Thursday, June 01, 2006

German magazine defies Holocaust hate laws

The German magazine Der Spiegel has landed a major coup in its latest edition not for doing a rare exclusive interview with the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, but for allowing him to express views which would have resulted in a lengthy prison sentence had they been stated by a German national. It is not clear whether this was the intention of Der Spiegel, which in an editorial distanced itself from the remarks by the Iranian president, but the publication will have been as decisive a step towards scrapping the thought crime laws dating from the period of allied occupation as the publication of "Crabwalk" by the famous German author Günther Grass a few years ago.

Grass' book was the first to break the taboo of talking about Germans and Germany in other terms than those of the evil perpetrators when dealing with the Second World War. He highlighted those "Other losses" and gave German readers the sense that they, too, had been victimised by those events. Discussing the Holocaust and the shadow it cast over Germany and generations of Germans, however, remained taboo, and German citizens would not only be punished for "defaming the memory of the dead", but even for not balancing any remarks casting doubt on the official holocaust dogma with the usual mantra of the eternal victimisation of Jews who were thereby absolved from any culpability for whatever they have done or might do to anybody else. In 1997, for example, a German court found Udo Walendy guilty not for knowingly publishing lies but for publishing a "one-sided" account of history and not giving sufficient attention to alternative interpretations. He was charged of having "on a very scholarly-historical basis" published quotations and facts that contradicted "in many specific points, the accepted version of German guilt for the Holocaust and other National Socialist crimes". Freedom of speech? For Walendy, Deckert, Toben, Rudolf and Zündel it comes at the price of several years in prison.

So Der Spiegel filled several pages with a rebuttal of what Ahmedinejad had to say, but it allowed him to question the veracity of the official Holocaust version, let him get away with saying that if the Holocaust happened as claimed and Germans or Europeans were collectively guilty then Israelis should be repatriated to Europe, and if it didn't then there was even less justification for the Palestinians to suffer occupation and injustice at their hands. The Iranian president was even allowed to challenge the anachronistic situation where scientific research into the Holocaust is punishable by prison under German law should it result in findings unfavourable to or objectionable by the Jewish lobby and he was given permission to say that the young generation of Germans should not be made to feel guilty for whatever their great grandparents might have done and that Germans should stop allowing themselves to be humiliated by the Zionists after having paid reparations for decades.

So far there has been condemnation of Ahmedinejad – who performed infinitely better in this interview than in his lengthy letter to the American president – but no threat of legal action against Der Spiegel. If this published interview remains unchallenged in the courts then it should now be permissible in Germany to report the views of Holocaust revisionists, and as long as the revisionists themselves are not German no charges would be brought. Germans, hitherto forbidden from discussing these issues, might now do so simply by quoting what others have said without adding their own opinion or judgment. The first cracks in the political and legal edifice to protect the Holocaust industry from criticism have started to appear and are likely to widen over time.


At 2 June 2006 at 07:17, Blogger Lite Up said...

Well appreciated thoughts and I believe also that the germans have been deceived and should not be feel in fault for what happened 60 years ago was their fault.

At 2 June 2006 at 22:48, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey --what about Americans? We, well most of us, had NOTHING to do with The Holocaust --

(yes, the only Holocaust that ever happened -- Armenia, Cambodia, Vietnam, Congo, Rwanda, Pakistan/India, Chechnya, Palestine, Tibet -- World Wars I and II -- all those dead people don't count because there was only One Holocaust ever...)

-- and yet we Americans have to pay for The Holocaust every single day in blood and treasure! The September 11 attacks, the invasion of Iraq, and the coming invasion of Iran -- we're paying for it because of...what????

What did we do to get this misery? I'll give you one guess. OK I'll just tell you -- America got Israel's load of bull sh*t by letting a craven, cowardly and greedy U.S. government to allow a foreign nation (Israel) to hijack our policy and lie us into endless war for its own benefit.

I invite any and every country to take Israel off our hands. PLEASE.

