28 February 2008 Hearing
Written Submission for 28 February 2008 FCA Hearing
Affidavit in Support
(Order 19, rule 2)
THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
No. N327 of 2001
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 directions only,
that the NOTICE OF MOTION of 2 January 2008 be augmented by this AMENDED NOTICE
OF MOTION for Orders that:
The circumstances of the report ‘Toben
gives Holocaust denial apology in Court’, in the Australian
Jewish News, dated 30 November 2007, concerning Orders of 27 November 2007
be investigated by the Registrar of the Federal Court of Australia.
The Respondent be given Declaratory Relief in the following terms:
Although the Respondent has – bar a link to an article on another website –
deleted per the 27 November 2007 Consent Order material from Adelaide
Institute’s website, it be declared that the Respondent has unreservedly
withdrawn his apology to the court on account of the Applicant attempting to use
the court as a proxy to achieve his conspiratorial aim of imposing – without
open debate – a Jewish Holocaust-Shoah world view on the Australian public,
something that is contrary to Australia’s democratic tradition of being a
pluralistic society because such a world-view would violate its moral compass by
entrenching Jewish supremacism within the fabric of Australian society.
That it be declared this current legal action – begun in 1996 before the Human
Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission-HREOC, then continued in 2001 in the
Federal Court of Australia-FCA, and finally culminating on 5 December 2006
with the Applicant, Jeremy Jones, requesting that the Court order the arrest of
the Respondent, Dr Fredrick Töben, for violating the FCA Court Order – is an
abuse of process because it violates Australia’s democratic value system, and
that Jeremy Jones and Members of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry
apologize to the Australian public for committing such an intentional abuse.
That the Applicant, Mr Jeremy Jones and Members of the Executive Council of
Australian Jewry, be declared obsessive and vexatious Holocaust-Shoah litigants
who merely follow directly in the footsteps of their overseas co-conspirators,
Dr Efraim Zuroff and Rabbis Cooper and Hier of the US-based Simon Wiesenthal
Centre, Los Angeles, in propagating what is for Germans and other truth-loving
individuals a false, hurtful, hate-filled, offensive and racially motivated
account of an historical event called the Holocaust-Shoah.
it be declared that the Applicant’s use of the Holocaust-Shoah narrative
serves to spread Zionist racist hatred and contempt against Germans and anyone
of German descent, and anything to do with German culture and heritage.
That it be declared that if the Applicant and Members of the ECAJ initiates any
future legal action wherein claims are made about the Holocaust-Shoah narrative,
they be obliged scientifically to substantiate and quantify any such claims and
subject such claims to a truth-test.
That it be declared that if the Applicant and Members of the ECAJ claim hurt
feelings flowing from any alternate Jewish Holocaust-Shoah narrative that
corrects the false factual nature of the Jeremy Jones, et al, propagated Jewish
Holocaust-Shoah narrative, they be obliged to substantiate such hurt feelings
per medical evidence, for example a psychiatric report of no less than four
That it be declared that a singular/unique interpretation of the Jewish
Holocaust-Shoah narrative is contrary to academic and scientific enquiry and is
a mere political/dogmatic interpretation of an historical event, something that
runs counter to Australia’s cherished concepts of freedom and democracy where
a plurality of world-views co-exist without criminalizing one view or another.
That it be declared that a belief in the narrative – that during World War Two
Germans systematically exterminated European Jewry in homicidal gas chambers –
without subjecting that belief to forensic investigations, remains a mere
belief, and that any attempt to enshrine it within Australia’s legal framework
is contrary to Australia’s self-interest because it enables the racist
Zionists in Australia to suppress free expression on any historical debate and
to criminalise dissenting views and opinions.
That it be declared that the claim Germans exterminated six million Jews during
World War Two, and the Auschwitz concentration camp death figure reduction –
from four million to 1.-1.5 million, and that this reduction does not influence
the total of six million – is an irrational claim without empirical
That it be declared that in both Germany/Austria and Turkey legal measures have
been implemented to prevent an open historical enquiry on a claimed historical
massacre – in the former about the Jewish Holocaust-Shoah massacre and in the
latter about the Armenian massacre.
That it be declared that to the question – cui bono? – it is Jewish
interests that are legally protected by such legal censorship preventing
investigation of an historical event, and that the Jewish Holocaust-Shoah
guarantees a perpetual victimhood status of Jews while the Armenian Holocaust
protects Jews from being regarded as perpetrators, which they were, and as they
were in the 1917 Soviet Bolshevik Holocaust.
That it be declared that such legal protection of an historical event leads to
legal persecution of individuals/dissidents who refuse to believe in the Zionist
racist propagated version of historical events, something that is contrary to
Australia’s understanding of human rights where freedom of expression is
paramount if a belief in freedom and democracy is to be maintained, all of which
is contrary to how Germany and Austria treat their dissidents, for example,
legally persecuting/imprisoning and criminalising dissenters, such as Germar
Rudolf and Ernst Zündel in Germany and Walter Fröhlich and Gerd Honsik in
Austria, only because they refuse to believe in the Zionist Jewish version of
the historical event called the Jewish Holocaust-Shoah.
3. There be such further or other Order as the Court may consider appropriate.
Filed by Dr F Töben Tel: 08.83310808
Wattle Park 5066
Top | Home
©-free 2008 Adelaide Institute