood 5067 Email: toben@adelaideinstitute.org

__________________________________________________________________________________________



Form 20

(Order 14, rule 2)

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY No. N327 of 2001

JEREMY JONES

Applicant

FREDRICK TÖBEN

Respondent

AFFIDAVIT OF FREDRICK TÖBEN

On 02 January 2008 I, Fredrick Töben, of Wattle Park, in the State of South Australia, retired teacher, say on oath:

1. I am the Respondent in these proceedings.

2. That on 21 December 2007 I sent an email to Applicant’s solicitor – annexed hereto and marked “A” is a copy of the email and response.

3. It is, among other things, in the light of the difficulties mentioned within the email that the Notice of Motion becomes relevant to these proceedings.

Annexure “A”

From: Adelaide Institute info@adelaideinstitute.org
Sent: Wednesday, 19 December 2007 5:25 PM
To: slewis@slatergordon.com.au
Subject: Directions Hearing FCA 19 December 2007

Dear Mr Lewis

Further to the above, please be advised that it is aimed by 4.00pm, 21 December 2007, to complete the deletion of all material as required by Consent Order from the website of www.adelaideinstitute.org

Kindly advise thereafter if any items have been inadvertently missed.

Sincerely

Fredrick Töben

Adelaide Institute

_____________________________________



AFFIDAVIT OF FREDRICK TÖBEN, dated February 2008

On 31 January 2008 I, Fredrick Töben, of Wattle Park, in the State of South Australia, retired teacher, say on oath:

1. I am the Respondent and have filed a Notice of Motion that is listed for directions at the hearing set down for 28 February 2008.

2. I make reference to my Affidavit dated 2 January 2008 – and to any of the other Affidavits filed in this matter since January 2007.

3. Since I and a group of individuals in 1994 began this non-profitable enterprise, Adelaide Institute, I have always been ready to augment, correct and delete material and offer an apology, especially if any of it in tone is jarring, rude and crude. But if material is factually correct, then there is no reason for being apologetic because this would compromise my moral and intellectual integrity. This view-point I conveyed to barrister Mr Paul Charman. As a non-Jew I do not subscribe to the Jewish habit of reciting the annual Kol Nidre, an oath that relieves me of any future obligations when making oaths or apologies.

4. It is my God-given duty to pursue the truth of a matter and if someone claims that material posted on our website is hurtful, then a reasonable argument needs to be offered, together with substantial medical evidence, how and why the material is causing an individual hurt. Any normally framed legal compensation claim for some mental or physical hurt suffered requires documented proof that a hurt has been suffered. That this is not the case when an individual makes claims before the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission-HREOC is proof that HREOC is a political tool used by some to further a political agenda. In the current matter it is Australia’s organized Jewry that is using these proceedings to further the Jewish Holocaust-Shoah narrative with the aim of establishing it as a dogma, if not as a new religion for the 21st Century.

5. When on 26 November 2007 at around 7 pm I received per email the draft of the Consent Orders, my focus on the actual Apology - as discussed with my barrister - rested on C of the Branson J Orders of 27 September 2002. I agreed that an article, under Order C, requested to be removed was indeed somewhat rude and crude, but I had prepared myself to defend the Allegation that I was in breach of Order A, B and D, which the barrister had accepted. The next morning at the FCA Adelaide, before signing the Consent Orders, my barrister and I again canvassed the matter and I understood that a blanket general apology would settle the matter, and at a later stage in future proceedings the specific orders could be challenged and varied. Hence my initial hesitation, as indicated at Line 30 of the Transcript of Proceedings, when offering the Apology to His Honour, Justice Michael Moore, who then demanded I give an unqualified apology to the court. I refer to Annexure “A” as being a copy of the 27 November 2007 Transcript of proceedings.

6. On 21 December 2007 I completed the deletion of all the material complained of, except for that mentioned in 1. of the Consent Orders of 27 November 2007.

7. While deleting the material I realized that under 1. of the Consent Orders the Applicant was granted leave to rely on the Second Further Amendment Statement of Charge filed on 3 November 2007. Therein the material listed for deletion is a LINK on our Internet website. I consider the removal of links from Adelaide Institute’s website not part of the Consent Order, and hence I have not deleted the link and through the Notice of Motion now seek protection from the Court that this matter be clarified and not be enforced.

7.1 The request to remove the link from the Internet website is in breach of fundamental human rights that guarantee a free flow of information/ free expression. The link that has been requested to be deleted is to the WayBackMachine, an Internet web crawl engine that archives all globally-generated material, some 85 billion web pages archived from 1996 onwards in over 60 countries.

I refer to Annexure “B” as being a copy of two pages detailing some information about the WayBackMachine – http://www.archive.org/web/web.php

7.2 Material that Branson. J in her Order of 17 September 2002 requested be removed was removed from Adelaide Institute’s Internet website but still remains archived on the WayBackMachine.

I refer to Annexure “C” as being a copy of two pages of the WayBackMachine wherein is listed the Adelaide Institute material as stored in the archives of the WayBackMachine –

http://www.archive.org/web/web/*/http://www.adelaideinstitute.org

7.3 The deletion request further highlights the world/global political nature of these proceedings – and of Mr Jeremy Jones’ efforts, on behalf of the world’s Zionist organisations, to impose what has already been imposed in a number of European countries through specific legislation, and in Canada through its Human Rights Commission. It is specifically Jewish organisations in Canada, as in Australia and elsewhere, that have pursued individuals for refusing to believe in the Jewish Holocaust-Shoah dogma and those who dare criticise racist Israel for its program of gradually exterminating the Palestinian people.

The matter before the Canadian Human Rights Organisation specifically focuses on a link placed on a website. I refer to Annexure “D” as being a copy of Adelaide Institute Newsletter Online No 366 2008 where is written up the matter of Mr Arthur Topham and his Radical Press who is subject of a Canadian Human Rights Commission enquiry as initiated by the well-known Zionist organisation of Canada - B’nai B’rith.

7.4 If it is recalled that Australia’s Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission-HREOC was established by former Federal Court of Australia Judge, Mr Marcus Einfeld, and of his subsequent well-known incessant proclamation of human rights and Holocaust propaganda both within the Federal Court of Australia environment and without in the wider Australian society, then it is self-evident that here we have a politically-motivated individual who, on behalf of his Jewish community, at every possible opportunity propagated to colleagues and media alike his views on the Jewish Holocaust-Shoah. Not for a moment would he entertain the idea that such propaganda is hurtful to all those who are the object of such propaganda – Germans and anyone who cherishes his German heritage. Their history has, in effect, been stolen by those who propagate the Jewish Holocaust-Shoah. The defamation is compounded when individuals are not given a Right-of-Reply to any of the allegations contained in the Jewish Holocaust-Shoah propaganda that saturates our society. The Jewish Holocaust-Shoah lies are poisoning our society. French Revisionist, Catholic Vincent Reynouard’s comment on the claims made about the Jewish Holocaust Shoah is: “spitting in the face of Christ”.

7.5 If it is recalled that Australia’s organised Jewish community was behind the drafting of the amendment to the Racial Discrimination Act, then the political nature of any proceedings under such an act becomes apparent – and should be treated as such, and not be perverted into a hunt to criminalize dissident minds that refuse to believe in the Jewish Holocaust-Shoah propaganda.

7.6 The fact that Federal Court of Australia judges, Justice Alan Goldberg and Justice Stephen Rothman, both have been heavily involved in propagating the Jewish Holocaust-Shoah gives rise for concern that any kind of justice can emerge from proceedings that directly impact on a contentious interpretation of an historical event. Hence, if the Jewish Holocaust-Shoah is an historical event, then like any other historical event it should be subjected to open enquiry and not be locked up legally and made the subject of proceedings that through the imposition of Court Orders criminalizes an individual who refuses to believe and refuses to remain silent and refuses passively to absorb the tsunami of information on the official version of the Jewish Holocaust-Shoah to which the world media subjects our society.

8. The matter of giving an apology for placing a link on an Internet website is an extension of offering an apology for placing alleged offensive material on a website. At the 19 December 2007 hearing His Honour, Michael Moore, stated that the Respondent’s belief/world view was not in question, but that the apology focused on specific material deemed to be offensive and published on the Respondent’s website was the issue.

8.1 Here we see how basic Common Law principles assert themselves against the Civil Law principles, the latter outright criminalizing thoughts, as evidenced in the recent trial of German solicitor/barrister, Sylvia Stolz.

8.2 I refer to Annexure “E” as being a copy of Adelaide Institute Newsletter Online No 367-A, B and C, 2008 wherein is written up the matter of Sylvia Stolz’s legal persecution for refusing to believe in the Jewish Holocaust-Shoah without being able to subject that belief to a rational enquiry.

8.3 In recent developments there is now a Jewish-Australian human rights lawyer and Labor candidate at the 24 November 2007 Federal election, Mr George Newhouse, who stated publicly that Adelaide resident and former Guantanamo prisoner, Mr David Hicks, should be made to apologize for alleged comments he made about Jews. Among other things, Mr Newhouse commenting on the Hicks matter is quoted as saying that “His actions were violent and his philosophy offensive …”.

8.4 Here we have the bridging thought structure that attempts to bring British Common law in line with European Civil Law where thoughts are criminalized and where individual liberty, as guaranteed by British Common Law, is reduced to the vagary of a hurt feeling. Ordinarily such an action would be the subject of a defamation action but under the Racial Discrimination Act it has erroneously become a “racial” issue. Terms and concepts such as “anti-Semitism”, “race hatred”, “Holocaust denial”, etc. have never been clearly defined because they are subject to political interpretations.

8.5 I refer to Annexure “D” as being a copy of Adelaide Institute Newsletter Online No 366 2008 wherein is quoted from the Australian Jewish News of 7 January 2008 the matter of Mr George Newhouse and his comment on Mr David Hicks.

9. Bearing in mind the comments made by His Honour at the 19 December 2007 hearing as regards my beliefs/world view not being subject of the Consent Orders, I am still having considerable difficulties deciding what is permitted and what is not permitted to be published on Adelaide Institute’s Internet website. If my belief, which His Honour labelled ‘Holocaust denial’, is not in contention then surely I am able to state: “I would rather be a Holocaust denier than a Holocaust liar!” My whole belief system is rather inadequately defined in the deeply flawed Branson J Orders of 17 September 2002. I therefore request that His Honour assist me by deciding whether the enclosed Newsletters in Annexure “D” and “E” in any way contravene the Branson, J Orders of 17 September 2002.

10. In view of the fact that Jeremy Jones, from the outset of these proceedings - first before HREOC in 1996 and subsequently in the FCA, until to date - has never shown any compromise in this matter towards me, which is a basic breach of Natural Justice, giving someone a right of reply. The matter immediately went into legal litigation – and the legal persecution process began – following a well recognized pattern of persecution adopted by Jewish organisations world-wide where non-Jewish individuals do the legal persecution and deliver the pound of flesh.

10.1 Even now Jones claims that he is not anymore involved in the matter because the subject matter of my beliefs has been subsumed under a Court Order, which it is then my duty to follow. In other words, I am now the author of my own ‘punishment’.

11. The conceptual confusion flowing from Branson J’s Orders and from the Consent Orders is designed to neutralize my mind and “to stop it from functioning”. I do not wish to be in breach of any Court Orders but I resist such an act of mental rape, and submit for His Honour’s consideration as an example of my attempt to escape this act of mental rape the following newsletters wherein the essence of my belief system/world view is clearly articulated and vigorously canvassed by experts in the field of historical research: No 368 as Annexure “F”, No 369 as Annexure “G”, No 370 as Annexure “H”, No 371 as Annexure “I”, and DVD - The Holocaust and the Iran Conference - as Annexure "J".

12. This matter before the FCA is a Jewish conspiratorial matter designed to protect an historical lie, a gigantic hoax that defames any German and anyone who values his German heritage, and to deflect any crititicism away from the perpetrators of a real extermination program, that of the Jews exterminating the Palestinians.

From the following, below, it is clear that it is organized Jewry that is behind the push to enshrine in law and to criminalize anyone who refuses to believe in the orthodox version of the Jewish Holocaust-Shoah, which has almost become a religion. The Common Law principle of Natural Justice is thereby eliminated, and it is almost impossible to escape the process of criminalization.

I make reference to Newsletter No 376-D where Judge Glenz justifies Sylvia Stolz’s custodial sentence while awaiting appeal results on grounds that she has contacts overseas and there is a possibility of her fleeing Germany. Fredrick Töben of the Adelaide Institute is mentioned as one person who lives in a country where German law on Holocaust-Shoah prohibition does not exist.

Further, the 27 January 2008 Holocaust Memorial Day in Britain has given rise to the following news item:

The Holocaust must never be forgotten - PM , 22 January 2008

Gordon Brown has made an impassioned plea for the Holocaust never to be forgotten. Ahead of the Memorial Day on Sunday, Mr Brown met Holocaust survivor Zigi Shipper, 78, at Downing Street and signed the Holocaust Day 'Book of Commitment'. The book sits in the Houses of Parliament in the week up to the Memorial Day and serves as a reminder to future generations of the atrocities which occurred.

The PM, who said it was "a privilege" to meet Mr Shipper, wrote in the book: "As the philosopher George Santayana wisely said, 'those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it'.

"That is why we must remember the Holocaust - not just as a defining tragedy but as a warning and so we rededicate ourselves to doing all we can to never allowing this to happen again. "The best tribute we can pay to those who perished is to educate our children to take a stand against hatred, intolerance and persecution wherever and whenever it is found."

Mr Shipper, of Bushey, Herts, spent time in Auschwitz in 1944 and was liberated from a camp in Germany the following year. He settled in Britain after the war and now, as part of a programme run by the Holocaust Educational Trust (HET), Mr Shipper visits schools and talks about his experience to help educate people about the Holocaust. Mr Shipper told the Prime Minister he was "proud to be here and proud to be British". He said afterwards: "I feel that when I talk about the Holocaust, I owe it to the people that did not survive, because there is nobody to speak for them."

Also at the meeting was Karen Pollock, Chief Executive of the HET, and the Trust's Chairman, Lord Janner, who said: "We are grateful to the Prime Minister, who when Chancellor, started a programme giving us funds to send youngsters to Auschwitz so they can learn about what happened and pass on the word when they come home." The Prime Minister continues his support to the Trust, which was established in 1988, with a yearly grant £1.5 million. http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page14349.asp



That Revisionists are dismantling a multi-billion industry is a fact, which needs to be emphasised because such an act will cause pain to those in the industry. The justification for dismantling the Holocaust-Shoah industry rests on a basic moral and intellectual imperative – an historical lie distorts our understanding of significant historical events, thereby perverting our understanding of current events.

The immediate example that comes to mind is the Anglo-American-Zionist destruction and rape of Iraq in March 2003. Other significant examples of such perversions flowing directly from the Jewish Holocaust-Shoah belief can be seen in the extermination policy followed by Jews in Palestine. As well, there is the matter how Dissenters – those who refuse to believe in the Jewish Holocaust-Shoah story – are criminalized in, for example, Austria, France, Germany, where Dissenters such as Wolfgang Fröhlich, Gerd Honsik , Robert Faurisson, Georges Theil, Germar Rudolf, Ernst Zündel, and many others, are imprisoned for up to five years.

12.1 Adam Internet, Adelaide-based Internet service provider, has since 1 May 1996 hosted Adelaide Institute’s website – without complaint. The provider has received death threats for refusing to disconnect Adelaide Institute’s website, and management continues to host the website because it considers the material on Adelaide Institute’s website to be covered by the democratic principles of free expression. Were Adelaide Institute to dabble in pornography, the site would have been pulled a long time ago.

12.2 South Australia Police – has not complained and does not regard Adelaide Institute’s activities as being detrimental to the community.

12.3 Australian Federal Police – has not complained and does not regard Adelaide Institute’s activities to be a national community threat – had there been weapons and drug involvement, then criminal proceedings would have been initiated a long time ago.

12.4 Australian Security Intelligence Organisation-ASIO – has not complained and does not regard Adelaide Institute’s activities to be an Australian national security threat.

12.5 Australia’s education institutions – Töben opposed the introduction of ideological concepts such as ‘value-free’ and ‘non-judgmental’ because they signified intellectual fraud. These concepts, among others, were then coupled to the anti-discrimination industry’s attempt to neutralise thinking processes, thereby suppressing within individuals a healthy development of a normative value system. Truth, honour, justice – are concepts that have no home within the discrimination industry’s value system.

12.6 The Australian Print Media – initially the local, state and national print media outlets supported Töben's educational endeavours, but not the substantive issue surrounding the Jewish Holocaust-Shoah. In fact, the media hate incitement against Fredrick Töben and Adelaide Institute was not absolute and there were instances of fair reporting. The Murdoch press unashamedly used one or more of the following concepts to whip up hatred against Adelaide Institute or Fredrick Töben: hater, Holocaust denier, antisemite, racist, neo-Nazi, etc. A ban imposed on Töben to a right-of-reply exists to this day at The Australian and The Advertiser newspapers. The Internet, however, offers Töben Natural Justice by enabling him to respond to any such attacks by placing material on Adelaide Institute’s website. It would be an injustice were this avenue of a right-of-reply taken from Töben.

