ISSN 1440-9828
August 2003
No 201
Free Speech in Australia

Bad times for Revisionists, good times for Revisionism

Recently a supporter of Adelaide Institute joined an all-women's discussion group, and at the inaugural meeting the convenor asked for suggestions as to what topics ought to be discussed. A participant suggested that politics should be kept out of any ensuing discussion. Our supporter said that she vehemently disagreed with that because if we wished to understand ourselves, others, and the world, then we need to address the three major issues facing us: sex, politics and religion. The lady who wished to avoid politics remained silent when the group met for a second time.

The above indicates a behavioural form all too familiar for the Revisionists who, on account of wishing to know things, do not fear exploring any unknown territory that may make up their own blind spots. In many of our various social service clubs it is exactly this problem of a subtle censorship, where mutual backslapping and socialising are the norm, that causes a declining membership because the big issues of the day are not addressed. The consequences are that the younger generation finds the 'old fuddy-duddies' somewhat irrelevant because the Internet offers them the uncensored world of unlimited information.

The only limitation we at Adelaide Institute place on open discussions is that such be conducted in a civilised way, something that the ABC TV's David Maher addressed in his latest Media Watch on 21 July 2003. He commented on how two early morning television presenters had cut short a guest on their program who had been invited to discuss language use. The guest, a dictionary compiler, spoke fluently about the problem of taste, then without flinching used the word 'fuckwit' to illustrate her point. She was cut off and her image did not appear again as the producer of the program cut back to the two presenters who profusely apologised for this slip in taste. This apologetic tone was maintained the following day by reading out comments from viewers who also were offended by hearing that word on live television. David Maher, on the other hand, ended his story by presenting the printed dictionary definition of the offensive word, then placing next to it the photos of the two television presenters. The inference was clear, and possibly libellous. Perhaps some legal action will ensue from Maher's program, but that will not solve the problem of hypocrisy, of arbitrary censorship, of censoring taste.

This kind of moral problem, however, will not be solved in the law courts, i.e. unless we wish to have a muted, fearful and colourless social environment that prevailed in the former Soviet Union and its member states. There anyone who, for example, broached the topic of 'Jewish power' was labelled an 'antisemite' and criminalised, and any dissident, any free-thinker, anyone who could not accept the atheistic dogmatism of Marxism, was labelled a Revisionist and banished to the Gulag prison system. This two-pincer movement killed the Russian soul.

Sounds familiar? Of course! In Australia, and in the rest of the so-called western world, we are now at the point that prevailed in the former Soviet Union, where 'the Jewish question' has now been excised from public discourse through legal means. Soon I shall be presented with a legal bill that will amount to about $A150, 000 because Adelaide Institute's website has dares to challenge any taboo topic and is not impressed nor restrained by "for fear of the Jews"!

Thus, in Australia we are at the point where individuals are intimidated, or rather, where individuals let themselves be intimidated into silence. And there are now cases that have been brought to the public's attention where the consequences of not remaining silent are horrendous. For example, we have Mrs Olga Scully, who for decades wished to inform the public that the majority of Bolsheviks, under whose system her grandparents were killed in Russia, were of Jewish origin. This historical fact is beyond dispute, but not accepted as such by Australia's leading Zionist, Jeremy Jones, who has a different view of history to that of Olga Scully. Mrs Scully now has a gag order that prevents her from stating such things in public. On top she has a $A150, 000 legal bill to pay. Free speech in Australia is expensive, and then not guaranteed. So much for the battle of the wills - this round won by Jeremy Jones who at one time even wished to speak on behalf of all Australian Jews. Interestingly, he claims to represent all Australian Jews, but then when Mrs Scully disagrees with him and responds to him because he is Jewish, that's an offence!