I'm with Ahmadinejad -- let those responsible for The Holocaust bear the burden of Israel. The Palestinians had nothing to do with it, the Americans had nothing to do with it (except sacrifice more than 500,000 of its finest to save the Jews) so EUROPE, IT IS TIME TO STEP UP TO THE PLATE!

Israel would do fine relocated to Berlin. There's already a memorial there to The Holocaust-- take the survivors.

Your parents and grandparents killed the Jews, Americans and Palestinians did not. TAKE THEM BACK.

And as for The Holocaust thought police - F yourself. I completely believe that there was a Jewish Holocaust -- but there were many others too, and I can lie about all of them and not be threatened with jail by truly hypocritical European governments.

At 3 June 2006 at 01:08, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good points, however, don't forget the Native Americans and the African Americans who were slaughtered under slavery and Jim Crow (especially lynchings), and both continue to be slaughtered and dispossessed to this day. We've got loads of blood on our hands... This has got to stop but it seems, could it be? that people in this country (US) are waking up? Did hell freeze over? Can we actually feel some form of hope finally?

At 3 June 2006 at 02:20, Blogger erlenda said...

Ehrlich gesagt, seitdem ich angefangen habe revisionistische Literatur zu lesen, glaube ich, dass diese "anderen" Historiker einige ziemlich gute Argumente vorbringen.
Aber ob der Spiegel wirklich vorhatte diese Argumente öffentlich zu machen, da habe ich meine stärksten Zweifel.
Normalerweise ist der Spiegel das Zentralorgan des Zionismus und der anti-muslimischen Propaganda in Deutschland.
Das Ziel war es wahrscheinlich, den iranischen Präsidenten ins "rechte" Licht zu rücken, um die Stimmung gegen den Iran und für einen Angriff auf den Iran weiter anzuheizen.
Nur denke ich, dass sie sich diesmal wohl selbst ins Bein geschossen haben. Sie dachten, dass die Mehrheit der Deutschen sich reflexartig gegen einen "Holocaustleugner" stellen würden. Es könnte aber sein, dass viele Deutschen die Nase inzwischen gestrichen voll haben, obwohl oder vielleicht auch gerade weil seit mehr als einem Jahr praktisch kein einziger Tag vergeht, wo im deutschen Fernsehen nicht irgendeine Doku oder ein Film über die Naziverbrechen läuft.
Bis vor ein paar Jahren hätte ich gesagt, dass es uns nichts schadet an die Verbrechen dieser Zeit erinnert zu werden, damit in der Zukunft ähnliche Verbrechen verhindert werden.
Aber inzwischen scheint es mir eher so, dass die Darstellungen der damaligen Verbrechen nur zur Rechtfertigung der heutigen Verbrechen gegen die Menschlichkeit dienen.
Das Sonderbare an der ganzen Sache ist, dass die meisten von uns so unglaublich blind sind.
Ich meine wie kann man die Ähnlichkeiten der antijüdischen Propaganda der Nazis mit der anti-muslimischen Propaganda von heute übersehen. Die dänischen Karikaturen könnten mit anderen Vorzeichen direkt aus dem "Stürmer" stammen.
Übrigens, ich bin keine Muslimin, sondern Katholikin. Und was mich bei Präsident Ahmedinejad besonders beeindruckt ist, wie ähnlich vieles, was er in seinen diversen Reden oder in dem Brief an Bush über Frieden und Gerechtigkeit sagt, dem ist, was der jetzige Papst gesagt und geschrieben hat.
Ich denke, dass gläubige Christen und gläubige Muslime sehr viele Berührungspunkte haben.

At 3 June 2006 at 04:26, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Greatest hoax of the 20th century!

At 3 June 2006 at 06:00, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have a doctorate in History and thanks to some very rigorous teachers I can say that if I know how to one thing, it's how to assess the value of the sources used to support historical claims. I used to teach the Holocaust myself, but can you believe that it never occurred to me to even look into the sources? Like most so-called scholars, I took the so-called sources for granted and assumed that the Holocaust had happened. This obviously isn't very good scholarly practice, and once I spent a few hours finding out what the revisionist arguments were, I found myself overwhelmed by how strong the arguments to the contrary were. (I thought I would be able to dismiss them in a couple of hours.) As a result, I launched an intensive study of the Holocaust sources, and I find that the revisionists are right. There was no German policy to exterminate the Jews.