13. The legal system - The initiating complaint came from Australia’s organized Jewry, and then only after being prompted into action by the highly immoral witch-hunting organisation, Simon Wiesenthal Centre, in Los Angeles, USA, which has a ready line to the world media outlets. The Executive Council of Australian Jewry’s then president, Jeremy Jones, had the audacity to inform the HREOC and the FCA that the material “hurt” his feelings. That this man at the time of making the complaint in 1996 was then considered to be the Australian Jewish community’s foreign minister highlights the corrupt nature of this whole process. It has nothing to do with justice but all to do with politics. That the HREOC commissioner and the FCA judge accepted Jones’ word – without any medical confirmation of the quantum of his hurt – is indicative of the non Jews bending to Jewish pressure. Both Commissioner McEvoy and Justice Branson claim they were merely interpreting statute law as found in the Racial Discrimination Act!

14. Why is there one Goyim among nine Jews? The AJN needs Fredrick Töben – why?

http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/images/photos2008/10top2007.jpg

15. The following is material from a website http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=109 that substantially deals with specifically Jewish crimes committed against non-Jews, something Adelaide Institute does not do. The Internet has become a weapon of mass instruction for enlightened individuals who refuse to bow to Jewish pressure, who refuse to adopt a Jewish world view.

________________________

Jewish Murderers Of The Russian Royal Family – http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=109
By Brother Nathanael Kapner - Copyright © 2008

All Articles May Be Reproduced Only With Authorship of Brother Nathanael Kapner & Link To Real Jew News - http://www.realjewnews.com/

http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/images/photos2008/Bolshe1.jpg

JEWS MURDERED THE RUSSIAN ROYAL FAMILY.

This was the greatest travesty beside the crucifixion of Jesus Christ in the history of mankind. The Russian Royal Family of Tzar Nicholas II were pious Orthodox Christians. They exemplified all that is precious in a family, namely, Christian piety and love for one’s neighbor.

But the Anti-Christ Jews murdered this preciousness! From then on the world has witnessed and felt the effects of the decline of the family - the staple of an ethical, Christian society. But Anti-Christian Jews, like Jacob Schiff, Chairman of Kuhn & Loeb Bank, who financed the Bolshevik Revolution, have wreaked their destruction on Christian civilization.

It was this Jew, Jacob Schiff, who brought Leon Trotsky (born “Lev Bronstein”) to New York in February 1916. Trotsky recruited Russian Jews from New York’s Russian Jewish immigrant population in the Lower East Side of Manhattan and trained them as revolutionaries.

On March 27 1917, Trotsky and his 300 well-trained Jewish communists from Manhattan’s Lower East Side, boarded the Norwegian steamer “Kristianiafjord” for a journey that brought them to St. Petersburg in Russia. Their purpose was to establish a Marxist government under the leadership of Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin. Before departing, Jacob Schiff gave this group $20 million in gold.

http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/images/photos2008/Boshe2.jpg

THE ROYAL FAMILY FLEES & PURSUED BY JEWISH COMMUNISTS

With support from inside the Social Democratic party and many of the Jewish-run soviets, Lenin, joined by Trotsky from New York, gained the upper hand over the Kerensky government.

In August of 1917, the Russian Royal Family fled to Tobolsk in Siberia. They stayed at the Governors House until April 1918. They hoped to escape to England where King George V, a Romanov cousin, would hopefully grant them refuge. But he refused due to pressure from Jewish groups.

On April 22 1918, the Jew, Jacob Sverdlov, first President of the Soviet Union, sent his aide, the Jew, Yankel Yakovlev, to Tobolsk to persuade Tzar Nicholas II to agree to sanction the Brest-Litovsk peace treaty. Tzar Nicholas refused for he considered the treaty an ‘eternal disgrace to Russia.’ He did though agree to return to Moscow as he was told that the Germans were willing to grant him asylum.

They got as far as Ekaterinburg in the Urals where the train was halted by the Regional Soviets dominated by four Jews, Goloshchekin, Safarov, Voikov and Syromolotov. These four communist Jews appointed the Jew, Jacob Yurovsky, son of a local Jewish ex-convict, as the head the local Cheka (Soviet Secret Police) in Ekaterinburg. Yurovsky was given the assignment to imprison, plan, and carry out, the assassination of the Russian Royal Family.

The Jew Yurovsky brought the Russian Royal Family to a former house of a wealthy Jewish merchant named Ipatiev, now made into a prison for the Tzar and his family. It should be noted that Ekaterinburg, named after named after St Catherine the Great, was renamed “Sverdlovsk” in 1924 in honor of Jacob Sverdlov who gave the final order to execute the Russian Royal Family.

On July 4 1918, the Jew Yurovsky dismissed all the Russian soldiers who were guarding the Tzar except for a Pavel Medvedev, a Cheka Jewish spy. Yurovsky replaced the loyal-to-the-Tzar Russian soldiers with Jewish communist assassins from Hungary. That they were Jewish communists from Hungary, their scribbling on the walls indicated.

On July 15 1918, two representatives from the Soviet Extraordinary Commission, one of them being the Jew, Philip Golochtchekine, came to the Ipatiev house with an order from the Jew Jacob Yurovsky to execute the Russian Royal Family.

On July 17 1918, about midnight, the Jew Yurovsky brought Tzar & Tzarina Nicholas and Alexandra, and their four daughters, the maid, the doctor, the cook, and the waiter to the basement. The Tzar carried the heir Alexei in his arms. They were told that they were to pose for a group picture. The Jewish assassins, Medvedev, Nikulin, Yermakov, Vaganov, were waiting. Medvedev claimed that he was outside at the time of the execution as his guilty conscience shamed his tongue into lying.

The Jew Yurovsky then pulled out his revolver and pointed it directly at the Tsar’s head and fired. Tzar Nicholas II died instantly. Next, he shot Tzarina Alexandra as she made the sign of the Cross. Olga, Tatiana, Maria, and Anastasia, were shot next. Demidova, the maid, survived the first volley, so the Jewish Cheka assassins decided to bayonet her 30 times.

As the room became silent there was a low groan. Alexei was still in the arms of the Tsar and alive. The Jew Yurovsky stepped up and fired two shots into the boy’s ear. All the members of the Tsar’s family were lying on the floor with many wounds in their bodies. The blood was running in streams.

http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/images/photos2008/Bolshe3.jpg

THE JEWISH COVER UP

As Robert Wilton, a correspondent in Moscow of the Times of London from 1902 through 1919, wrote in his book, The Last Days Of The Romanovs, the Jewish Board of Deputies and the Anglo-Jewish Association in Britain published an interview with Starynkevich, a Jewish lawyer, who was then Minister of Justice in the Urals region. Starynkevich had appointed another Jew, Sergeiev, to carry out an investigation of the murders.

The Jew lawyer, Starynkevich lied saying that his team of investigators (all Jews) had found no trace of any Jewish involvement in the killings. This was a brazen falsehood and no support was proffered to support his claims. His lie was evidently intended to give Jewish organizations abroad a means of confusing and obscuring the whole issue.

But as Jesus Christ Himself said: “There is nothing covered that shall not be revealed,” the truth about this Jewish crime of all crimes is now being shouted from the rooftops. The Jews, every single one of them, are culpable of “collective guilt.” They all better repent before the judgment of the Lord Jesus Christ falls upon their wicked heads!

For More See: “Jewish Murderers Of The Russian Revolution” - http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=62

Sources: Judical Inc Web Site @ http://judicial-inc.biz/Romanoffs.htm; A Lifelong Passion - Nicholas And Alexandra Their Own Story, Doubleday Publishing; The Last Days of the Romanovs, Robert Wilton.

Sworn by Deponent

at Adelaide on the 31st day of January 2008
…………………………..

Deponent Signature

Before me:……………………

http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/newsletters/n372.htm

[Alex Linder]

[Check out the bias in this headline! "Witch called to account for dead cows"]

Holocaust denier called to account

Jeremy Roberts | February 28, 2008

HOLOCAUST denier Fredrick Toben faced accusations of criminal contempt of court yesterday after he claimed the Federal Court was part of worldwide conspiracy against him.

The call to lay criminal charge against Dr Toben came from counsel for Australian Jewish leader Jeremy Jones, in a long running Federal Court case aimed at removing Holocaust-denial material from Dr Toben's Adelaide Institute website.

In a document lodged with the Federal Court yesterday, Dr Toben, 62, claimed the court was a part of a plan to silence his controversial views on the Holocaust.

"This matter before the Federal Court of Australia is a Jewish conspiratorial matter designed to protect an historical lie," Dr Toben says, in notice of motion filed yesterday.

Going further, Dr Toben identifies two Jewish judges, Federal Court Justice Alan Goldberg and NSW Supreme Court Justice Stephen Rothman, and questions the integrity of the courts.

"Both (judges) have been heavily involved in propagating the Jewish Holocaust-Shoah, gives rise for concern that any kind of justice can emerge from proceedings that directly impact on a contentious interpretation of an historical event," he says.

Counsel for Mr Jones, Robin Margo SC, told the court that Dr Toben's comments were so serious as to attract a criminal action.

"This matter has passed from a civil contempt proceeding to serious criminal contempt," Mr Margo said.

Mr Margo told Justice Michael Moore, sitting in Sydney, that after six years of litigation from Mr Jones, it was time for criminal action to be taken by the court against Dr Toben.

"There must come a point in which a private litigant doesn't have to keep pushing the barrow for ever," Mr Margo said.

German-born Australian, Mr Toben, 62, spent seven months in a German prison in 1999 for breaching Holocaust denial laws on his website.

He represented himself yesterday in Adelaide, connected to the Sydney court by video link, responding to a civil contempt of court complaint by Mr Jones, a former president of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry.

Mr Jones is attempting to have Dr Toben honour a court undertaking, made in November last year, to remove references to Holocaust denial material on his website.

Mr Jones also wants Dr Toben to re-issue his apology, made last November, for breaching the terms of the 2002 decision by Justice Catherine Branson to remove the Holocaust-denial material.

Justice Moore adjourned the case to a date in April, ahead of a possible hearing in June.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23290926-2702,00.html

[Mark Kerpolt]

Fredrick Töben (with o-umlaut) is a great man, among those I truly admire. I'm sure many people saw his excellent documentary videos. I e-mail with him from time to time. It's nice he's on YouTube now.

Maybe it's an idea to invite him on a VNN Radio show or to have a [recorded] interview?

[Alex Linder]

That is a good idea. I don't know how to make the umlaut, I just use simplified English spelling.

[cillian]

That is a good idea. I don't know how to make the umlaut, I just use simplified English spelling.

alt+0246

ö

[Mark Kerpolt]

That sounds great!


By the way, you can also spell it out as: Fredrick Toeben (that's the official, full-out, orthography of German without diactrics).

In the “U.S. English Int'l” keyboard layout in Windows operating systems, above “2000,” there's the key-combination: R.ALT + P; the deadkey: " + O. Or, you could use my custom-made Latin script [transliteration] keyboard, available here (http://rapidshare.de/files/38717412/Au.Latin_extended_v3.zip.html) (which provides the same deadkey combination and functionality).


Some other examples: Führer → Fuehrer
Übermenſch → Uebermensch
Jäger → Jaeger


A reversed example, something that has always been written like that in German for some reason: Goebbels → Göbbels

[Alex Linder]

Shoah denier makes accusation

07/03/2008

by Dan Goldberg

An Adelaide-based Holocaust denier has accused two senior Jewish judges of “propagating the Jewish Holocaust” to “protect an historical lie”.

Fredrick Toben, 62, founder of the notorious Adelaide Institute, made his accusations to the Federal Court this week as he battles a long-running case over Holocaust denial material.

He now faces a possible contempt of court for suggesting that the judicial role of both Justice Alan Goldberg and Justice Stephen Rothman “gives rise for concern that any kind of justice can emerge from proceedings that directly impact on a contentious interpretation of an historical event”.

Jeremy Jones, a past president of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, has continued to pursue Dr Toben through the courts. His legal counsel, Robin Margo, told the judge in Sydney this week that Dr Toben’s slur should attract criminal contempt, according to a report in The Australian.

http://www.thejc.com/home.aspx?ParentId=m11s19&SecId=19&AId=58575&ATypeId=1

[Alex Linder]

Wacko’s World by David Brockschmidt

Manny Waks, one of the Jewish B’nai B’rith’s Anti Defamation Commission publication editors, and/or one of his front men had a go at my article that appeared in Adelaide Institute’s Newsletter No 329 May 2007: ‘Richard Toye, Sir Winston Churchill, Sir Martin Gilbert and the end of Lies’.

Again it looks as if these types of journalists suffer from the selective memory syndrome and in this case it has gotten the better of them.

Let’s address the points Manny Waks makes in his 2007 submission about me:



1. Yes, Brockschmidt has read Adolf Hitler‘s Mein Kampf, Der Mythos des 20. Jahrhunderts written by the National Sozialistische Deutsche Arbeiter Partei-NSDAP ideologue with a nice Jewish-German name, Alfred Rosenberg; The Goebbels Diaries, 1933-45, and much more literature written and published during the Third Reich. I have read and reflected on all of it at a time when your father was still jumping over the fence with you.

Manny, you asked me if I had forgotten what Hitler wrote, and to that I say it is not important what political leaders wrote in their younger years, but what they say, write and act on when they are in power, especially during times of war.



2. It was not German propaganda regarding Stalin’s plan to attack Germany on 6 July 1941 and steam-roll the rest of Europe right up to the Atlantic in order to advance the communist world revolution. This is a very well documented historical fact and it explains Hitler’s desperate attempt to make peace with the western allies in order to have a free hand to neutralise Stalin’s plan and smash Bolshevism in Soviet Russia.



3. Manny, I think you have conveniently forgotten to read the following books and Stalin’s speeches while he was in power. All that I mention here is confirmed. In order to overcome your historical information gap I shall mention again the books, plans and speeches you need to read in order to make a competent historical judgment.

a. Martin Allen: The Hitler–Hess Deception

b. Joachim Hoffmann: Stalin’s War of Extermination

c. Victor Suvorow: Icebreaker

d. Victor Suvorow: The Day M

e. Werner Maser: Der Wortbruch. Here we find Stalin’s famous secret speech before his generals, given at the Frunse Military Academy, Moscow, in 1940.

f. General Wassilewski’s plan to attack Germany May 1941

g. Marshall Schukow’s plan to steamroll Europe between May and 6 July 1941.

h. Gerd Schulze-Blumhof: Der Krieg der viele Väter hatte.

i. Albert Weeks: Stalin’s Other War. Soviet Grand Startegy 1939 to 1941. This book includes Stalin’s secret speech to his politbureau given on 19 August 1939.

j. Erkki Hautamaki: Finnland in the Whirlwind.

k. Hitler’s Tabletalks of 1936-1945, published by DTV.



4. This is, of course, only the tip of the information iceberg proving that Germany’s attack on Soviet Russia was a pre-emptive strike, similar to Israel’s so-called Six-Day-War in 1967. I was there, Manny, risking my life for Erez Israel. Where were you?



5. If you want to take on Revisionist scholars and historians you had better make certain you have done your homework, or you can end up with egg on your face. Revisionists work with facts, not with faction and/or fiction.



6. So, what do you say in response, Manny? We are all eyes and ears. Please educate us, will you? As long as you shoot from the lip and not from the hip, as long as you present fire and waterproof facts, not faction, fiction, opinions and heresay, we are happy to revise everything we write. Every thinking person should revise, and we are sure you do just that. That, of course, will make you a Revisionist. So welcome on board, Manny, for the sake of truth in history.



7. Let’s stop playing the good, the bad and the ugly game. Political correctness, which is nothing else but intellectual terrorism, is suffocating sensible historical thinking through constant info-tainment and disinformation pumped into people’s brains 24-hours a day by our mass media. The west is turning into an “Axis of Willing Morons”.

8. Last but not least, for you and your colleagues who are thinking of pulling the antisemite, racist, hater, Nazi, and Holocaust denier card on me, may I offer you two more book titles for the betterment and further education of you and your organisation before you get back to me with the facts. Peter Schaeffer: Jesus and the Talmud, Princeton University Press, 2005; Michael Kellog: The Russian Roots of Nazism. White Emigres and the Making of National Socialism, 1917-45. Cambridge University Press 2006. Remember, Manny, knowledge is power and the Internet is the weapon of Revisionist mass instruction.

_______________________________

History’s Memory Holes by David Brockschmidt

The official Holocaust-Shoah history, taught world-wide in schools and universities, is like the Ozone holes above the North and South Poles. They shift constantly, getting bigger or smaller, according to the needs of the Holocaust-Shoah industry.

Let’s start again with the victim figures for Auschwitz I-Stammlager and Auschwitz II-Birkenau. According to the International War Crimes Tribunal, Nurnberg in 1945-46, the French submitted a victim figure of 8 million, which is only related to the Auschwitz camps. The same applies to the following victim figures: 4 million deaths as alleged by the Soviet Union, which were officially recognized by the Nurnberg War Crimes Tribunal, and remained valid until 1989. Then the official figures for Auschwitz were reduced by the Polish authorities to one million. Because of world-wide Jewish pressure and protests, the Polish president, Lech Walensa, issued an order to increase the victim figure from one million to 1.5 million. Today, the actual Auschwitz plaques carry the figure 1.-1.5 million.