The dialectic trick is neat, and one must concede that those who make legal judgments in favour of Jewish individuals are not subtle enough in their thinking to see through this deception, or the "for fear of the Jews" syndrome has influenced them. I am reminded of the Alan Goldberg letter to Mrs Joyce Steele wherein the legal and social threat mechanism is clearly revealed. The fact that Goldberg is now a judge at the Federal Court of Australia speaks for itself.

The importance of moral and intellectual courage in overcoming any oppressors of free speech, so evident in Mrs Joyce Steele's fearless stance as she resisted Goldberg's huff and bluff, is self-evident. Don't blame 'the Jews' for whatever happened blame those that bend to their pressure because of a lack of a moral backbone!



Coalition Of Deceit:

Dead Scientist Feared "Dark Actors Playing Games"

By Justin Raimondo


In the moments before he set off on what was to be his final stroll across the hills and copses near his home, British government weapons expert Dr David Kelly sent a number of emails to friends saying he was being haunted by "many dark actors playing games."

He was found dead, several hours later, an apparent suicide.

The British government is in a crisis, and the waves of panic are reverberating over on this side of the Atlantic, as the spiders' web spun by government spinmeisters comes unraveled. The rationale for war on Iraq turns out to have been woven from lies.

The ongoing controversy over the now infamous "16 words" is just the beginning of a scandal that is fast morphing into a much wider cause celebre. Niger-gate is turning into Fibber-gate.

We were told, by the Americans as well as the British government, that Saddam could launch a chemical or biological attack within 45 minutes of giving the order. That turns out to have been a figment of someone's imagination, but whose?

The President of the United States got up there and told the American people that a fleet of UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles) possessed by the Iraqis was capable of launching an attack on the continental U.S. and leveling American cities, so where is this sinister armada? And where the heck did Bush get such an outlandishly tall tale?

Dr. Kelly was supposedly the key source for a BBC report that the Blair government had "sexed up" the Iraqi WMD dossier in order to drag an unwilling nation into war. In Blair's England, where the right of free speech is ever more precarious, the government launched an all-out assault on the supposedly independent media organization, which does, after all, rely on government revenues, and Dr. Kelly's name had been deliberately leaked as the BBC's "mole" within the Ministry of Defense. He was dragged before a committee of Parliament, mercilessly grilled, kept holed up in a MoD "safe house," and ultimately found dead a few miles from his home.

Dr. Kelly committed suicide, as far as we know, but it is fair to ask: was he felled, in an important sense, by the "dark actors" he complained about in his final hours?

Shortly before Kelly's death, Julian Borger, writing in the Guardian,brought to light the existence of a network of some very dark actors, a faction of the British and American intelligence agencies that almost certainly was about to be exposed as the source of the disinformation put out by the Bush-Blair coalition of deceit.,3858,4714031,00.html

In the period leading up to the invasion, as millions marched in the streets hoping to stop the rush to war, Newt Gingrich, the disgraced former Speaker of the House, made at least three trips to CIA headquarters, in Langley, Virginia, to browbeat analysts into projecting a more threatening picture of Iraq's military capabilities. But why, one has to ask, would anyone bother listening to a political has-been and well-known bore? Surely the CIA brass had better things to do.

"Mr Gingrich gained access to the CIA headquarters and was listened to," reports Borger, "because he was seen as a personal emissary of the Pentagon and, in particular, of the OSP."

The key link in an international chain of professional prevaricators, the OSP, or Office of Special Plans,12239,953604,00.html,

was authorized by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and presided over by a cabal of neoconservative ideologues [eastern European-Jewish immigrants who confess to be motivated by the 'Holocaust'myth - Adelaide Institute.] who "functioned like a shadow government," according to Borger

Bypassing both the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency, they "cherry-picked" tidbits of raw intelligence, acting more like lawyers arguing a case than analysts probing for facts, and piped their propaganda directly to the President via Dick Cheney.