I am now working on a book about how and when the Holocaust was fabricated, although, to be honest, I rather doubt that it will find a publisher.

At 3 June 2006 at 16:03, Blogger Wolfgang P. May said...

The perspective of history depends on who currently has the power to hold the magnifying glass through which the deeds of previous decades are viewed:

In Russian/Polish occupied Breslau, elderly Germans were forced to clear the rubble, using only their hands. My grandmother, who was ordered to perform this function daily at gunpoint, received no food from the "authorities", but had to work from dusk to dawn. When these conscripted slaves became to weak, they were taken to the nearby high school, where they lay side by side, until they could be dumped into mass graves, separated by thin layers of quicklime, often before they were dead. She survived, because my mother found employment at the railroad station, and a German jew,who had been released from Auschwitz, provided extra food for his employees, so that we could give enough to my grandmother to keep her alive. For more info, see:

At 3 June 2006 at 23:26, Anonymous Anonymous said...

In the algebra of cautionary Holocaust remembrance silence before injustice, the refusal to speak truth to abusive power, we are told equals tacit consent and backdoor complicity in the very injustice. But of course as with the schemes of "creative" accounting, you'll
also find loopholes and exceptions in this moral ledger.

For example, the Jewish state was very chummy with South Africa's apartheid regime through the 1970s and 80s, a relationship kick-started by a state visit to Israel by Prime Minister Vorster, a diehard racist and white supremacist who spent 2 years of World War Two
interned as a Nazi collaborator. The Coburns in Dangerous Liaison [Stoddart: Toronto, 1991, pp. 299-300] recall that after Vorster had left Israel, "The old Nazi sympathizer came away with bilateral
agreements for commercial, military, and nuclear cooperation that would become the basis for future relations between the two countries." Mossad turncoat Victor Ostrovsky [By Way of Deception, Stoddart: Toronto, 1990, p. 151] reports that the Jewish state had
"helped South Africa with its nuclear program. We [i.e., the Israelis] supplied them with most of their military equipment. We trained their special units. We worked hand in hand with them for years."

At 4 June 2006 at 02:58, Blogger Rabbit said...

Dr Mustaqim

You say:

"Ahmedinejad – who performed infinitely better in this interview than in his lengthy letter to the Iranian (sic) president"

You meant letter to the American President, obviously, yet I still must take exception.

The letter from Ahmedinejad to Bush was not long. It is but eight pages, not eitheen, despite the fact it is everywhere falsely claimed to be eihteen pages.

Having read a translation of the letter I find it hard to imagine anyone who has done so with an open mind could call it anything but excellent. His letter was neither steeped in overly religious language, as has been claimed by some, nor was it anything but direct, honest and realistic.

Had one of our own leaders (USA, Britain or Oz) penned such a missive it would be still being celebrated as a watershed moment, and a historical bit of prose.

The Der Spiegal interview on the other hand was stilted and quite unsatisfying. Despite the obvious ignorance of the interviewer shown in his standard rhetoric, the Iranian president barely touched upon issues which could yet have been brought more fully to the fore had he been quick enough.

This unfortunate comparison aside, it was a good interview.

Who would have thought I would live to see the day when I would envy the Iranians their president, and be wishing them victory against US and our forces if we should be so belligerant as to attack Iran.

At 4 June 2006 at 05:11, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You know Abedimishad (whatever) is bullshitting when he says "We need a new approach. Of course we want the free will of the people to reign, ... Yeah, right. What a raghead!

At 6 June 2006 at 02:27, Blogger trueprojector said...

In relation to this article we invite you to study


A discussion-group which deals in Sociological-Political-Economy
and History to the present time and the future!
In particular Sociology and Social Science are studies about the
origin, development, organization, structure and functioning of
society and the fundamental laws of social relations.
Political Economy is a study about the relationship between
politics and economy and their influence on social institutions,
the individual and society.
The Basis for this Discussion is the Compiling of Information and
the Attempt of an Analysis of the discovered Elements behind the 2
World-Wars to the present Wars in Afghanistan, -Iraq, -Palestine
and the hol(l)o(w) caus(e)t or holo-hoax!
Participants are invited to elaborate and investigate on the themes!
Just follow the chapters on the index-board, please!