In May 2002 the chief editor, Fritjof Meyer, of Germany’s left-wing Der Spiegel, which is Europe’s largest news magazine, published an article in the Osteuropa, titled ‘Die Todeszahlen von Auschwitz’, wherein he reduced the figures even further, by another one million, to approximately 500,000, of those 360,000 were gassed.

As the victim figures have shrunk so dramatically so have the size of the Zyklon B gas insertion holes in the underground homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz II-Birkenau, Krema II and III. According to the ‘Pope’ of Holocaust-Shoah history, Professor Robert-Jan van Pelt, the four holes in the ceiling of Krema II, mortuary I, were reduced by van Pelt from 700x700mm2 to approximately 50x50mm round, the size of a tennis ball.

These four gas insertion holes were also ‘moved’ from the middle of the ceiling next to the underground concrete columns, and then to the edge of the roof!

Further, van Pelt informs his readers that before the Nazis destroyed the underground mortuary-gas chamber, the four tennis ball-size holes were filled with cement and then blown up. Does that make any sense?

To his credit, one should say that in his book Auschwitz: From 1270 to the Present, published in 1996, at pages 363-64, he admits that the so-called homicidal gas chamber at Auschwitz-Stammlager was a re-construction, built after World War Two, symbolically representing what happened at Auschwitz II-Birkenau, where supposedly the real homicidal gas chambers operated. Fritjof Meyer, of course, has changed not only the victim figures from 1.-1.5 million to approx 500,000, as previously mentioned but also transferred van Pelt’s homicidal mass gassings outside of Auschwitz II-Birkenau camp into two farm houses – the red and white house, or Bunker I and II. In an unpublished section of his essay, which Meyer gave to historian Werner Maser, the latter quotes Meyer by saying that there is no historical proof that these two farm houses ever existed.

So, here we go again, the story is continually changing. Now let’s have a look at what another eminent Holocaust-Shoah historian, Professor Deborah Lipstadt has to contribute to this historical matter.

Professor Lipstadt used the building plans of the SS Bauleitung – construction office – of Auschwitz-Birkenau, which ‘the stupid Nazis forgot to burn’. She calls them ‘the blueprints of genocide’. Now, all of a sudden, the holes are not on top of the alleged homicidal gas chamber ceiling anymore but have been moved to a side wall and turned into air vents of the underground facility. According to the plans these air vents, which really existed, could never have been used as Zyklon B gas insertion holes.

Then another change occurs as Professor Lipstadt continues her research. She reports on discovering in the underground mortuary, windows which could only be opened from the outside. On photos we have seen Mortuary I was nearly underground and there are no visible windows at all! Lipstadt’s ‘blueprints of genocide’ do not show them either. How these non-visible underground windows could be accessed and opened from the outside remains a mystery, indeed a miracle.

It took these eminent Holocaust-Shoah historians more than 60 years to come up with such contradictory research results, but at the same time telling the world that the Holocaust-Shoah is the most researched piece of history in the history of mankind.

Another controversy regarding the underground mortuary I at Krema II raised by Professor Lipstadt is the conversion of the body chute where the corpses were slid down into the mortuary awaiting cremation. She points out that this chute was converted into steps and this proves that the victims walked to their death. The conversion from chute into steps is shown in the plans, but there may be another explanation for this. It seems never to have occurred to anybody post World War Two, especially during the typhoid epidemics in the camp, which not only affected the prisoners but also staff and medical personnel, that these steps could have been used to carry corpses on a stretcher into the mortuary instead of sliding them down the chute. The latter operation could have been more efficient.

The factual evidence provided by van Pelt and Lipstadt and the contradictions it contains indicates that their version of homicidal mass gassings at Auschwitz II-Birkenau has more holes than a Swiss cheese!

This is, in my opinion, shoddy investigation. It is only water on the mills of Nazis and of Holocaust deniers who say: “It is better to be a Holocaust denier than a Holocaust liar”.

Eminent Holocaust-Shoah historian, the late Raul Hilberg, told the world just before his death in 2007:

“The Holocaust has only been researched by twenty per cent so far. The Revisionist historians and scholars are actually helpful for us because they force us to have another look so we can revise our own research and results”.

May I suggest to Professor Robert-Jan van Pelt and Professor Deborah Lipstadt, and all the other official Holocaust-Shoah historians, to go back to work and honour Professor Raul Hilberg’s suggestion to tackle the other 80 per cent the unresearched part of the Holocaust-Shoah.

It has taken these official court historians over 60 years to come up with lots of contradictions within their 20 per cent research of the topic, which means it could take another 280 years in order to have the Holocaust-Shoah fully researched, if they get it right next time!

I personally believe it is a scandal using Holocaust liars – like the Swiss Benjamin Wilkomirski who said he was in Auschwitz II-Birkenau and is a Holocaust survivor but actually had never left Switzerland. Professor Deborah Lipstadt is still telling the world that the contribution of such liars like Wilkomirski – and there are hundreds of them – is still a valuable source of information for teaching Holocaust-Shoah history. It seems that ‘true lies’ rule supreme. I recall Jewish activist, Professor Eli Wiesel, when questioned by his Rabbi while writing one of his books: ‘But is it true, Eli?’ Wiesel’s response was: ‘Sometimes truth are lies, and lies are truth’.

The other option in order to shorten the research of the 80 per cent unresearched part of the Holocaust-Shoah, would be to agree with Fritjof Meyer’s 2002 report and/or Gitta Sereny who in 2001 told the world that Auschwitz I and II were not death or extermination camps at all.

That, of course, would bring people into conflict with the laws in many countries, especially Europe, that protect the official version of the Holocaust-Shoah narrative, regardless of what Meyer and Sereny have written. You would be prosecuted either as a Holocaust liar and/or a Holocaust denier. The ‘logic’ of these lawmakers is simple regarding the official Holocaust-Shoah version: 1 + 1 = 6. If you don’t believe that, regardless of what the evidence shows, they can arrange to give you at least five years of recreation and rehabilitation behind bars.

So much for freedom of expression and freedom to pursue scientific and historical research in what is termed the democratic world.

It is Galileo Galilee and Giordano Bruno all over again.

Henry Ford said “History is bunk”. Let’s try to find truth in history through an historical example, naming the Turkish-Armenian Holocaust: “The Turks say it did not happen. Right?! – which makes the Turks in the eyes of the Armenians ‘Holocaust deniers’. The Armenians say: ‘It did happen’, which makes the Armenians in the eyes of the Turks ‘Holocaust liars. Right?!

So Professors Lipstadt and van Pelt, let’s go back to work, kick some dust and find truth in history. People don’t want to believe anymore, they have a right to know.

ISSN 1440-9828
March 2008
No 374

http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/newsletters/n374.htm

[Mark Kerpolt]

Alex Linder, any progress as far as this (http://www.vnnforum.com/showpost.php?p=733689&postcount=7) goes?

[Mark Kerpolt]

(Any progress now, perhaps?)

[Alex Linder]

[From Toeben's newsletter]

German Destiny

Address by Dagmar Brenne at the Inverell Forum, 10 March 2008

Ladies and Gentleman here at Inverell. I wish to thank the organisers of the Inverell Forum for giving me the opportunity to speak today on the subject of the German perspective of the Second World War. I have a profound sense of destiny at this time, during these twilight days of White Civilisation and today I want to give you a history lesson in broad brush strokes.

In the 1930s my country Germany elected a chancellor. I won't mention his name as his name upsets some people. He was the head of a party, whose name I won't mention either, for the same reason: it upsets people. Now from this man and from the party, much evil was emanating throughout Germany, so much so, that the good people of the world were very concerned and saw it necessary to band together to fight this evil. Yes, Good fought Evil...so, Ladies and Gentlemen, Good fought Evil in the 1930s and as it is well known: Good won! This is, broadly speaking the official storyline of WW2.

On 24 March 1933 there appeared the now famous headline in the London Express saying: JUDEA DECLARES WAR ON GERMANY! I want you to take note of the date: 1933. Basically it means, that all Jews, wherever they lived in the World, even in Germany (!), were at war with Germany! This is predating any concentration camps or any of the things that Germans were supposed to have done to Jews. It is like a prophetic presentiment. [I discount W Benz’s reflections about this declaration – see Wikipedia: .]

Now, I need to tell you, this war is still on-going. It is raging unabated. The declared outcome and purpose of this war, starting in 1933 is: Germany MUST perish. We have not perished yet, but the people who call themselves Judea are still working on it. Germany has no peace treaty. Nor do I ever expect to see one.

But, ladies and gentlemen, the war started quite some time earlier. Margaret Thatcher tells us that a war ensued between England and Germany in 1871, a trade war in this case. In the 1870s England was the foremost industrial nation and along came Germany with manufactured goods of excellent quality, excellent after sales service and excellent reputation, even to this very day: Made in Germany! The mark of excellence! Germany gained markets in Asia and in Africa. England's envy was aroused and the hierarchy, the people from the ''City of London” sat together to do something about the situation. Three wars were being planned: WWI – Germany was to be defeated and Germany was to be made into an agrarian society in a dismembered Europe. WWII – Germany was to be defeated and Germany/ Europe was to be cut up some more and Germany was to be the number one criminal nation, on whom all belligerence could be pinned. The culprit nation, just as we see it today.

And, my dear audience, if you have missed out on WAR No.1 and WAR No.2, you will not miss out altogether. World War No.3 is sure to come and is not far off. The situation in Europe in the 1930s was like this: On the other side of the border, in Russia, was a massive build-up of armies, the Russian Communists, the Bolshevik Marxist entity, ready to over-run the rest of Europe. This godless Marxist Colossus had killed, according to Solzenitzyn some 66 Million Christian Russian white people, a fact that had not gone unnoticed in Germany, and these communists were now poised to juggernaut Europe. The slaughter to be wreaked was unimaginable and the only ones that stood in the way was Germany. Here I need to mention the many volunteers from other nations, who heroically stood by Germany in this fight.

And then, Ladies and Gentlemen, there was Poland. Polish people started to kill Germans in great numbers. There were enclaves of Germans in Poland which came about like this: In the days of

August the Strong, 1670-1733, who was both the king of Saxony and who became the king of Poland, when he changed his religion, many Germans were called into the country to cultivate the soil. Germans are good at that. This included my mother’s family who heeded that call.

To get a handle on the caliber of Polish people I just want to ask you to name five world-famous Poles!? Can you do it? Now the Poles were killing many Germans. Who has heard of the Bromberg Bloody Sunday? To get the situation into perspective: the Germans had far more reason to invade Poland, to stop these massacres than America had for invading Korea, Vietnam, Kosovo or Iraq. But when Germany invaded Poland it was England that declared war on Germany in 1939.

When we look at Germany's situation in the 1930s we have: JUDEA DECLARES WAR ON GERMANY. We also have the Communist threat in Russia and little Poland killing multitudes of ethnic Germans in Poland and in German border regions. Germany did not have to try very hard to find some implacable enemies at that time.

But I understand, in a spiritual, intuitive way, why World Jewry declared war on Germany: Judea declares War on Germany. It's not pleasant, grateful, loyal to Germany nor civilised, but understandable.

There exists a profound incompatibility between Jews and Germans. It is anchored in the DNA of the species, far beyond the ken of the average person. Amazingly the Jew understands this far better than the German. It is a mentality of: US OR THEM. Germans always think it is something they have DONE, while the Jew knows instinctively it is something the German REPRESENTS.

Here I need to speak of three points in regards to the Germans:

1. Germany, in the centre of Europe, is the womb, the fountain head of White Civilisation. Whether anyone understands it or not: the Germans are the stewards and caretakers of White Civilisation. In Germany were the Celts, the family of people that extended to France, Ireland, Scotland, Wales and other countries.

In Germany were the Goths, whose immense kingdom extended into Italy, Spain, France, northward into Scandinavia and from there into Russia. The title of the King of Sweden to this day is: Rex Gothae et Vandalorum - King of the Goths and Vandals.

In Germany were and still are the tribes of the Angles and Saxons, who went into England and became the Anglo-Saxon nations.

The Jews, I need to tell you in this context are NOT white people. A number of their own kind, for example, Benjamin Friedmann and Arthur Koestler, and the historian, H.G. Wells, confirm that Jews are Asiatics, related to Mongolians and Turks.

2. The Germans call their country THE FATHERLAND. This is a declaration of legitimacy, as a father makes a child legitimate. A child with a father is not illegitimate, is not a bastard.

A father speaks of the head of the house, the provider, the protector, the lawgiver and of order. Germany is a patriarchal society, the family line goes through the father's side.

The Jews have a matriarchal society. The family line goes through the mother. A profound difference in outlook on life.

3. The Germans as stewards of White Civilisation were the only ones in all recorded history with an AWARENESS of their white Aryan racial family. They elected an emblem, that had been the sign of life and good fortune since ancient times, to underline this awareness and fight for it.

It appears that others were quite happy to mix and mingle in the multi-cultural genetic pool.

Now, Ladies and Gentlemen, I don't know about your world view, but to me – he who despises his birthright, he who pays no heed to Father and Mother, he who cares not for his ancestry is cursed according to the tenets of my faith. And it appears to me, that white society is labouring under a curse, when I see the rampant disowning, the disenfranchising, the massive disinheriting of our people in all lands, the countries of our White Civilisation.

I now have come full circle with my speech. When GOOD fought EVIL and GOOD won, why, I ask, has this not led to great prosperity, well-being and peace? When good fought evil and good won, why do we see so much poverty, crime, immorality, hopelessness and suicides? So many fatherless children?

When Good fought Evil, why has it turned out so BAD, when Good won?

Maybe, Ladies and Gentlemen, they told you a lie, when they told you that it was GOOD that had won!

***

Dagmar Brenne can be contacted at:

danamemet@ceinternet.com.au

http://adelaideinstitute.org/newsletters/n375.htm

[Robert Bandanza]

http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/newsletters/n404.htm

[EireannGoddess]

http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/newsletters/n404.htm

Thank you both Herr Linder and Roberto for posting these important messages - Herr Töben is right, and I was particularly moved by his latest message from the link above.

Those of us who are of German ancestry are globally perceived as "monsters". Even we Children and grand-children, great-grandchildren. And it is doubly true if we challenge holocaustianity, the jewish Lie. We are accused of many things that are perverse; which are untrue. To be a proud German, one who is proud of Germany's past accomplishment, particularly during the Reich Era, is considered a criminal act in and of itself.

I could go into personal account here; but will not; suffice to say that my Bavarian-Gael accented English has caused much problem for me.

[Mark Kerpolt]

Alex Linder, anything new as for the plans to interview him for a VNN radio show?

[tuisto]

http://youtube.com/user/FredrickToben

Chapeau Toeben's courage!

But in all honesty the video is pathetic, absolutely pathetic.
Hebrew-wood garbage :puke:
Not recommendable.

[Mark Kerpolt]

But in all honesty the video is pathetic, absolutely pathetic.
Hebrew-wood garbage :puke:
Not recommendable.
It's a pathetic talmudvision-show, the song itself is dedicated to Xianity, but the piece she sang is absolutely nothing ‘Hebrew’ whatsoever. It's pure Aryan creativity, beauty and merit being exhibited. (Unless you're, for some awkward reason, against classical music).

[tuisto]

It's a pathetic talmudvision-show, the song itself is dedicated to Xianity, but the piece she sang is absolutely nothing ‘Hebrew’ whatsoever. It's pure Aryan creativity, beauty and merit being exhibited. (Unless you're, for some awkward reason, against classical music).

The "pathetic talmudvision-show" (with self-infatuated audience) is taking everything out of perspective and the poor girl is musically not very talented (even though there are moments when she exhibits some good vibrato and beauty) and therefore does not deserve all the unjustified applause which will make a potentially big-headed cunt out of her when she gets older.
The standard of interpretation is very high these days, she'd miss passing the first round in a competition.

[Adi18]

Those of us who are of German ancestry are globally perceived as "monsters". Even we Children and grand-children, great-grandchildren. And it is doubly true if we challenge holocaustianity, the jewish Lie. We are accused of many things that are perverse; which are untrue. To be a proud German, one who is proud of Germany's past accomplishment, particularly during the Reich Era, is considered a criminal act in and of itself.

I could go into personal account here; but will not; suffice to say that my Bavarian-Gael accented English has caused much problem for me.

Fraulein, Never forget!! Deutschland ist Adolf Hitler, Adolf Hitler ist Deutschland!! They can accuse us of anything, let them accuse, because one day, we will prevail.
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p211/andrew_125/ww2%20propaganda/mutterkind.jpg

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p211/andrew_125/ww2%20propaganda/altar.jpg

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p211/andrew_125/ww2%20propaganda/bols.jpg

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p211/andrew_125/ww2%20propaganda/fw7-23.jpg

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p211/andrew_125/ww2%20propaganda/fw8-22.jpg

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p211/andrew_125/ww2%20propaganda/fw9-24.jpg

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p211/andrew_125/ww2%20propaganda/frauen.jpg

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p211/andrew_125/ww2%20propaganda/muetter.jpg

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p211/andrew_125/ww2%20propaganda/1943.jpg

I hope these pictures remind you of what we stand for. Deutschland Uber Allies!!

[Mark Kerpolt]

Alex Linder, did you see my previous post?


Deutschland Uber Allies!!
It'd always be: Deutſchland über alles. Or, with diphthongs, full-out: Deutſchland ueber alles.

[EireannGoddess]

Alex Linder, did you see my previous post?
It'd always be: Deutſchland über alles. Or, with diphthongs, full-out: Deutſchland ueber alles.