This story is nothing new: Seymour Hersh gave us a good look inside this network, and several writers have elaborated on a similar theme, but Borger provides some telling (and disturbing) new details:

"The OSP itself had less than 10 full-time staff, so to help deal with the load, the office hired scores of temporary 'consultants.' They included lawyers, congressional staffers, and policy wonks from the numerous rightwing thinktanks in Washington. Few had experience in intelligence. 'Most of the people they had in that office were off the books, on personal services contracts. At one time, there were over 100 of them,' said an intelligence source. The contracts allow a department to hire individuals, without specifying a job description."

This was, in effect, a welfare program for warmongers. In the great debate leading up to the war, one side was subsidized and succored by our tax dollars, the other was vilified, threatened, and harassed by paid shills and agents of the U.S. government. Over 100 of the pro-war pundits,

professional screamers, and

crusading "patriots" who make careers out of finding an "Islamofascist" under every bed were on the take.

Who were they? How much did they get? And how many of them are still sucking at the federal teat? The journalists among them surely need a little exposure, in this, the age of Jayson Blair. And what about all those think-tankers who managed to get on the Iraq war gravy train? How many of them were from such bastions of scholarly integrity as the American Enterprise Institute, the Center for Security Policy , the Jewish Institute for National Strategic Affairs, and the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies?

As U.S. troops took Baghdad, an article in the Financial Times reported on a rollicking party in the nation's capital: "Billed as a 'black coffee briefing on the war on Iraq,' yesterday's breakfast for the influential hawks of the American Enterprise Institute was more of a victory celebration. With a few words of caution, that the war to oust Saddam Hussein was not yet over, the panel of speakers, part of the Bush administration's ideological vanguard, set out their bold vision of the postwar agenda: radical reform of the UN, regime change in Iran and Syria, and 'containment' of France and Germany."

Rollicking, that is, by neocon standards. The talk was of a measured triumphalism, and a sneering disdain for the defeated peace movement: "The war was going well, said Richard Perle, chairman of the Pentagon's Defence Advisory Board. There were more anti-war demonstrators in San Francisco than Iraqis willing to defend their leader. The 'coalition of the willing' was growing."

As Perle, along with his fellow warmongers Michael Ledeen, and Bill Kristol, pontificated to an audience of like-minded Washington war wonks, how many in that room were not on the government payroll? It was, no doubt, a gathering of welfare queens and kings, and they had plenty to celebrate. Not only on account of their ideological victory, albeit a short-lived one, but also because they had personally profited handsomely. Perle has already been demoted for improper profiteering off his position with the Pentagon's Defense Advisory Board, and had to resign his chairmanship. How many of his fellow celebrants have similarly dubious relationships is a matter that needs to be thoroughly investigated.

Remember the "poverty pimps" of the 1960s and 70s, who were riding high on the liberal illusion that the welfare state could uplift the poor, if only we lavished enough dollars on social service bureaucracies and waged a "war on poverty"? Today, in the post-9/11 era, we have the propaganda pimps of the "war on terrorism," who in this age of perpetual war are guaranteed permanent and lucrative employment.

The media and at least two congressional investigations are now busy uncovering the trail of lies that misled us into war. If the scope of the investigation is not limited, and they follow the fibs and outright forgeries back to their original source, they are investigators are likely to discover that the neoconservative network inside the Washington Beltway acted like a conveyor belt feeding fantastic tales of Iraqi WMD directly to the Oval Office. The question then becomes how far the White House will have to distance itself from the resulting embarrassing revelations.

The unsavory concoction fed to the President and his top advisors was disguised as "intelligence", to make it easier to swallow, and the President is still refusing to take personal responsibility for the fateful 16 words, or much of anything else. In order to maintain that stance, the White House is going to have to fob off the responsibility elsewhere, and there is some indication that this is already beginning to occur, with the President reprimanding National Security advisor Condolezza Rice and even outgoing presidential spokesman Ari Fleischer. Let's hope that the result of the political tornado now sweeping Washington replicates the plot of "The Wizard of Oz," and the house falls directly on the Wicked Witch of the OSP.