Just visit us on this web-site:

Please add this web-site to your links on our web-site!

Some further themes of our discussion-group are as follows; -
“Great Britain’s” desire to Re-Conquer the USA, Drug-Trade, Irish
Famine, Australia, as seen on:

Please see also our articles on Depleted Uranium which is used by the US-British-Zionists to poison Humanity and the Pine-Gap-6 on:

At 6 June 2006 at 21:02, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ernst Zundel and David Irving must be mentioned here as they are in prison for saying such things. The government is clamping down. They arrest people for free speech, they force book outlets to stop selling "America Deceived" by E.A. Blayre III, they put protestors in cages and start Wars without consent. They will respond and shut down the internet. It's coming soon.
Last link before Google Books pulls it:

At 6 June 2006 at 22:14, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just recently in Germany a woman was sentenced to 15 year for killing 8 babies. That's 2 years per dead baby, if you want to be generous to the EU "justice" system.

Meanwhile, David Irving is languishing in prison for 3 years, not for hurting anyone, but for saying that no one was killed in the gas chamber at Auschwitz that they show to tourists/enthusiasts and which was built by the Polish after the war was over.

So apparently, it is better to kill babies than to say truths that the Zionists and their puppet EU governments don't like.

Hmm, I bet she would've gotten the gas chamber if there had been any Jewish babies amongst her victims.

At 7 June 2006 at 03:36, Anonymous Anonymous said...

More significant than the case of David Irving is that of Germar Rudolf. As a chemist Rudolf studied the alleged "Auschwitz gas chambers" and cleared up the few gaps which Fred Leuchter had left in his report. Rudolf has also published quite a number of books written originally by Carlo Mattogno, the leading revisionist. That type of service has now been interrupted by Rudolf's arrest.

At 10 June 2006 at 20:15, Blogger infoterror said...

If we are going to have freedom, there should be no sacred cows. If we can discuss drugs, homosexuality, nudity, promiscuity and wasteful behavior (pollution, buying junk products) in public, we should be able to discuss anything. The West is growing up as it faces this paradox and must consider a solution.

Interestingly, the site for which I write -- -- is banned in more Western locations than Middle Eastern ones. It is not a porn site.

At 4 July 2006 at 18:41, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I suppose, from your use of the term 'Holocaust industry', that you are one of those who would seek to deny what the Germans did to the Jews of Europe. If so, why not say so openly? If not, perhaps you would care to make your views on this subject clear? Or do you perhaps have a vestige of shame about aligning yourself with Neo-Nazi fantasists?

By the way, I'm not a supporter of the state of Israel - just somebody who believes that there is such a thing as historical truth, and that on this of all subjects it shoud not be slurred in this way.

At 4 July 2006 at 22:34, Blogger Mustaqim said...

Don't SUPPOSE - I use Holocaust industry in the way it was first coined by Finkelstein when exposing the profiteering by interest groups trying to cash in on the feeling of guilt of others. As for historical truth, it is best established through thorough and vigorous research, not censorship.

At 2 August 2006 at 08:13, Blogger MT said...

Oh, vigorous research like "Intelligent Design" and "Creationism" such as makes it only sensible to teach alternatives to common descent in high school biology, as taught in theocracies like Kansas? "Research" and "skepticism" is well established as a posture with which to disguise a partisan agenda. Partisans against common descent enjoyed an ample audience in the many decades of debate after Darwin. Some arguments do not deserve to be heard or reenacted. What evidence do you have for bad faith among the testimony of witnesses and the generations of scholars who have produced the main stream understanding of what happened to Jews in WWII? The hypothesis of a massive conspiracy to willfully lie and deceive is utterly without merit, unless we presuppose that Jews are unlike everybody else, which is simply racism.


Post a Comment

<< Home