Tchk, tchk now Aistulf - no need to go quite that far! Most Americans, and I include Canadians in that category, spell the word über as "uber". I don't believe there should be a penalty for that! It's a common usage matter, as distressing as this might be to you as a specialist in linguistics of several languages.

[Adi18]

Alex Linder, did you see my previous post?



It'd always be: Deutſchland über alles. Or, with diphthongs, full-out: Deutſchland ueber alles.
Alex, Hey Alex!!! Alex can you hear me.... Alex, hey Alex, did you see MY previous post? Kicks the shit out of Aistulf's hey?
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p211/andrew_125/funny%20pics/Attention-Firing_squad.jpg

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p211/andrew_125/funny%20pics/cbgcomputer.gif
After some careful calculations I've found that in your lifetime you'll waste exactly 247.5 days of your life by switching languages for silly things like la puta, uber, I'm being an attention whore and posting useless bullshit for nothing........
Thank you Eireean Goddess, you see, flamewars can be a good thing, don't ever take it personally.

[tuisto]

Tchk, tchk now Aistulf - no need to go quite that far! Most Americans, and I include Canadians in that category, spell the word über as "uber". I don't believe there should be a penalty for that! It's a common usage matter, as distressing as this might be to you as a specialist in linguistics of several languages.

Linder's occasional concern about spelling (by others) should also apply to himself, don't you think so?

Toeben for example is just a name without particular connotations.
Toben however means running berserk in German and it'll better be corrected.

[EireannGoddess]

I am posting this latest news re Herr Dr. Toben's trial. The same ploy of ruling all or most of his Defence as "irrevelant" and therefore basically inadmissable, except for purpose of furthering the Prosectiuon's stand was implemented against Frau Sylvia Stolz [attorney to Herr Zundel] in her battle in the German Courts.

The difference is that Herr Tobin is being attacked for his website content; rather than any book he has written, and, for failure to comply with the juden's demands to "clean up" his site.

Herr Tobin is charged with a whopping 28 counts of misconduct toward the court. His attorney [who most likely will be tried next, as was Frau Stolz, for the crime of having tried to defend a "holoaust denier" ] had applied for removal of 11 of the counts and was unsuccessful. I suspect we can see a repeat of the Zundel-Stolz trials in Australia.

Here is the article:



Pia Akerman | August 06, 2008HOLOCAUST denier Fredrick Toben aggravated charges of criminal contempt of court by attacking federal judges and the judicial process, a court has heard.

Dr Toben yesterday pleaded not guilty to 28 charges alleging he breached orders made by the Federal Court in 2002, as well as an undertaking he made last year to remove offensive material from his website.

The former schoolteacher, who spent seven months in a German prison in 1999 for inciting racism, is facing a possible finding of criminal contempt in the Federal Court in Adelaide.

Jeremy Jones, former president of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, has alleged Dr Toben failed to comply with orders made by judge Catherine Branson in 2002 to remove material that breached the Racial Discrimination Act. The postings implied the Holocaust did not happen and doubted the existence of gas chambers at the Auschwitz concentration camp.

Dr Toben has also been banned from publishing material implying Jews who were offended or challenged by Holocaust denial were of limited intelligence, and that some Jewish people had exaggerated the number of Jews killed in World War II and the circumstances for financial gain.

Robin Margo SC, representing Mr Jones, said Dr Toben had aggravated the alleged breach of court orders by attacking the judiciary on his website.

He said Dr Toben continued to cast aspersions against judicial officers and the legal process, promoting a view that the court was "merely a proxy" for Jews.

Mr Margo said such "public defiance" of the court's authority as well as personal attacks on Mr Jones undermined the fabric of justice.

Melbourne barrister David Perkins, representing Dr Toben, unsuccessfully applied for a permanent stay of 11 of the charges.

Judge Bruce Lander, hearing the case, said any evidence tendered arguing that the Holocaust did not occur would be ruled irrelevant.

The hearing continues.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24135417-5006787,00.html

[Mark Kerpolt]

Alex, Hey Alex!!! Alex can you hear me.... Alex, hey Alex, did you see MY previous post? Kicks the shit out of Aistulf's hey?
Hey liquid-nigger-for-brains, if you actually read this thread (but reading is not your ‘strong point’), you'd have noticed I asked him a question and that Alex Linder at first answered, but never got back on it to tell about any progress. Either way, it's none of your concern, so go back and play some b-ball and have some water melon willya?


*niggerish ranting and talmudvision-rhetoric* la puta, *niggerish ranting and talmudvision-rhetoric*
You must be really heartbroken that time I told the truth on your big nigger-loving and kike-fellating crush and love!


Thank you Eireean Goddess, you see, flamewars can be a good thing, don't ever take it personally.
This sums up your whole presence on this forum. Enjoy your stay til September, then it's shalom with you.


Tchk, tchk now Aistulf - no need to go quite that far! Most Americans, and I include Canadians in that category, spell the word über as "uber". I don't believe there should be a penalty for that! It's a common usage matter, as distressing as this might be to you as a specialist in linguistics of several languages.
There's no penalty for it, other than writing incorrect German... I don't know if that's ‘penalty’ enough for you, but how hard is it to write ueber instead of ‘uber’?

I am posting this latest news re Herr Dr. Toben's trial. The same ploy of ruling all or most of his Defence as "irrevelant" and therefore basically inadmissable, except for purpose of furthering the Prosectiuon's stand was implemented against Frau Sylvia Stolz [attorney to Herr Zundel] in her battle in the German Courts.

The difference is that Herr Tobin is being attacked for his website content; rather than any book he has written, and, for failure to comply with the juden's demands to "clean up" his site.

Herr Tobin is charged with a whopping 28 counts of misconduct toward the court. His attorney [who most likely will be tried next, as was Frau Stolz, for the crime of having tried to defend a "holoaust denier" ] had applied for removal of 11 of the counts and was unsuccessful. I suspect we can see a repeat of the Zundel-Stolz trials in Australia.
Did you do this on purpose to make a point or so? I mean, after I and tuisto just made a point about it. I thought you were German and spoke it often? I thought you wrote that somewhere.

[EireannGoddess]

Did you do this on purpose to make a point or so? I mean, after I and tuisto just made a point about it. I thought you were German and spoke it often? I thought you wrote that somewhere.

If you are addressing me Aistulf, I made the post as an update to Herr Toben's trial, and drew the obvious association to that of Herr Zundel and Frau Stolz.

If you will note, the article also uses the same spelling as I have used here on an American internet board where English is the language used and English spelling and grammar are the rule, not the exception.

There is no irregularity in using the more common English spelling. I can't believe that you would ignore the content of the article, which is rather sober and disturbing, to take a fit over my decision to utilise common use English on this board. Ridiculous.

Ps., my post re your earlier correction was meant to be humourous, not meant to upset you. However, since you have proven to lack wit, I will not use either broad or subtle humour when responding to you.

[Mark Kerpolt]

There is no irregularity in using the more common English spelling. I can't believe that you would ignore the content of the article, which is rather sober and disturbing, to take a fit over my decision to utilise common use English on this board. Ridiculous.
I thought you said you spoke English and German, English even with a German accent? As for your claim, actually, most history books — for instance — do spell it correctly. Think of Fuehrer, they usually get that right in English literature. Regardless of everything, in the end, there's really no excuse to butcher a language, especially not if it has been addressed by two people in the same thread.

The most flabbergasting, however, was that you used both “Toben” and “Tobin” in the same piece (as if you were trying to make some point). The only person I know spelling his name as that is Hesham Tilawi, an Arab (Palestinian) living in Louisiana. He's not exactly a German, I'd at least expect you — and particularly in regard to your background — to get it right. I must've overestimated your German lingual capabilities then.


Ps., my post re your earlier correction was meant to be humourous, not meant to upset you.
Sorry, I don't find consciously butchering a language humorous. That's actually how bastard ‘tongues’ like Yiddish came into existence.


However, since you have proven to lack wit, I will not use either broad or subtle humour when responding to you.
Really elegant ad hominem remark there.

[EireannGoddess]

[quote=Aistulf;821068]Sorry, I don't find consciously butchering a language humorous. That's actually how bastard ‘tongues’ like Yiddish came into existence.

Hmm. Alex Linder asked us to try to be more conscious of proper English grammar, by that I understood him to mean we all try to use the a more standardised form of American English, and leaving out the idiosyncrasies inherent between the two forms of English. This is a request that I am attempting to honour. And, one that has altered my overall writing style already. If you have a problem with that, take it up with a mod or Herr Linder.

Which format of English language should I be using? Which one is the "yiddish" English of the two? European or American. For, there is a difference.

And, if you wish to accuse me of being a jew for not writing/spelling in German on an English speaking board, then do so - do not make bitchy comments and innuendo.

Really elegant ad hominem remark there

There's a reason Alex Linder put a sticky on this thread, I doubt it has anything to do with your personal pique re language.

Do you have ANY comment about Dr. Toben and his legal difficulties which could very likely end up with him going to jail or prison for "holocaust denial"? At least I attempted to update the thread dedicated to Toben with new information and some commentary on the matter.

But, that seems to not matter to you. You would try to derail a thread on what I consider one of the most important issues we are facing: Our Revisionists being imprisoned for committing thought crime.

Let's see, last week you'd decided to attack psychologicalshock, today it is my turn. Who will it be tomorrow? Your response has nothing at all to do with the topic of this thread. I would appreciate it if you would take your BS to another thread. How's that for ad hominen?

[Mark Kerpolt]

Hmm. Alex Linder asked us to try to be more conscious of proper English grammar, by that I understood him to mean we all try to use the a more standardised form of American English, and leaving out the idiosyncrasies inherent between the two forms of English.
Okay, so you don't care about German just English. I thought you spoke it, or that you were capable of speaking it, but obviously not then. Your unwillingness speaks volumes. Thanks for clearing that up.


If you have a problem with that, take it up with a mod or Herr Linder.
Why do you write ‘Herr’ Linder? You can't even write German properly, you even consciously and on purposely butcher it. Your own ego is obviously more important than upholding the correctness (which is surprising, coming from someone allegedly proud to be German, speaking the language and even speaking English with an accent influenced by it).


Which format of English language should I be using? Which one is the "yiddish" English of the two? European or American. For, there is a difference.
Your ego knows no bounds. You can't admit you were wrong, that you were wrong and that there's no excuse for your butchering of the German language.

Really pathetic.


And, if you wish to accuse me of being a jew
Where did I? You just quote me where. But, if the shoe fits...


for not writing/spelling in German on an English speaking board, then do so - do not make bitchy comments and innuendo.
This has nothing to do with whether this forum is German or English.


Do you have ANY comment about Dr. Toben and his legal difficulties which could very likely end up with him going to jail or prison for "holocaust denial"?
I e-mail with the man from time to time, whose name is Dr. Fredrick Töben (or Toeben). Very poor smear attempt by the way, you can do a lot better.


Let's see, last week you'd decided to attack psychologicalshock, today it is my turn. Who will it be tomorrow? Your response has nothing at all to do with the topic of this thread.
Did you even read what that thread was about? If you did, you'd have noticed there was no ‘attack,’ not on his person anyway, and that the situation has changed. Also, this self-victimization is more than hilarious. (I thought we loathed Jews for such behavior?)


I would appreciate it if you would take your BS to another thread. How's that for ad hominen?
You know where you can stick this advice, don't you?

Also, it's ad hominem, not ad ‘hominen.’ Or is Latin also qualified to be butchered?

[EireannGoddess]

Okay, so you don't care about German just English.

Right.//Sarcasm//

Your ego knows no bounds. You can't admit you were wrong, that you were wrong and that there's no excuse for your butchering of the German language.

I posted an article relevant to this thread, and have posted on topic in my response to other threads; you have been going around the forum attacking other members as though you know anything about them for over a week now.

This behaviour of yours has increased ever since Alex Linder said he was going to implement bans, ect.

Bans based either on continued mis-use of the [American] English language and grammar, as well as the total content of individual posting history.

Upon learning that, you have decided to expose well hidden animosities and petit piques with other Members - strumping around the Forum like an old menopausal woman, trying to build cases against folks you apparently do not like.

[quote]Where did I? You just quote me where. But, [I]if the shoe fits...

Don't pretend to be dense. You alleged it in your prior post by your choice of words, "Linguist".

Now you have accused me of being a jew more specifically. Well, according to Alex Linder's new policies, one must prove this when attacking other Members or face banning.

Did you even read what that thread was about? If you did, you'd have noticed there was no ‘attack,’ not on his person anyway, and that the situation has changed. Also, this self-victimization is more than hilarious. (I thought we loathed Jews for such behavior?)

We? If I recall, when I first came to VNNF, you were trying to convince me you were White, particularly in PM.

I e-mail with the man from time to time, whose name is Dr. Fredrick Töben (or Toeben). Very poor smear attempt by the way, you can do a lot better.


Since you are in contact with Dr. Toben and claim to have a relationship via email, perhaps you could comment on this thread. Why are you refusing to do this?

It would seem that he would appreciate if you did that. However, why not email Herr Toben and ask whether we should be discussing how his name is commonly spelled in English or if he would prefer we discuss his trial.

I'm leaving it up to Alex Linder to decide whether or not you are entitled to hijack his thread on Dr. Toben with your BS.

In the meantime, I am starting a new thread re the update on Dr. Toben's trial as I think it's rather important.

[Mark Kerpolt]

Upon learning that, Aistulf has decided to expose his well hidden animosity and petit piques with other Members - strumping around the Forum like an old menopausal woman, trying to build cases against folks you apparently do not like.
Are you now trying to play a shrink? Good lord, Jew-yoke Shtetl (‘NYC’) must be really getting at you...


[i]Don't pretend to be dense. You alleged it in your prior post by your choice of words.
Why don't you quote it? Or are you using the same kind of logic as seen used by those who define and control the Holocaust narrative, as Dr. Töben always puts it so eloquently.


Now you have accused me of being a jew more specifically. Well, according to Alex Linder's policies, you must prove this or face banning. Go ahead.
You really need to work on your comprehensive reading skills. At most I likened your behavior to that of one.


I'm leaving it up to Alex Linder to decide whether or not you are entitled to hijack his thread on Dr. Toben with your BS.
Whining in the direction of Alex Linder to get me banned. Now that's rather... T.J.B.


We? If I recall, when I first came to VNNF, you were trying to convince me you were White, particularly in PM.
Because a bunch of dickless, no-brain, McCain-voting patriotards were claiming I wasn't. Which was rather laughable. I'm still thankful for them banning me, it was a mistake of me to join on that MudDick shrine of worship forum in the first place.


Since you are in contact with Dr. Toben and claim to have a relationship via email, perhaps you could comment on this thread. Why are you refusing to do this?
I don't claim so, it's true. Ask the man. I exchange articles with him, I've helped to put out videos of him, like when he went to that ‘non-White’ country Iran (that you and your beloved MudDick hate intensively) to attend IPIS's international Holocaust conference in 2006, in Tehran.

[EireannGoddess]

[quote=Aistulf;821308]

Because a bunch of dickless, no-brain, McCain-voting patriotards were claiming I wasn't. Which was rather laughable. I'm still thankful for them banning me, it was a mistake of me to join on that MudDick shrine of worship forum in the first place.


I am not interested in your problems on other forums, or even on VNNF or why you were banned ect.

I don't claim so, it's true. Ask the man. I exchange articles with him, I've helped to put out videos of him, like when he went to that ‘non-White’ country Iran (that you and your beloved MudDick hate intensively) to attend IPIS's international Holocaust conference in 2006, in Tehran.

Why don't you post something about your article exchanges with Dr. Toben. With his permission of course. Now would seem to be a good time to discuss them and Dr Toben's work as a Revisionist since the jews have forced him to censor his web-site.

I have posted my news on his trial elsewhere, Aistulf since you are determined that it not be given any attention here.

[Mark Kerpolt]

I am not interested in your problems on other forums, or even on VNNF or why you were banned ect.
Yes you are, since you brought it up. Also, it's the second time you misspelled this: It's etc. as in et cetera.

[EireannGoddess]

Yes you are, since you brought it up. Also, it's the second time you misspelled this: It's etc. as in et cetera.

And.. "ignore". Good-bye.

[psychologicalshock]

Why bite into people for minor details? It's not that important especially since this is an English forum and most people do see a significant difference between Toben and Toeben (Most English speakers would pronounce both as Toe-ben). Seriously Aistulf, lately it seems like you're just looking for an excuse to attack.

[Karl Radl]

Besides ect is actually a common German usage of etc.

[Mark Kerpolt]

Besides ect is actually a common German usage of etc.
Did they pick the letters et cetera to abbreviate it in German or so? Very confusing then.

[Kaiser]

Hello Aistulf, I just sent you Rep ,with the answer to your question.

[Adi18]

Dysgenic shitskin Coonuck, with the new policy in power you'll become a Tutsi outnumbered by Hutus soon...
Dysgenic, first time I've ever heard the word, I think you are an Uber geek, and suffer from a lack of basic communication skills so you come off as a douchebag, because you think that your the shit.
Unwanted Births And Dysgenic Reproduction In The United States
by Marian Van Court
Originally published in The Eugenics Bulletin, Spring 1983


Most people are surprised to discover the prevalence of unwanted births in this country and the extent to which they are inversely related to intelligence and educational level. Approximately one-fifth of the births between 1960-1965 in a U.S. sample were said by the parents to have resulted from unplanned, unwanted pregnancies; two-fifths of the remainder were also accidental, but claimed to have been intended for some future time (Bumpass and Westoff, 1970). These figures tend to underestimate the total percentage of unwanted births because there is "considerable rationalization" in parents' reporting, and because illegitimate births are not counted.