The "dark actors" in this tale of disinformation and competing spy agencies are shadowy, elusive creatures who wield enormous power with no compunctions about the consequences. Some are Americans, some British: others are Israelis, as Borger reports:

"The OSP was an open and largely unfiltered conduit to the White House not only for the Iraqi opposition. It also forged close ties to a parallel, ad hoc intelligence operation inside Ariel Sharon's office in Israel specifically to bypass Mossad and provide the Bush administration with more alarmist reports on Saddam's Iraq than Mossad was prepared to authorize. 'None of the Israelis who came were cleared into the Pentagon through normal channels,' said one source familiar with the visits. Instead, they were waved in on Mr. [Douglas] Feith's authority without having to fill in the usual forms.",4273,4493638,00.html+feith+%22a+clean+break%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Bypassing all the normal procedures and regular government agencies, agents of a foreign power, Israel, were admitted into the inner sanctum of the Pentagon, where they proceeded to clog the arteries of U.S. intelligence operations with mis-information. The War Party, as we see, was hired on as a "consultant" to the U.S. government in the crucial period leading up to the invasion of Iraq. But what other government gave them succor and assistance? We have said all along in this space that the one country that stood to benefit from the war was not the U.S., but Israel. The war in Iraq, as Professor Paul W. Schroeder pointed out in The American Conservative, "Would represent something to my knowledge unique in history. It is common for great powers to try to fight wars by proxy, getting smaller powers to fight for their interests. This would be the first instance I know where a great power (in fact, a superpower) would do the fighting as the proxy of a small client state."

Surely this is a case of the tail wagging the dog, but the explanation for this strange phenomenon is now coming out in the investigation into Liar-gate. If we look at the Iraq war as an intelligence operation directed by the one nation that stood to benefit, the answer to the question of how did we get into this mess becomes a little clearer. No wonder the neocons were celebrating at that AEI shindig, lifting their coffee cups in a collective toast to a job well-done and gloating over their victory. No matter what the consequences of the Iraq war for the U.S., Israel's interests were well-served. Let Uncle Sam shell out $3.9 million per month and let the President take the heat for misleading the nation with bogus information about the imminence of the Iraqi "threat", the cabal's mission has been accomplished.

For the embedded links go to





"We liberated Iraq.

Now the people here don't want us here, and guess what?

We don't want to be here either.

So why are we still here?

Why don't they bring us home?"

Pfc. Jason Ring, in: San Francisco Chronicle, Friday, July 18, 2003




Jewish Board of Deputies Battles On!

On 5 May 2003, the South African Jewish Board of Deputies (SAJBOD) served papers on ICASA / BMCC and Radio 786 to appeal against the decision of the Broadcasting Monitoring Complaints Committee (BMCC) to dismiss their complaint against the station. SAJBOD lodged a complaint against a programme on Zionism and the 'State' of Israel aired on Radio 786 in May 1998.





Never Forget-Never Forgive?!

1. Remember: Eric Margolis, the Contributing Foreign Editor, Toronto Sun, 8 June 2003, spells out the Iraq WMD hoax: 'By Way Of Deception': "NEW YORK -When I lived in Jamaica, many moons ago, there occurred a bizarre national panic known as "the three-wheeled coffin." According to a storm of rumours, a black, three-wheeled coffin, with three black crows on top, was moving along Jamaica's roads. Villages emptied in terror at reports the coffin was nearing. The three-wheeled coffin was never found. The panic subsided. North Americans and Britons have just experienced their own version of the three-wheeled coffin - a national panic attack called Iraq."


2. Remember: A Declaration of War on Revisionists?

"Israeli death squads have been authorised to enter 'friendly' countries and assassinate opponents in a move that raises the prospect of political killings in Australia. Agents of the Israeli secret Mossad have been given free rein to kill those deemed a threat to the Jewish sate wherever they are hiding … A spokesman for Foreign Minister Alexander Downer yesterday refused to comment on the possibility of Mossad agents operating in Australia." Sunday Times, 19 January 2003.