In this same study, the incidence of unwanted births war negatively related to both educational level and income. The proportion was twice as high among wives with less than a high school education compared to that of wives with at least some college (26% vs. 13%). The proportion was twice as high for families with incomes under $3000 than for families with incomes over $10,000. For every category of education and income, the percentage was higher for blacks than for whites. For blacks as a whole, more than one-third of the births to married couples were unwanted (Bumpass and Westoff, 1970).

During the 1970's, there was a dramatic increase in usage of the most effective birth control methods-"the pill'', the IUD and sterilization (Westoff & Ryder, 1977). In 1976, unwanted marital fertility had declined to 12% (USDHEW, 1980). But the rate of illegitimate births (most of which could be presumed to be unwanted) had more than tripled since the early '60's. By 1979, 9% of white births and 49% of black and "other" births were out-ofwedlock (Bureau of the Census, 1979). Significant differences by education and income remained.

Part of the problem is that those of low educational level are less likely to use contraception. Yet even among a sample of women using the same highly-effective methods, those with lower IQs were found to have much higher failure rates. Percentages having unwanted births during a three-year interval were 3%, 8% and 11% for high, medium and low IQ women, respectively. For those not using one of these methods, the percentages were 15%, 23 and 31% (Udry, 1978). After an unwanted pregnancy has occurred, higher IQ couples are more likely to obtain abortions (Cohen, 1978). Unmarried teenage girls who become pregnant are more likely to carry and deliver a baby than to have an abortion if they are doing poorly in school (Olson, 1980). Thus each factor--from initially employing some form of contraception, to successful implementation of the method, to termination of an accidental pregnancy when it occurs--involves selection against intelligence.

A pathbreaking study by Vining (1982) has reported a negative correlation between fertility and intelligence for a large, representative sample in the U.S. aged 24-35 as of the late 1970's. My own research (Van Court, manuscript in preparation) has replicated Vining's results on a broader age range. Unwanted births undoubtedly make a contribution to this dysgenic trend, although no study (to my knowledge) has yet precisely quantified their impact.

Fertility studies usually include information about socio-economic status and educational level, which can be used as proxies for IQ, but are not ideal measures. As mentioned above, there are problems with reluctance of parents to admit to contraceptive failures, which introduce unreliability into calculations of unwanted births. Perhaps the main impediment has been the environmentalist milieu of the past several decades which has relegated vital research questions such as these to a not-entirely-benign neglect.

Despite the unfortunate lack of exact figures on the effect of unwanted births on the dysgenic trend in the U.S., inferences can be drawn from various data which indicate the impact is substantial. Several studies which reported the usual negative correlation between number of children and educational level and income found zero correlation, or even a tiny positive correlation, when only planned families were analyzed (Kiser and Whelpton, 1953; Freedman and Slesinger, 1961).

As an aside, it should be mentioned that while a great deal of attention has been paid to "excess fertility'' and its implications for the problem of overpopulation, very little attention has been paid to the opposite problem of "deficit fertility". It was first analyzed by Weller and Chi (1973), and again on a larger sample by Weller (1974), who found that 18% of American women said they desire more children than they expect to have. Highly educated women were more likely to fall into the "deficit fertility" category. The reasons for this definitely warrant closer examination. Weller also found the usual negative relationship between the wives education and unwanted births.

Prevention of unwanted births could well be considered a worthwhile humanitarian goal in itself, aside from its important eugenic consequences. A great deal of individual human misery could be alleviated for parents and for children if only planned births occurred. Unwanted children are reported to be more often subjected to neglect and physical abuse, and to suffer more frequently from emotional problems (Lebensohn, 1973). Prevention of unwanted births would yield collective economic benefits as well--the number one cause of dependence upon Aid to Families With Dependent Children (AFDC, the largest category of welfare) is accidental, unwanted births (Bogue, 1975; "Unplanned Pregnancy...", 1981).

For many people, a major reluctance to confronting the crucial question of the current direction of human evolution stems from an uncomfortable suspicion that it might well be unfavorable, and from the allied conviction that if indeed the evidence proves we are deteriorating genetically, no morally and socially acceptable solutions exist. An almost primitive fatalism and superstition underly the assumption that as a society we are utterly powerless to alter our course, however disastrous a legacy we may be leaving future generations through our negligence, and the irrational fear that if we dare attempt to guide it (or even if we think about it too much!) we run a grave risk of being suddenly forced against our wills through some mysterious, outrageously implausible yet inexorable sequence of events culminating in genocide and World War III. I am pleased to report that this need not be the case!

The fact that some substantial portion of current dysgenic reproduction is attributable to unwanted births points squarely to a set of remedies which would be acceptable to most people, both morally and socially: 1. greater efforts in the area of sex education for adolescents, 2. increased availability of permanent birth control methods for couples who have achieved their desired family size, and 3. most important, more equal access to abortion as a safety net when other methods fail. "More equal access" necessarily means liberalization of abortion laws and government support for those who want abortions but can't afford to pay for them. It seems most improbable that the vociferous "Pro-Life" faction will ever succeed in totally banning all abortions against the desires of the majority of Americans. Therefore, abortions must be equally obtained by all segments of society unless they are to act as a selective agent. At present, abortions are more readily obtained by those with money, education, intelligence and initiative. Thus the effect is to decrease our genetic potential for these and associated positive traits. Ideally abortions would act automatically as a selective agent in a eugenic rather than a dysgenic way. Since women of low IQ fail more often with birth control and thus have more unwanted pregnancies, if all women with unwanted pregnancies had abortions, this would neutralize the dysgenic effect of birth control failure. Few political conservatives (or liberals, for that matter) are actively searching for more government programs on which to spend taxpayers' dollars. But the alternative in this case--even viewed solely from a short-term standpoint--is even worse. It is obviously far more expensive for a woman on welfare to deliver a baby than to have an abortion, not to mention the costs of supporting the child for 18 years.

In Japan, where eugenic considerations are written into law, abortions are easily obtained and are very inexpensive (Muramatsu, 1967). As a consequence, obtaining one does not present an insurmountable obstacle to the unintelligent, the uneducated, the extremely passive or the indigent. If this became the situation in the United States, if the slogan "Every child a planned child" became a reality, it could go a long way towards eliminating the unhealthy negative relationship between intelligence and fertility which now exists.


I'm not Dysgenic, Uberfag, I was a planned birth, I would even take the Waffen SS measurements to prove that I was Aryan, only having brown hair blue eyes, I might just be a Michling Aryan.... I've even produced Aryan stock, have you bred dipshit? Do you have proof or your genetic superiority from already breeding? My genetics bootfucked the mothers and you can tell it's my child.
God damn you are one delusional nigger lover, I don't think most people know what the fuck your talking about, it sounds like nigger tribes or something. This here is what douchestulf left for his negative rep comment for me, can someone explain it? You obsess over the stupidest things like someone spelling uber without the two dots on top because they aren't lost to the internet. I'm not worried about the new policy, as you seem to be a little nigger lover attention whore who doesn't have shit to say, and I'd say in all honesty is a clown.
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p211/andrew_125/You-Are-Cool_Ronald.jpg

Don't worry, Ronald McAryan still thinks your cool dipshit.


uber geek
An uber geek is a prominent or extreme example of the common geek . Uber, the German word for above or over, has been adopted by English-speakers as a prefix meaning super or ultra; thus, the uber geek is one whose preoccupation with technology goes above and beyond that of the average geek

There you go Uberdork!
From Wikipedia's English speaking definition of Uber, UberFag!!
Über or ueber (German pronunciation (help·info)) comes from the German language. It is a cognate of both Latin super and Greek ὑπέρ (hyper), as well as English over (as in "overkill"). During the 2000s, über also became known as a synonym for super due to gamers' excessively using the word incorrectly; e.g. über-bright = "super bright," generally with a slightly intensified meaning. Über is commonly written as uber in English, though with slightly different meaning.

One of the first popular modern uses of the word as a synonym in English for super was a Saturday Night Live TV sketch in 1979. The sketch, What if?, pondered the notion of what if the comic book hero Superman had landed in Nazi Germany when he first came from Krypton. Rather than being called Superman, he took the name of Uberman.[1]

An expression like "über cool" sounds rather awkward in the ears of a German. They would rather use "obercool", where "ober" means "upper", "higher" or "superior". For example the German word for "first lieutenant" is "Oberleutnant" (as opposed to just "Leutnant" for "second lieutenant").

The normal transliteration of the "ü" ('u' with an umlaut) when used in writing systems without diacritics (such as airport arrival boards, older computer systems, etc.) is "ue", not just "u"; however, it could be argued that the English language use of the word uber is a new word distinct from ueber. This is because English is defined by common use of words, which dictionaries and academia record, not the reverse. The use of 'ü', 'u', and 'ue' in the word is an emerging trend in common usage in English with no clear consensus. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%9Cber


So Uberdouchebag, as you can see according to the english meaning and usage of the word Uber, nobody really gives a shit about the Ue or U double dot, so your just being a bitch, and now on my ignore list!
Do you realize for all your lame ass flaming about the gayest shit like two dots and asking Alex if he saw your post makes you look like a little child asking for their parents to watch them do something? You are one of the UBER-FAGGOTS that are infesting this board with your pseudo-crypto-judaic language that nobody but you seems to understand, so I think maybe you should just talk to yourself, as you seem to be a total homo that most people would probably curbstomp after a 2 minute conversation. Go sit in the gas chamber now, it's homo's like you and others that are insanely obsessed about the gayest things that are talked about in the New Policy, so do everyone a favour, and
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p211/andrew_125/funny%20pics/stfu-bruce-campbell-SMart.jpg

P.s.
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p211/andrew_125/funny%20pics/Chuck-norris-youre-a-fag.gif

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p211/andrew_125/funny%20pics/Gay-Antonio.jpg

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p211/andrew_125/funny%20pics/fuckoffanddie.jpg

Thank you douche bag, I'm now ignoring you. P.s. Believe or not douchebag, the 3K has operated in my own province for a good 25 years at least, I know this for a fact, yet I've never come across a story in the jewspaper, the internet, or anywhere else for that matter. As in Masonry which is what the Klan is modeled on, you don't tell everyone, HEY, I'M A MASON, ARE YOU COMING TO THE LODGE???? So just because you haven't heard of the Russian KKK, doesn't mean it's not there. Half of Russia doesn't have the internet or even a phone dumbfuck. You are an UBER BITCH, so
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p211/andrew_125/funny%20pics/normal_know-your-place-1.jpg

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p211/andrew_125/funny%20pics/kill_yourself.jpg

Now you see what you've created?
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p211/andrew_125/normal_uncomfortable.jpg

[Mark Kerpolt]

Adi18, I stand by those same words. I'll just say bye in advance, for soon. Real soon hopefully. :)


Hello Aistulf, I just sent you Rep ,with the answer to your question.
I know about usw. (und so weiter), it's just the pure German variant of it. Languages have synonyms, you know.

[QuikSilver]

Holocaust denier arrested

October 2, 2008

AUSTRALIAN Holocaust revisionist Gerald Fredrick Toben has been arrested at London's Heathrow airport.

British police executed a European Union arrest warrant issued by German authorities at Heathrow late last night Melbourne time.

The arrest warrant accuses 64-year-old Toben of publishing material on the internet "of an anti-Semitic and/or revisionist nature" in Australia, Germany and other countries.

The alleged Holocaust denier was to appear later at the City of Westminster Magistrates Court.

Toben, a former teacher in Victoria, has been involved in lengthy court proceedings in Australia for allegedly denying the Holocaust, and was jailed in Germany in 1999.

This story was found at: http://www.theage.com.au/national/ho...1002-4s58.html

[Alex Linder]

Utterly sickening. Yet again we see that even countries lacking explicit jew-critic-jailing laws comply with those of other countries. The solution? Exterminate all jews and those who aid them.

[ohgolly]

No matter how you look at it it still comes up that our kind will be better off after, and only after, the elimination of the US from the world scene. Europe and Australia will do an about-face and will boom. Anyone reading between the lines, and even on the lines should be able to see how this is playing out.

Save America? No chance. Save the European race? Only at the expense of the USA. A mighty good deal, actually.

[EireannGoddess]

No matter how you look at it it still comes up that our kind will be better off after, and only after, the elimination of the US from the world scene. Europe and Australia will do an about-face and will boom. Anyone reading between the lines, and even on the lines should be able to see how this is playing out.

Save America? No chance. Save the European race? Only at the expense of the USA. A mighty good deal, actually.

It was Europe that caved in to the jews demands for "holocaust denial' laws. Granted, many of them were/are American jews but so far this distinctly European enacted law does not yet apply in America.

However, at this date had Herr Toben landed at even Kennedy Airport in NY~the most jew infested city outside of Tel Aviv, he would not have been arrested, though the kikes would have been screaming for his head on a platter.

I have lived in both Europe and America. America is still the most "free" occupied nation in the world, though the jews are trying hard to enslave White America (indeed ALL of America)~ they are finding it's not as easy to accomplish as they had believed. Certainly not as easy as it had been to foist such laws onto Europe, which was only too happy to oblige the jews' craven demands after the war.

I attribute this to the then present and healthy anti~semitism of America. I attribute it today to the still growing WN movement as well as the unique American (original version) Constitution. Just something for you to consider.

[ohgolly]

Sorry to rain on your parade dear but there is no anti-semitism in America, unfortunately.

As for the "freedoms" that are guaranteed in America, well, they are an illusion. Don't believe me? Ask Rudolph or Zundel.

Get the American mercenaries out of Europe and the rest of the world and you'll see some REAL freedom abound.

As for the US Constitution, it has been a dead instrument since 1865. This is why the politicians scoff at and take for granted the folks who still believe in it.

Trust me. I've been to Europe but American history is my thing.

[tuisto]

Besides ect is actually a common German usage of etc.


Aistulf quote:
Did they pick the letters et cetera to abbreviate it in German or so? Very confusing then.

Aistulf

Radl just tried to pull your leg (einen Baeren aufbinden) and you allowed him to do so:lulz:

Very disappointing to witness this kind of disinformation coming from Raedl to make a point! T.J.B.

No, only a drunk German would change etc into ect and then proclaime it to be of "common usage".

The thick skinned American arrogance will not much longer be tolerated.
Who cares about etc, a latin abbreviation anyways.
But to spell names purposefully wrong is simply insulting (like in the case of TOEBEN).

[Alex Linder]

'Holocaust denier' Gerald Toben faces extradition to Germany
A man who denies the Holocaust took place is to appear in court facing extradition to Germany.

By Jessica Salter
03 Oct 2008

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01003/Toben-460_1003089c.jpg
'Holocaust denier' Gerald Toben faces extradition to Germany
The German-born historian, Gerald Toben, is the founder and director of the Adelaide Institute, a Holocaust denial group

Gerald Fredrick Toben, 64, was arrested at Heathrow at the request of German authorities for publishing "anti-Semitic and/or revisionist" material between 2000 and 2004. Holocaust denial is an offence in Germany where Dr Toben faces up to five years in prison if found guilty.

The Australian citizen was arrested while travelling from America to Dubai under a European Arrest Warrant designed to fast-track extraditions.

Dr Toben, appeared before City Westminster Magistrates' Court yesterday where he objected to the terms of the warrant, saying: "This is a legal ambush. It's not British law, where the individual still has freedoms." He claimed that he would not get a fair trial in Germany.

He said: "As soon as I open my mouth they will prove I am guilty."

He was remanded until his appearace today.

A German arrest warrant was issued in 2004 which alleges that he denied, approved or played down the mass murder of Jews perpetrated by the Nazis during the Second World War. The warrant stated that he had committed the offences in Australia, Germany and other countries.

The German-born historian is the founder and director of the Adelaide Institute, a Holocaust denial group.

On his website he wrote: "If you wish to begin to doubt the Holocaust-Shoah narrative, you must be prepared for personal sacrifice, must be prepared for marriage and family break-up, loss of career, and go to prison."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/3126769/Holocaust-denier-Gerald-Toben-faces-extradition-to-Germany.html

[Alex Linder]

Extradition win for revisionist Frederick Toben

Staff writer
October 31, 2008 12:00am

CONTROVERSIAL Australian revisionist historian Frederick Toben has won the first round of his fight against extradition to Germany from Britain.

A London judge ruled yesterday that the European arrest warrant used to detain him for extradition earlier this month was invalid because it didn't provide enough detail.

But lawyers representing German prosecutors, who want to try Dr Toben for his alleged anti-Semitic views, are preparing to appeal to Britain's High Court.

Mr Toben's solicitor, Kevin Lowry-Mullins, said the ruling was a victory and the academic, who has been granted bail, looked forward to the High Court hearing his case.

Dr Toben was arrested in transit at Heathrow Airport on October 1 under a warrant issued by Germany, which accuses him of racism and publishing anti-Semitic views.

But Westminster Magistrates' Court district judge Daphne Wickham ruled the the warrant contained only "sparse" and vague and imprecise details of offences.

Strict bail conditions include pound stg. 100,000 ($A247,465) cash as security, daily reporting to police, and a ban on using the internet, speaking to the media or attending public meetings.

Unlike in Britain, Holocaust denial is a crime in Germany and offenders can face up to five years in jail.

Dr Toben smiled broadly as the judge handed down her decision, and a group of about 10 of his supporters, including British Holocaust denier David Irving, also cheered the decision.

Mr Irving said he believed the High Court would uphold the judge's decision.

"This shows that we defeated Germany again. We've defeated Europe in fact," Mr Irving said.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24578173-5012749,00.html

[Alex Linder]

German prosecutors to appeal after Toben's release

PETER KOHN

ADELAIDE man Fredrick Toben has won at least a temporary reprieve from being sent to Germany to stand trial for Holocaust denial.

In London’s Westminster Magistrates Court, Judge Daphne Wickham ruled yesterday that a European Union arrest warrant under which Toben was picked up at Heathrow Airport on October 1 was invalid as it was not detailed enough.

The AJN understands that the German warrant, which is based on Toben's alleged violations of Germany's criminal code between 2000 and 2004, may have deliberately avoided greater detail in order to facilitate his extradition.

Holocaust denial is a crime in Germany, but not in Britain where Toben was arrested or in Australia where the offensive content was posted on his Adelaide Institute website. However, it is prohibited by Australian anti-discrimination laws.

Lawyers for prosecutors from Germany's Mannheim court are now preparing to appeal the ruling in Britain's High Court.

Meanwhile, Judge Wickham has granted Toben bail with strict conditions, including a surety of 100,000 pounds, banning him from using the internet and requiring him to report to police daily.

If Toben manages to avoid being sent to Germany and convicted there of Holocaust denial on the internet, he still faces judgement and sentencing in a contempt case now before the Federal Court of Australia.

Jeremy Jones, who was president of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry in 2002 when the Federal Court ordered Toben to remove and not replace offensive material denying the Holocaust on his Adelaide Institute website, launched the contempt action in 2006 after repeated violations.

http://www.ajn.com.au/news/news.asp?pgID=6507

[Bassanio]

Strict bail conditions include pound stg. 100,000 (,465) cash as security, daily reporting to police, and a ban on using the internet, speaking to the media or attending public meetings.


In the meanwhile pakis and niggers are beating, raping and murdering Whites the world over in the UK.

[MikeTodd]

CONTROVERSIAL Australian revisionist historian Frederick Toben has won the first round of his fight against extradition to Germany from Britain.
Unfortunately, when it comes to kikes, there is never a last round.
("Never forgive, never forget"- Hebrew proverb)
The only way to beat them is by knock-out!T.J.B.

[Anne]

www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24478370-5006787,00.html

Andreas Grossman was the prosecutor in the Zundel trial--this may have been mentioned, but I must confess that I have not read this entire thread.

[Alex Linder]

Germany to Pursue Holocaust Denier's Arrest

Germany will continue to pursue a well-known Holocaust denier even after a British court ruled against his extradition and set him free, a German state prosecutor said Monday. Gerald Fredrick Toben is wanted on charges of denying the Holocaust for articles posted to his Web site, said Mannheim prosecutor Andreas Grossmann ... Although Toben is Australian and his Website is hosted there, Grossmann said that German law allows for his prosecution here on charges of denying the Holocaust because the site can be accessed in Germany.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27892812/

[Alex Linder]

Holocaust Denier's Freedom 'A Great Success,' Says Lady Renouf

Holocaust denier Fredrick Toben has flown out of London a free man, leaving fellow Australian Michele Renouf celebrating her role in what she sees as a great victory for democracy and freedom of thought. After helping Dr Toben to avoid extradition to Germany on Holocaust denial charges, Lady Renouf vowed yesterday to keep working for a cause that is widely seen as a hateful and anti-Semitic twisting of history. "This is not a hobby for me -- I feel it is a responsibility," she said. "Now I know people are being imprisoned for their opinions, I can't stop trying to do something about it."

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24723357-2703,00.html




Toben Now Faces Charges in Australia

With German authorities pausing in their bid to bring Fredrick Toben to trial on criminal charges, the focus has swung back to a two-year-old Australian contempt case against the globetrotting Holocaust denier. Prosecutors in Germany have pulled the plug on their current attempt to bring the Adelaide man to court in their country, where Holocaust denial is classified as a crime, but say they will continue to pursue him ... Last week's change of strategy by German lawyers has shifted the international spotlight to Australia, where Toben is facing a contempt hearing in the Federal Court.

http://www.ajn.com.au/news/news.asp?pgID=6660

[Harry Flash]

Message from Fredrick Töben - 6 December 2008

Thank you to all those individuals who publicised my imprisonment in emails, newsletters, on websites, at public meetings, wrote letters to judges, politicians and media commentators - and to me personally in prison- which all helped to spread the cause of freedom of expression without which life is not worth living.

More at his Adelaide Institute site.

[Alex Linder]

Toben's home and on offensive

Pia Akerman | December 08, 2008
The Australian

BACK home in Adelaide's leafy eastern suburbs, serial Holocaust revisionist Fredrick Toben is unrepentant.

The grim cells of London's Wandsworth prison are a long way away, and the Holocaust denier is free once more to loudly declare the views that others find so offensive.

"The Germans never systematically exterminated anyone - it's a lie," he says, sipping coffee in a Norwood cafe.

"I refuse to recant."

Dr Toben, 64, returned to Adelaide last week after his 50-day stay in London's Wandsworth Prison and wasted no time in resuming his Adelaide Institute newsletter, telling his supporters of his experience.

The former schoolteacher was arrested aboard a plane at Heathrow airport on October 1 en route to Dubai.

British police were acting on a European Union arrest warrant, issued in Germany, which accused him of publishing internet material "of an anti-Semitic and/or revisionist nature".

"It was a legal ambush," Dr Toben told The Australian. "I was the test case for the European arrest warrant.

"I mentally prepared myself for seven or eight months at Wandsworth ... we were going to go right through to the House of Lords if we failed at the lower levels."

But Dr Toben's legal team - recruited by former Newcastle beauty queen and outspoken revisionist supporter Michele Renouf - emerged victorious after a British judge ruled the arrest warrant invalid.

Dr Toben maintains there are people out to get him.

"I know they are out to get me because I refuse to believe in their nonsense," he said. "Their aim is to criminalise thought."

His case sparked debate in the British press, with civil libertarians, MPs and editorials loudly voicing opposition to the German extradition attempt.

"His opinions are wrong and offensive - but error and offensiveness are not grounds for banning an opinion, still less for imprisoning the individual who expresses it," wrote London's The Daily Telegraph.

"The British legal system should have no part in this process. It is a blatant attack on free speech."

Holocaust denial is not a crime in Britain or Australia.

It was not the first time Germany - his homeland - had pursued Dr Toben. He spent seven months in a Mannheim prison in 1999 for inciting racism.

With international travel off the cards in the near future in case of further arrest, Dr Toben remains in Adelaide awaiting a Federal Court judgment in a civil case against him.

He has pleaded not guilty to 28 charges alleging he breached orders by the Federal Court in 2002 not to publish offensive material on his website. He faces a finding of criminal contempt if found guilty.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24764264-5013404,00.html

[Great credit goes to Toben for standing up to tyrants, and to La Renouf too.]

[Robert Bandanza]

Dr. Fredrick Toben Interview on Current Issues TV

[Curtis Stone]

Pia Akerman | January 24, 2009
Article from: The Australian
REVISIONIST commentator Fredrick Toben will fight charges of Holocaust denial in Germany within weeks of escaping extradition proceedings in London, after negotiating with German prosecutors to face a European court.

In a video posted on YouTube, Dr Toben declares he will travel to Germany to meet Mannheim prosecutor Andreas Grossman, responsible for the failed extradition case against the former Adelaide schoolteacher in Britain last year.

"Mr Grossman, here is a message for you: that in the near future I shall be travelling to Germany, I shall be visiting you and we shall be thrashing it out in the German court," Dr Toben says in the video.

"I am progressing to that next stage in our battle for truth, in our battle for civilisation, in our battle to liberate the people who are oppressed. "We shall see whether truth will prevail ... whether we can in fact get some justice or whether you are simply going to demolish me, criminalise my thoughts and therefore further kill the German soul."

Dr Toben, 64, declined to say when he would go to Germany when contacted by The Weekend Australian yesterday.

But he said he had already been in email contact with Mr Grossman to arrange the court proceedings.

"I don't like being threatened by people who say they are going to hunt me down," he said. "Let's be civilised in these things, and discuss it and thrash it out."

Dr Toben spent seven months in Mannheim prison in 1999 for inciting racism. He will now face up to five years in jail, with parole an unlikely prospect unless he recants his claims.

British police arrested Dr Toben last October on a plane at Heathrow airport, acting on a European Union arrest warrant issued in Germany, which accused him of publishing internet material "of an anti-Semitic and/or revisionist nature".

A British judge ruled the arrest warrant invalid, a decision Germany initially appealed against before withdrawing.

Dr Toben would not say if he had already arranged legal representation, as he will almost certainly face another jail term. "Nothing is ever certain, but I just don't like this nonsense of being targeted and pulled off a plane," he said. "This is just primitive."

In the YouTube video -- where he speaks in front of Canberra's Parliament House -- Dr Toben foreshadows a visit to an upcoming revisionist conference to be held in Tehran.

He was a speaker at a similar conference organised by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in the Iranian capital in 2006 that sparked strong condemnation from international leaders.

Meanwhile, a Federal Court judgment in a civil case against Dr Toben is still pending. He has pleaded not guilty to 28 charges alleging he breached orders by the Federal Court in 2002 not to publish offensive material on his website. The material breached the Racial Discrimination Act, implying that the Holocaust did not happen and doubting the existence of gas chambers at the Auschwitz concentration camp.

He faces a finding of criminal contempt if found guilty.

[Robert Bandanza]

YouTube - IRIB1

[Robert Bandanza]

An Australian previously jailed in Germany and Austria for expounding his view that there were no mass killings of Jews in World War II was convicted Thursday of contempt of court in Melbourne for continuing to publish anti-Semitic material on his Web site.

German-born former high school teacher Frederick Toben, 65, was the subject of a civil action by Jeremy Jones, a former president of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, for defying a court order to stop publishing claims that the Holocaust never happened.

Toben, who said he would choose to go to jail rather than pay a fine when he is sentenced later this month, said he had no regrets.

"If you believe in something and you want to have that freedom to express your opinions, then you should be prepared for sacrifices," he said outside the court in Sydney.

Last year, Toben was held in London under a European Union arrest warrant because he is wanted by the District Court in Mannheim, Germany, on charges of publishing material on the internet of an anti-Semitic or revisionist nature.

Denying the Holocaust is an offence in Germany with a maximum jail term of five years.

In 1999, Toben spent seven months in jail in Germany and has served an 11-month sentence in Austria for Holocaust denial.

In 2006, Toben was a speaker at a controversial two-day conference in Tehran organized by the Iranian government and attended by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. There, he described as "mere puffery" the assertion that mass killings of Jews were carried out by the Nazis.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1078746.html

[Robert Bandanza]

http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/FCA/2009/354.html?query=%5etoben

[Robert Bandanza]

YouTube - Fredrick Töben after hand-down of 16 April 2009 Judgment at Adelaide, Australia

[EireannGoddess]

I find this particular case more than disturbing, and upsetting, for a variety of reason.

I am starting to believe that a hunger strike by these elders, one following another, rather than total is necessary in order to draw world attention to this disgusting jewish travesty of justce - in this I also include the only woman, POW Sylvia Stolz.

"holocaust denial law" - I spit on it.

I'm more than inclined to go to Germany and publicly deny the Hoax and Holocaustianity and be imprisoned. I would not mind being the first to take to the blanket and hunger strike. I'm young enough and in good health, it would take a longer time for me to starve.

It is time to make a Stand and expose this barbaric law for what it is and thereby expose the kikes to the world for the vicious bloodthirsty animals they are and always have been. The denial law must be repealed.

[Alex Linder]

YouTube - Fredrick Töben after penalty submissions made on 28 April 2009

[Robert Bandanza]

YouTube - Töben public comments after 16 April 2009 guilty sentence

[OTPTT]

Is Dr. Toben's website completely down? Is there a mirror somewhere? I meant to download the entire website and was going to mirror it here but got distracted with some out of state work.

Is there a chance someone here has a complete copy of Dr. Toben's website?

[Curtis Stone]

Is Dr. Toben's website completely down? Is there a mirror somewhere? I meant to download the entire website and was going to mirror it here but got distracted with some out of state work.

Is there a chance someone here has a complete copy of Dr. Toben's website?


I wish very much I had taken down everything. Maybe the Wayback Machine has it.


http://www.adelaideinstitute.org Adelaide Institute

<a href="http://www.adelaideinstitute.org">Adelaide Institute</a>


There is a notice at the bottom saying the site is having a little rest "due to a change of management."

When he waves out the window of the car in the video below, I thought myself he was giving a salute at the end and I watched it twice to make sure.

[Robert Bandanza]

http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/HomePage28April2009/Images/pics/Beauty.jpg

http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/

[Robert Bandanza]

http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=93909

[Robert Bandanza]

YouTube - 7 News 13 May 2009 Fredrick Töben receives three months prison sentence

[Robert Bandanza]

Dr. Töben's new email address:
fredricktoben@y7mail.com

[Curtis Stone]

"If the Holocaust can be shown to be a Zionist myth, the strongest of all weapons in Israel's propaganda armoury collapses."

Professor W D Rubenstein (Quadrant, September 1979)

"Arbeit Macht Frei"

Yatala Gulag - will this be Dr Töben 's home for the next three months ???

Is this the FINAL SOLUTION for Dr Töben?

Will he be fit for work - or will he be gassed immediately upon arrival?

Töben is getting ready for his three months prison sentence because they lost the argument and claimed hurt feelings. He has thus successfully resisted mental rape and escaped from the conceptual prison into which they wish to place his mind. This is a great victory for free expression in Australia.

AUSTRALIA

THIS CLEVER COUNTRY

WHAT AN INTELLECTUAL ACHIEVEMENT

AND WHAT GREAT CONTRIBUTION TO WORLD KNOWLEDGE!

AUSTRALIA HAS NOW, through a contempt charge, CRIMINALIZED OPINIONS

Please note that Dr Töben’s next court appearance is 10.00am, Wednesday 27th May 2009, at the Federal Court of Australia, 3 Angas Street, Adelaide (near Victoria Square) When you get into the lobby you will see a board showing the room number for "Jones v Toben". It is expected that he will be imprisoned at this time. Anyone who is able to support Dr Töben and attend this hearing, please make a special effort.

Please advise your intended presence to Peter Hartung info@adelaideinstitute.org

APPEAL FOR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE

Please help Dr Töben meet his considerable legal costs

For details of how to donate please email Peter Hartung info@adelaideinstitute.org

[Robert Bandanza]

Dr Töben's appeal hearing will be heard at The Federal Court of Australia, 3 Angas Street, Adelaide, at 10.00 AM, Thursday 13th August 2009. Please attend and show your support.

http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/

[Robert Bandanza]

For the historian, the sociologist, or the jurist, the case of Australian revisionist Fredrick Toben is one of the simplest and most instructive. It is also both appalling and amusing.

One day, moved by curiosity, this German-born Australian left the antipodes on a journey to Europe in order to confer with an individual who had coined the phrase « No holes, no “Holocaust” ». From there he went on to Poland, to Auschwitz, where with his own eyes he observed that, in the effective absence of any “holes” in the collapsed roof of an alleged homicidal gas chamber, there was cause to doubt whether such chemical slaughterhouses had ever existed at that spot, the veritable centre of the “Holocaust”. Finally, on a pilgrimage to the Germanic lands, he shared his doubts and asked for explanations, an act which earned him forthwith a stay in prison.


Voltaire would have liked this “affaire Calas” (of a less tragic sort). From it he could have drawn inspiration for a tale entitled: The Emperor’s New Clothes or The Imposture. It seems right to imagine that, as in a classical French play, the story should evolve in five stages.


In the first of these stages, our hero from the other hemisphere hears tell that a certain European emperor, dear to the Jews and thus also to today’s Germans, is, in the eyes of his court, bedecked in the most extraordinary attire, whilst in reality he is quite simply naked. It is said that some ingenious rascals had pretended to create for the emperor garments of an exceedingly rare cloth, costing a fortune. In the next stage, our Australian, modern-day Huron of the Voltaire tale Le Huron ou l’Ingénu, armed with some advice on how to carry out his inquiry arrives in Europe and prepares to see for himself. Once on location, he gets the impression that this emperor could well be naked. In a third stage, he proceeds to inquire of those around him, going so far as to whisper to the courtiers: “Is your emperor perhaps naked?” For want of a fitting reply, he resolves to go to the Germanic lands and consult a man of the craft. This latter person, most certainly a German and perhaps a Jew as well, has a reputation, the world over, for such good knowledge of the solution to the riddle that he will not abide any answer other than his own. This individual, prosecutor of woeful mien, invites the sceptic to come back to see him the next day in order to get his answer. This our Australian does not fail to do. There, in the prosecutor’s study, with a stranger present, he is asked to repeat his question. Which he does. And so it is that, in a fifth and final stage, the question-man finds himself behind the bars of a German jail.