3. Remember: German politician, Jürgen Möllemann, parachuted to his death, so it is alleged by the German media. Anyone who has parachuted, knows that the safety mechanism that releases the emergency parachute cannot be switched off once it has been activated. It is stated by those who were with Möllemann on that fateful day that Möllemann activated this mechanism just prior to jumping out of the plane. The fact that Möllemann had dared publicly to oppose Israel's politics and policies towards the Palestinians made him the subject of a smear campaign, of being antisemitic. This stupid word, 'antisemitic', unfortunately, is still powerful enough to sway non-thinking individuals into irrational action. Also, Möllemann was about to launch a new political party, something his opponents feared.

4. Bush, Blair discuss Guantanamo prisoners

United States President George W Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair have discussed the possible extradition of two British citizens being held at Guantanamo Bay to face trial in their home nation. Any decision about the British detainees is likely to have implications for the two Australians also being held in Cuba. Mr Blair has been under enormous pressure in Britain to raise the Guantanamo issue with American officials. President Bush is promising an open mind. "Prior to his arrival he said 'I want to talk about this in a serious way - can we work with you'," Mr Bush said. "The answer is absolutely and we'll have a very good discussion about it." Any decision about where the British detainees will be tried will have implications for Australian detainee David Hicks, who has been earmarked for possible trial in the US. The Australian Government is in frequent contact with the US about his legal process. Mr Bush and Mr Blair are expected to release a statement on the matter tomorrow. Meanwhile, Mr Blair and his wife Cherie have now left the United States and are on the way to east Asia. ABC News Online 18/7/2003


5. Unis to hand over hard drives in piracy case

The Federal Court in Sydney has ordered three Australian universities to hand over documents, CDs and computer hard drives to a recording industry expert for examination. The orders relate to legal action record companies EMI, Universal and Sony are taking against the universities over alleged music copyright infringements. The companies have taken the universities of Sydney, Melbourne and Tasmania to court over alleged music piracy detected by a routine check on Internet usage. The Federal Court has granted the record companies access to the universities' computer system to investigate the allegations further. ABC News Online 18/7/2003


6. WTC court case

A federal appeals court in New York has begun hearing argument over the destruction of the World Trade Centre on September 11, 2001. The leaseholder, Larry Silverstein, says the twin towers were destroyed in two separate attacks, many minutes apart, and that he was therefore entitled to two insurance payouts, of roughly $US3.5 billion each. Caroline Overington, in: The Sydney Morning Herald, July 24, 2003




Fredrick Töben reflects during his June-July 2003 Travels


The Daily Telegraph, 9 July 2003, headlines that 'Schröder cancels Italian break in Nazi row', and goes on to say that the eight-day row between Germany and Italy began when Italy's prime minister, Silvio Berlusconi, "lost his temper in front of jeering Euro-MPs and described a German member, Martin Schulz, as suitable to play a Nazi concentration camp guard in a film". Mr Berlusconi said his response was "an ironic joke". The tourism minister, Stefano Stefani referred to Germans as "uniform, hypernationalistic, blonds who loudly invade Italy's beaches and have been indoctrinated to feel top of the class whatever the situation". They were "drunk with imagined certainties" if they took intelligence tests, he wrote to La Padania, the newspaper of the Northern League.


Comment: The Battle of the Wills in Europe.

The pivotal role of Revisionist work is evident from the above. Were the context of the Nazi jibe not a criminal offence in Germany anymore, then the whole matter would have died a natural death. However, there are still too many individuals who have their snout in the 'Nazi trough', and they will not welcome the Germans to throw away the 'Hitler Hat' to then at long last open themselves to this period of their history without fearing imprisonment, as is now the case.


Top of Page | Home Page

©-free 2003 Adelaide Institute