In the reality of the Toben case, the prosecutor was a man called Heiko Klein, the stranger was a police informer and the jail was, for seven months, that of Mannheim.


What followed would equally have inspired Voltaire. It throws a stark light on the way in which the German justice system works at present and on the mode of conduct adopted by a large number of Western democracies as soon as the most hallowed of their taboos, that of the “Holocaust”, appears to be in peril.


Removed from his jail cell, F. Toben, in handcuffs and duly escorted, was led into a courtroom. But, given the gravity of his case, he had the right only to a mock trial. He was, of course, provided with counsel, but the latter was made to understand that he would do well to keep quiet if he did not want to join his client in prison. The lawyer kept quiet and F. Toben was found guilty, sentenced to time served and a heavy fine, and then released on bail the next day.


In Australia, the authorities were careful not to intervene in favour of the victim. Indeed they fell little short of applauding the German judges’ decision, most likely envying the German magistrates freedom of action.


In the rest of the Western world, everyone, by and large, fell into tune with Germany and Australia. The “élites” in place kept silent or approved. None of them got the idea of decrying an outrage. No petitions in support of the heretic, no demonstrations. “Amnesty International” considered it natural and normal that an intellectual, an academic should be so treated. In effect, precisely because he is a professor, many must be of the opinion that F. Toben surely ought to know that some questions simply offend decency.




Twenty years earlier


Twenty years previously, I myself had lived through an experience comparable to that of my Australian colleague. In the columns of Le Monde (Feb.21, 1979), thirty-four French historians — among whom some, like Fernand Braudel, enjoyed international renown — had issued a joint declaration rebuking me for having put a question that propriety should have forbidden me to conceive.


I had discovered that the existence and operation of the alleged Nazi gas chambers were, for physical and chemical reasons understandable to a child of eight, fundamentally impossible. In the late seventies I had therefore asked Germany’s accusers how, for them, such mass murder by gassing had been technically possible. The answer took some time in coming, then gushed forth:


It must not be asked how, technically, such mass murder was possible. It was technically possible, given that it took place. That is the requisite point of departure of any historical inquiry on this subject. It is incumbent upon us to simply state this truth : there is not, there cannot be any debate on the existence of the gas chambers.
I had the awkwardness to think then that I had just brought off a decisive victory. My adversaries were taking flight. They showed themselves to be unable to reply to my arguments except by spin. For me, the myth of the alleged gas chambers had just breathed its last.


Pressac’s surrender, Spielberg’s triumph


Of course, from a scientific standpoint, those gas chambers had fallen back into nothingness. The following years were to confirm this. From 1979 to 1995, every attempt to demonstrate their existence would abort: the Rückerls and Langbeins, the Hilbergs and Brownings, the Klarfelds and Pressacs would all suffer the most humiliating failures. It is not I who say this but rather one of their keenest apostles, historian Jacques Baynac. In 1996, in two long and particularly well-informed articles, this fierce opponent of the revisionists drafted, with a heavy heart, an assessment of the vain tries to establish the existence of the Nazi gas chambers (Le Nouveau Quotidien [of Lausanne], Sept. 2 and 3, 1996). Baynac’s conclusion: the historians had failed totally and, as a result, recourse was had to the judiciary in order to silence the revisionists.


In March 2000, Jean-Claude Pressac was, in a way, to announce his own surrender. On this point one may read an interview with him published by the French academic historian (and staunch anti-revisionist) Valérie Igounet in her book Histoire du négationnisme en France (Paris, Éditions du Seuil, 2000, p. 613-652). The last two pages of the interview are staggering: J.-C. Pressac states that the “rubbish bins of history” await… the official story of the concentration camps! This text of a recorded talk, supposedly of June 15, 1995, must have been somewhat modified afterwards.


But, as is well known, the sphere of science, on the one hand, and that of the mass media, on the other, are plainly different in nature. In the latter sphere, while the Nazi gas chambers have had a very rough time of it, the adjoining myths of the genocide and the six million have prospered thanks to a thunderous promotion. Hilberg and his like may have failed in their work as historians but Spielberg, the master of special effects cinema, triumphs with his holocaustic epics. Today, the kosher version of Second World War history has force of law and of custom to such a degree that the nasty “deniers” seem annihilated.


The particular case of F. Toben


Nevertheless, a number of these rebels called revisionists remain alive, and very much so, to the despair of the thought police and their lackeys in the prosecution service, the judiciary, and the media. Among these revisionists stands F.Toben, who, upon leaving prison, did not have the decency to show the least contrition or, as is said today, repentance. It may be feared that, for him, the emperor (of the Jews) will stay definitively naked, and that he will continue going about repeating “No holes, no ‘Holocaust’”, or, in allusion to the non-existent fabric , “No clothes, no ‘Holocaust.’”


Beginning with the indomitable Paul Rassinier, a good many other revisionists besides our Australian have endured or still endure a thousand travails. A few months ago, one of them, in Germany, was driven to suicide. Werner Pfeifenberger, a professor in Münster, killed himself on May 13, 2000 after years of an exhausting struggle against his persecutors. On 25 April 1995, in a Munich square, Reinhold Elstner immolated himself by fire.


What distinguishes the revisionist Toben’s case from that of others is its simple and swift unwinding, and therefore its illustrative value. One might call it a synopsis, an all-in-a-nutshell sketch. It is nothing but the story of a man who, for having made a prosaic remark on a material fact, finds himself in prison. To whoever cared to listen, he had, in fact, held forth thus: “At Auschwitz-Birkenau, day after day, a deadly substance was apparently poured through four openings, specially made in a reinforced concrete roof, so as to kill, each time, the thousands of persons confined in the room below. How could such an operation be possible given that manifestly, as one may remark today, none of those four openings ever existed? Of course, the roof is now in ruins but, on the surface, no trace of those openings can be made out and, if one slides down beneath the ruin, one can see also that the ceiling has never had any openings in it. How do you explain that?” He received no answer. Then, he sought out a man who, by definition, must know the answer to his query (and the answer to several others of the same calibre, -- material and rudimentary). As his only reply, that individual deemed it necessary to throw the inquirer into jail. But, once out of jail, what did our impertinent friend do? He repeated his question, but this time urbi et orbi, and with renewed vigour.


A story edifying in its brevity, and not without spice.


Toben in an Ingénue Role from a Tale by Voltaire


I shall say it again: a Frenchman familiar with Voltaire is tempted to see in this antipodean a reincarnation, in his own mode, of Candide or the Huron (the original Ingénu). Under Voltaire’s pen, the ingenuousness, real or feigned, of those two heroes, wholly of his imagining, ended up putting them through numerous ordeals -- but it also helped them overcome adversity, and not without providing some interesting perspectives for the reader on the beliefs and superstitions to be found at the foundations of our society and institutions. The story of Fredrick Toben (German as was, in fact, Candide) would probably have appealed to Voltaire on another score, that of the execrable intolerance of the Jews and their high priests (See : Henri Labroue, Voltaire antijuif [Paris, Les Documents contemporains, 1942].)


Today, in France, the re-editions of some of the works of the “patriarch of Ferney” are expurgated, for fear of displeasing the Jews. No one can doubt that, if he came back to this world, Voltaire, following Toben’s example, would be “put inside” for his disrespectful questions. Even Switzerland, where in his time Voltaire knew he could find refuge, would today not fail to lock him.


********


A note to the reader : Voltaire (1694-1778) was notably the author of Candide ou l’Optimisme (philosophical tale, 1759), Le Huron ou l’Ingénu (satirical tale, 1767) as well as the Dictionnaire philosophique ou la Raison par alphabet (1764). He intervened in a series of court cases, such as that of the Calvinist Jean Calas, to speak out against what he called the crimes of intolerance or of superstition. He spent his last twenty years at Ferney, near the Swiss border.


Note on a false attribution to Voltaire: It is by mistake that the following remark is attributed to Voltaire: “I disapprove of what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it”, sometimes with the adjunct “Monsieur l’abbé…”. In reality, a London author, in a book published in 1906, wrote the following, on the subject of the attitude taken by Voltaire in case of intense disagreement with an adversary: ”I disapprove of what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it was his attitude now.” The author was called Stephen G. Tallentyre (real name: Evelyn B. Hall) and the book was entitled The Friends of Voltaire. Source : Paul F. Boller Jr and John George, They Never Said It: A Book of Fake Quotes, Misquotes, and Misleading Attributions, New York and Oxford, O.U.P., 1989, p. 124-126. Such,anyway, is the information that I have drawn from an article in L’Intermédiaire des chercheurs et curieux (Nov. 1993, p. 1157), kindly sent to me seven years ago by the Belgian revisionist Pierre Moreau, to whom I had confided my failure to find the remark in any of Voltaire’s writings.

August 22, 2000




Posted by N

http://robertfaurisson.blogspot.com/2000/08/toben-case-as-seen-by-voltaire.html

[fossilator]

For the historian, the sociologist, or the jurist, the case of Australian revisionist Fredrick Toben is one of the simplest and most instructive. It is also both appalling and amusing.

One day, moved by curiosity, this German-born Australian left the antipodes on a journey to Europe in order to confer with an individual who had coined the phrase « No holes, no “Holocaust” ». From there he went on to Poland, to Auschwitz, where with his own eyes he observed that, in the effective absence of any “holes” in the collapsed roof of an alleged homicidal gas chamber, there was cause to doubt whether such chemical slaughterhouses had ever existed at that spot, the veritable centre of the “Holocaust”. Finally, on a pilgrimage to the Germanic lands, he shared his doubts and asked for explanations, an act which earned him forthwith a stay in prison.


Voltaire would have liked this “affaire Calas” (of a less tragic sort). From it he could have drawn inspiration for a tale entitled: The Emperor’s New Clothes or The Imposture. It seems right to imagine that, as in a classical French play, the story should evolve in five stages.


In the first of these stages, our hero from the other hemisphere hears tell that a certain European emperor, dear to the Jews and thus also to today’s Germans, is, in the eyes of his court, bedecked in the most extraordinary attire, whilst in reality he is quite simply naked. It is said that some ingenious rascals had pretended to create for the emperor garments of an exceedingly rare cloth, costing a fortune. In the next stage, our Australian, modern-day Huron of the Voltaire tale Le Huron ou l’Ingénu, armed with some advice on how to carry out his inquiry arrives in Europe and prepares to see for himself. Once on location, he gets the impression that this emperor could well be naked. In a third stage, he proceeds to inquire of those around him, going so far as to whisper to the courtiers: “Is your emperor perhaps naked?” For want of a fitting reply, he resolves to go to the Germanic lands and consult a man of the craft. This latter person, most certainly a German and perhaps a Jew as well, has a reputation, the world over, for such good knowledge of the solution to the riddle that he will not abide any answer other than his own. This individual, prosecutor of woeful mien, invites the sceptic to come back to see him the next day in order to get his answer. This our Australian does not fail to do. There, in the prosecutor’s study, with a stranger present, he is asked to repeat his question. Which he does. And so it is that, in a fifth and final stage, the question-man finds himself behind the bars of a German jail.


In the reality of the Toben case, the prosecutor was a man called Heiko Klein, the stranger was a police informer and the jail was, for seven months, that of Mannheim.


What followed would equally have inspired Voltaire. It throws a stark light on the way in which the German justice system works at present and on the mode of conduct adopted by a large number of Western democracies as soon as the most hallowed of their taboos, that of the “Holocaust”, appears to be in peril.


Removed from his jail cell, F. Toben, in handcuffs and duly escorted, was led into a courtroom. But, given the gravity of his case, he had the right only to a mock trial. He was, of course, provided with counsel, but the latter was made to understand that he would do well to keep quiet if he did not want to join his client in prison. The lawyer kept quiet and F. Toben was found guilty, sentenced to time served and a heavy fine, and then released on bail the next day.


In Australia, the authorities were careful not to intervene in favour of the victim. Indeed they fell little short of applauding the German judges’ decision, most likely envying the German magistrates freedom of action.


In the rest of the Western world, everyone, by and large, fell into tune with Germany and Australia. The “élites” in place kept silent or approved. None of them got the idea of decrying an outrage. No petitions in support of the heretic, no demonstrations. “Amnesty International” considered it natural and normal that an intellectual, an academic should be so treated. In effect, precisely because he is a professor, many must be of the opinion that F. Toben surely ought to know that some questions simply offend decency.




Twenty years earlier


Twenty years previously, I myself had lived through an experience comparable to that of my Australian colleague. In the columns of Le Monde (Feb.21, 1979), thirty-four French historians — among whom some, like Fernand Braudel, enjoyed international renown — had issued a joint declaration rebuking me for having put a question that propriety should have forbidden me to conceive.


I had discovered that the existence and operation of the alleged Nazi gas chambers were, for physical and chemical reasons understandable to a child of eight, fundamentally impossible. In the late seventies I had therefore asked Germany’s accusers how, for them, such mass murder by gassing had been technically possible. The answer took some time in coming, then gushed forth:


It must not be asked how, technically, such mass murder was possible. It was technically possible, given that it took place. That is the requisite point of departure of any historical inquiry on this subject. It is incumbent upon us to simply state this truth : there is not, there cannot be any debate on the existence of the gas chambers.
I had the awkwardness to think then that I had just brought off a decisive victory. My adversaries were taking flight. They showed themselves to be unable to reply to my arguments except by spin. For me, the myth of the alleged gas chambers had just breathed its last.


Pressac’s surrender, Spielberg’s triumph


Of course, from a scientific standpoint, those gas chambers had fallen back into nothingness. The following years were to confirm this. From 1979 to 1995, every attempt to demonstrate their existence would abort: the Rückerls and Langbeins, the Hilbergs and Brownings, the Klarfelds and Pressacs would all suffer the most humiliating failures. It is not I who say this but rather one of their keenest apostles, historian Jacques Baynac. In 1996, in two long and particularly well-informed articles, this fierce opponent of the revisionists drafted, with a heavy heart, an assessment of the vain tries to establish the existence of the Nazi gas chambers (Le Nouveau Quotidien [of Lausanne], Sept. 2 and 3, 1996). Baynac’s conclusion: the historians had failed totally and, as a result, recourse was had to the judiciary in order to silence the revisionists.


In March 2000, Jean-Claude Pressac was, in a way, to announce his own surrender. On this point one may read an interview with him published by the French academic historian (and staunch anti-revisionist) Valérie Igounet in her book Histoire du négationnisme en France (Paris, Éditions du Seuil, 2000, p. 613-652). The last two pages of the interview are staggering: J.-C. Pressac states that the “rubbish bins of history” await… the official story of the concentration camps! This text of a recorded talk, supposedly of June 15, 1995, must have been somewhat modified afterwards.


But, as is well known, the sphere of science, on the one hand, and that of the mass media, on the other, are plainly different in nature. In the latter sphere, while the Nazi gas chambers have had a very rough time of it, the adjoining myths of the genocide and the six million have prospered thanks to a thunderous promotion. Hilberg and his like may have failed in their work as historians but Spielberg, the master of special effects cinema, triumphs with his holocaustic epics. Today, the kosher version of Second World War history has force of law and of custom to such a degree that the nasty “deniers” seem annihilated.


The particular case of F. Toben


Nevertheless, a number of these rebels called revisionists remain alive, and very much so, to the despair of the thought police and their lackeys in the prosecution service, the judiciary, and the media. Among these revisionists stands F.Toben, who, upon leaving prison, did not have the decency to show the least contrition or, as is said today, repentance. It may be feared that, for him, the emperor (of the Jews) will stay definitively naked, and that he will continue going about repeating “No holes, no ‘Holocaust’”, or, in allusion to the non-existent fabric , “No clothes, no ‘Holocaust.’”


Beginning with the indomitable Paul Rassinier, a good many other revisionists besides our Australian have endured or still endure a thousand travails. A few months ago, one of them, in Germany, was driven to suicide. Werner Pfeifenberger, a professor in Münster, killed himself on May 13, 2000 after years of an exhausting struggle against his persecutors. On 25 April 1995, in a Munich square, Reinhold Elstner immolated himself by fire.


What distinguishes the revisionist Toben’s case from that of others is its simple and swift unwinding, and therefore its illustrative value. One might call it a synopsis, an all-in-a-nutshell sketch. It is nothing but the story of a man who, for having made a prosaic remark on a material fact, finds himself in prison. To whoever cared to listen, he had, in fact, held forth thus: “At Auschwitz-Birkenau, day after day, a deadly substance was apparently poured through four openings, specially made in a reinforced concrete roof, so as to kill, each time, the thousands of persons confined in the room below. How could such an operation be possible given that manifestly, as one may remark today, none of those four openings ever existed? Of course, the roof is now in ruins but, on the surface, no trace of those openings can be made out and, if one slides down beneath the ruin, one can see also that the ceiling has never had any openings in it. How do you explain that?” He received no answer. Then, he sought out a man who, by definition, must know the answer to his query (and the answer to several others of the same calibre, -- material and rudimentary). As his only reply, that individual deemed it necessary to throw the inquirer into jail. But, once out of jail, what did our impertinent friend do? He repeated his question, but this time urbi et orbi, and with renewed vigour.


A story edifying in its brevity, and not without spice.


Toben in an Ingénue Role from a Tale by Voltaire


I shall say it again: a Frenchman familiar with Voltaire is tempted to see in this antipodean a reincarnation, in his own mode, of Candide or the Huron (the original Ingénu). Under Voltaire’s pen, the ingenuousness, real or feigned, of those two heroes, wholly of his imagining, ended up putting them through numerous ordeals -- but it also helped them overcome adversity, and not without providing some interesting perspectives for the reader on the beliefs and superstitions to be found at the foundations of our society and institutions. The story of Fredrick Toben (German as was, in fact, Candide) would probably have appealed to Voltaire on another score, that of the execrable intolerance of the Jews and their high priests (See : Henri Labroue, Voltaire antijuif [Paris, Les Documents contemporains, 1942].)


Today, in France, the re-editions of some of the works of the “patriarch of Ferney” are expurgated, for fear of displeasing the Jews. No one can doubt that, if he came back to this world, Voltaire, following Toben’s example, would be “put inside” for his disrespectful questions. Even Switzerland, where in his time Voltaire knew he could find refuge, would today not fail to lock him.


********


A note to the reader : Voltaire (1694-1778) was notably the author of Candide ou l’Optimisme (philosophical tale, 1759), Le Huron ou l’Ingénu (satirical tale, 1767) as well as the Dictionnaire philosophique ou la Raison par alphabet (1764). He intervened in a series of court cases, such as that of the Calvinist Jean Calas, to speak out against what he called the crimes of intolerance or of superstition. He spent his last twenty years at Ferney, near the Swiss border.


Note on a false attribution to Voltaire: It is by mistake that the following remark is attributed to Voltaire: “I disapprove of what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it”, sometimes with the adjunct “Monsieur l’abbé…”. In reality, a London author, in a book published in 1906, wrote the following, on the subject of the attitude taken by Voltaire in case of intense disagreement with an adversary: ”I disapprove of what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it was his attitude now.” The author was called Stephen G. Tallentyre (real name: Evelyn B. Hall) and the book was entitled The Friends of Voltaire. Source : Paul F. Boller Jr and John George, They Never Said It: A Book of Fake Quotes, Misquotes, and Misleading Attributions, New York and Oxford, O.U.P., 1989, p. 124-126. Such,anyway, is the information that I have drawn from an article in L’Intermédiaire des chercheurs et curieux (Nov. 1993, p. 1157), kindly sent to me seven years ago by the Belgian revisionist Pierre Moreau, to whom I had confided my failure to find the remark in any of Voltaire’s writings.

August 22, 2000




Posted by N

http://robertfaurisson.blogspot.com/2000/08/toben-case-as-seen-by-voltaire.html

Excellent post!

[Robert Bandanza]

I went to Adelaide in order to attend the final kangaroo court hearing that dispatched Dr Fredrick toben to prison. Toben was appealing against the decision by a lower court judge to impose on him a three-month jail term for an alleged “contempt of court” offence. The reasons given for the allegation was that on numerous occasions Toben did not believe the allegation that Germans gassed jews in the fourties of the twentieth century. The said judge ordered Toben not to insult jews who believed in the Holocaust myth, and to stop “vilifying” them by believing and asserting that those deluded individuals were “of limited intelligence”, an assertion with which many, including my humble self, would totally agree. People do not need to be of super intelligence in order to see that the so called “Jewish Holocaust” was a total fabrication.

Jews in Germany were among many other groups accused of being “enemies of the state”. They were arrested and sent to concentration camps to be used as forced labour for the German war effort during WW2. There is not a shred of real or logical evidence that any Jew had been deliberately killed. The conditions in the camps might have been bad, the food rations might have been inadequate, but the allegation that Jews were mass-killed is totally absurd. Some workers were dead because of infectious typhus, a disease transmitted by body lice. The corpses of the dead had to be burnt in order to stop the spreading of the epidemic. The claim that six million Jews were executed is a blatant lie propagated by demented individuals who survived the war.

Anyway, I delved into the “Adelaide High Court” where a “full court” of three judges sat on the bench. As the hearing progressed, I could clearly see that the judges have made up their minds before walking into the room. As the formalities continued, David Perkins, the defence counsel, opened for the three judges every possible avenue that would make them reach a sensible decision. He tried to make them understand that the “Anti Discrimination Act” should not override the constitutional right to free speech, but they insisted that the whole matter was an ordinary run-of-the-mill simple case of contempt of court that had nothing to do with the Holocaust.

Hiding behind this flimsy façade of “contempt of court”, the presiding judge began to read the justification for the forthcoming sentence. My stomach could not take such nonsense and I found myself walking out of the courtroom before the sentence was announced. As I waited outside, I reflected sadly on my last forty years as an Australian citizen. Is this really the free country I loved so dearly? Will it continue to be my refuge from the ugly totalitarian system I left back at my birthplace Egypt?

My colleague, the brave fearless Fredrick Toben, walked out a few minutes after. We exchanged a reassuring look and, together with Peter Hartung and several other supporters, walked for a few metres in the direction of a number of Federal Police agents, who were shyly ready to carry out the instructions they previously received. Fredrick bid us goodbye and walked to them with a friendly smile saying, ”Here I am, I am ready and I have nothing to carry with me.” Minutes later, I met David Perkins, who almost talking to himself remarked, “They gave us no chance!”

Unlike the programmed robots I have seen on the day, David struck me as a very decent strong believer in and advocate of free speech. He probably believed that the law of the land and its custodians would never transform Australia into a member of the Talmudic group of nations. I believe that, on 13 August 2009, he faced his day of reckoning.
Posted by Mohammed A. Hegazi at 2:07 AM
1 comments:

Noor al Haqiqa said...
You have a few good posts here that I had lost before putting up ... First being the one on the Talmud and the body part rabbi ... and the pic of toben will be on my next post, it is JUST what I needed....
http://snippits-and-slappits.blogspot.com/
... adding you to my blog roll which is getting huge LOL... but everyone has such good stuff...

3:02 AM

http://hegazi.blogspot.com/2009/08/toben-case-welcome-to-talmudistan.html

[Robert Bandanza]

The Australian

To the Editor:

In the Australian, August 18, 2009, issue, Steven Lewis and Peter Wertheim wrote Freedom of Speech should not be freedom to vilify. It has its certain merits; however, when it comes to those who question or deny the Holocaust, the word is grossly overused in denying freedom to those who question. Instead of debating the issue, these people are vilified and character assassinated by instilling and reading into what they believe the questioners had written,as they have done to the statements used by Dr. Toben, which, to the average reader do not sound offensive, racial hatred,
racist or anti-Semitic but logical questions when one considers that a Holocaust did not occur as such, for killing was not limited only to Jews.

Pulling a "Holocaust" out of World War II, is, in itself, a racistact. Any government which requires persons within its jurisdiction to accept a belief, without allowing public questioning or debate as to its validity, is thereby establishing a government religion. Most government constitutions in the "free world" preclude the establishment of a governmentreligion. Portraying Jews as the exclusive victims of the so-called Holocaust has the effect of deifying the Jewish people.


Like all freedoms, the proper limits of free speech are exceeded when it is about causing physical and mental harm....But harm has to be proved according to objective criteria. The questions raised by the
historian/revisionists were never debated, or proved wrong or harmful .simply genuine questions of a academic group seeking clearer facts and scientific debate, which never occurred. The thrust of his material to use the internet to stoke up hatred against Jews as a group, is an unproven statement that has never been clarified or actually been part of an open debate about history, but only used to their means to distort the intent of the questioning the Holocaust did not occur, or that there were no gas chambers at Auschwitz, that Jewish people who believed in the Holocaust were of limited intelligence and that they have exaggerated the number of Jews killed during World War II from what he described as "a Holocaust myth," are reasonable. In a legal first in Austsralia , Fredrik Toben, has been jailed for three months following the failure of his appeal for contempt of court rising from
repeatedly ignoring court orders to remove material the court found that breached the racial-hatred provisions of the Racial Discrimination Act .However, the claims as listed are no criminal sanctions under the [Racial Discrimination] act. Toben went to jail for contempt of court...

The Anti-Defamation League, the Jewish Congress, and many other Jewish organizations are "watchdog groups" around the world, seeking to condemn anyone for any statements that can be tiwisted into a "Hate Crime," turning people into "criminals" and having them imprisoned.History shows that ever since "Jews" were finally dispersed from the land of Milk and Honey, as promised by their God if they would obey his commandments, they have sought revenge in many countries to where they had migrated, and not assimilated.


No Christian, or other public affairs groups have ever made criminal charges against the public vilifying of Jesus Christ by Jews from the time they insisted that the Romans crucify him.. No non-Jewish group has ever taken Menacheim Begin when he made a speech to the Kneeset ( the Israeli Parliament) that was published in The New Statesman in June 25, 1982. when he said: "Our race is the master race. We are divine gods on this earth. We are different from the inferior races as they are from insects---other races compare to us as human excrement."

Neither did any group speak out against Golda Meir, who was Israel's Prime Minister in 1969 when she said: "There is no such thing as a Palestine people. It is not as if we came and threw them out and took there country. They did not exist." Now, for more than 60 years they have been wiping out
the Palestines whom she claimed did not exist. (Is not a denial of an ethnic group an act of racism and hate?)


"It is the Jews who originated biblical exegesis (a critical analysis of the Bible), just as they were the first to criticize the forms and doctrines of Christianity...Truly has Darmesteter written: 'The Jew was the apostle of unbelief, and every revolt of mind originated with him.'" (Bernard Lazare, Antisemitism: It's History and Causes, London: Britons Publishing Co., 1967, pp. 149-151).


"Ever since the Jews invented the libel charge of 'anti-Semitism' in the 1880s (The word 'anti- Semitism' was first printed in 1880.' The Jewish Encyclopedia, Vol. I (1901), p. 641), it has been built up with Jewishmoney, organizations, propaganda, and lies (such as the Holocaust-Holohoax), so that now the word is like snake venom which paralyzes one's nervous system. Even the mention of the word 'Jew' is shunned unless used in a most favorable and positive context." (Charles A. Weisman, Who is Esau-Edom?, p. 63).

There is no concerted effort by any group to fight free speech vilifying non-Jewish races or ethinic groups by their smears and gross insults. While there is still some freedom of speech, the world needs to counter the Jewish influence that is being inflicted through this "Hate Crime Law" being foisted upon the governments of still independent nations, and superceding the United Nations Resolutions.

Considering that one of the basic principles of the Charter of the United Nations is that of the dignity and equality inherent in all human beings, and that all Member States have pledged themselves to take joint and separate action in co-operation with the Organization to promote and encourage universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion, that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenants on Human Rights proclaim the principles of non-discrimination and equality before the law and the right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion and belief.

Convinced that freedom of religion and belief should also contribute to the attainment of the goals of world peace, social justice and friendship among peoples and to the elimination of ideologies or practices of colonialism and racial discrimination as based on This Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief:

Article 1
1. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have a religion or whatever belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.

2. No one shall be subject to coercion which would impair his freedom to have a religion or belief of his choice.

Article 3
Discrimination between human being on the grounds of religion or belief constitutes an affront to human dignity and a disavowal of the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and shall be condemned as a violation of the human rights and fundamental freedoms proclaimed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and enunciated in detail in the International Covenants on Human Rights, and as an obstacle to friendly and peaceful relations between nations.


All this makes no need for the "Hate Crime Law" that has been instigated by the self-serving Jewish organizations, and being foisted on individual nations to supersede their own government laws and the United Nations where no serious action has been taken against their ethnic crimes. Words that are
turned and twisted to meet such a law will, and can only encourage more hatred.

Amy Phillips Aremia
Raleigh, NC 27613
USA



The article to which this letter refers:

Voice to be held in contempt

http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/HomePage28April2009/amy_aremia_letter_the_australian.htm

[Robert Bandanza]

Official - Holocaust Denial now punishable by Jail in Australia


26th August - further update

Dr Töben has been taken to Cadell Training Centre to complete his holiday for denying the Holocaust. He has been a very bad boy!!

Letters can be sent to:

Dr Fredrick Töben
c/o Cadell Training Centre
Locked Bag, Cadell 5321
South Australia

http://www.corrections.sa.gov.au/prisons/cadell_training_centre.htm

[Robert Bandanza]

A delegation from the Executive Council of Australian Jewry has met with Attorney-General Robert McLelland in a bid to review the effectiveness of the Racial Discrimination Act.

Quoting the difficulties experienced in bringing Holocaust-denier Dr Fredrick Toben to justice, Peter Wertheim, the newly-appointed Executive Director of the ECAJ and Robin Margo SC the organisation’s vice-president told the A-G that it had taken 13 years to finalise this particular case.

The delegation suggested to the Attorney-General that well-founded complaints of racial vilification should be dealt with more effectively. Toben’s material had been published on his Adelaide Institute web site. Consequently, the ECAJ has asked the Government to consult with ISP providers in Australia, suggesting to them that they should impose a voluntary code of conduct banning sites found to be promoting racial hatred.

The Attorney-General suggested that once the Australian Human RightsdCommission publishes an opinion upholding a racial vilification complaint, such a ban could come into effect pending any final determination by a court.

Wertheim and Margo also suggested that the current legislation be amended to allow for the total removal of a website should there be repeated offences. They also submitted that the law be amended to deal with whichever persons were involved in the contravention.

Attorney-General McLelland was asked to consider how to deal with international hate sites. It was proposed that any new convention should obligate the individual States to enact legislation to require ISP operators within their borders to ban hate-sites.

ACAJ president Robert Goot told J-Wire: “The Attorney-General acknowledged that the current law does not always provide a quick and effective remedy. He has welcomed the ECAJ proposals and they will be the subject of a review.”

http://www.jwire.com.au/?p=4143

[Robert Bandanza]

Yesterday (Saturday, 29th) a delegation of Adelaide Institute associates visited Fredrick at Cadell Training Centre. Christopher Steele, David Brockschmidt, and myself (Peter Hartung), took the two and a half hour drive to Cadell, which is located 180 km from Adelaide.

We arrived just before 2pm, running late as we had planned to arrive at 1pm. Upon arrival we entered the gates, parked our vehicle and went to the visitors office. We were met by quite friendly prison officers, and given a form to complete with our personal particulars, and identification. After checking this and our IDs, we had to place any keys or money in a locker provided and then have our bodies scanned with a hand held metal detector, after which we passed through the glass doors to the visitors area.

We were greeted by quite a pleasant surrounding, approximately 20 picnic style benches under some leafy gum trees. About 10 of these benches were occupied by varying groups of visitors, obviously family and friends. One of the guards had gone to inform the prisoner of our arrival, and after a couple of minutes we saw a figure approaching from the surrounding buildings. At first I was unsure if this was Fredrick. I had never seen him wearing Jeans!! He also looked much younger than the last time that I had seen him, on the day that he was imprisoned, 13th August, just over 2 weeks ago.

At first Fredrick, displaying his particular sense of humour, pretended to have lost his mind and seemed to have been in a state of consciousness reminiscent of someone who has had a frontal-lobotomy, and pretended not to know us. We all sensed that everything was fine, and after some very warm and emotional greetings, we all sat down at the nearby picnic table.

Fredrick told us all about his experiences at Yatala Prison where he had been for 2 weeks. In his words, "It was a character building exercise". Some of his experiences were obviously quite unpleasant, but he likened the whole thing to doing basic military training, or boarding school. He praised the guards of both prisons, telling us that they do a good job, and were working in very difficult environments.

Physically, Dr Töben was in fine shape. He told us that he had lost five and a half kilograms. He was a totally different picture from that of a few weeks ago, when the strain of being persecuted for over 13 years was starting to show its effect. He had been looking very tired, exhausted and ragged. Mentally, one could see that he was tight and strained. He had put on a little weight, which made his clothing seem a little too small for him. Now he was beaming and looked to be at least 10 years younger than before. The rest was obviously doing him good. I still could not come to grips with his prison garb. Jeans that were rolled up at the ankles, obviously too long for him, a blue sloppy-joe and prison wind-cheater. It did not seem to fit his character at all. His usual attire is a smart suit. This is his usual all-purpose uniform, wearing it for all manner of occasions from picnics to the theatre, even bushwalking!

Fredrick shares a cell with another fellow, with whom he gets on well. They are locked in each night at 9pm and released again at 7am. There is a good library at the prison, and the food is good. This is a low security installation, but the discipline is still very strict. The prisoners know that it is very much a privilege to be there which can just as easily be taken away if they do not behave.

We spent the time discussing the events of the last few weeks. I passed on many greetings and wishes of support from his friends all around the world, and he wished me to pass on his thanks to all of his friends.

At 10 to 4 one of the guards came and told us that we had 10 minutes left, so we had our final words, Fredrick told us not to worry about him, he was fine.

And so we left, and spent the journey home reflecting on the lovely time that we had spent with our dear comrade and friend.



Peter Hartung

August 30, 2009

http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/HomePage28April2009/toben_cadell_visit_09.htm

[Eric Blair]

What the hell is "Cadell Training Centre"


Sounds exactly like a re-education camp to me!

[Robert Bandanza]

What the hell is "Cadell Training Centre"


Sounds exactly like a re-education camp to me!

Yeah it really does sound like that to me too, but I guess that is the facility or jail Töben is being detained in.

[Robert Bandanza]

"There will come a day when all the lies collapse under their own weight and truth will again triumph; The hour will come in which we will again stand before the world, pure and unsullied, as pure and unsullied as our faith and goal have always been." - Dr Joseph Goebbels, speaking near the end of WW2

http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/