Welcome to Adelaide Institute’s 11^th Year of Operations

Fredrick Töben

It is self-evident that supporters of Adelaide Institute can look back on the past decade with some satisfaction in having survived a decisive Jewish onslaught and defended their world view against the likes of Jeremy Jones, Stephen Rothman, Colin Rubenstein, and their numerous non-Jewish helpers, such as our local Adelaide Advertiser columnist Rex Jory, ABC Radio National’s broadcaster Phillip Adams, academics such as Professors Colin Tatz and Konrad Kwiet, and half a dozen judges at the Federal Court of Australia who are now aware of the fact that amongst their midst there is Justice Alan Goldberg, a former B’nai B’rith activist, et al.

Yes, these individuals may have won the battle in the Federal Court of Australia , in academia and in the mass media but their victory was gained through a process wherein truth is not a defence. Imagine, the fundamental concept upon which our civilisation rests – TRUTH – has become irrelevant when deciding on whether we are to be found guilty or not guilty of an infringement.

In my case I could not find legal representation and so had a ‘summary judgment’ made by a single judge who had advised me to read up legal texts, then mount my own defence. How can I defend myself against the allegation that I have hurt someone’s feelings! Years ago Professor Arthur Butz pointed out that against such an allegation all Revisionists are guilty. Revisionist work certainly ‘offends’ those who let themselves be offended Our written material on Adelaide Institute’s website is offensive, for example, to Jeremy Jones, who upon ‘stumbling upon it’, then reading it, feels quite devastated to learn that in our world view the derived ‘Holocaust’ story is a lie. He falls apart and needs to call upon the law to protect his world view that clashes with ours.

Once it was a mystery to me why he simply does not switch off the computer, or extract himself from our website, as would any morally and intellectually discriminating mature individual. Now I know that he cannot simply extricate himself from our website because he needs to present himself as a perpetual victim of oppression. After all, as a good Jew who has perfected the victim mentality that does not require him to accept responsibility for his actions, he forever plays this victim role to perfection: he is either in a ‘Holocaust’, just getting out of a ‘Holocaust’, or expecting a ‘Holocaust’.

This state of mind is usually referred to as having a persecution complex, of being neurotic, which sometimes can lead to outright madness where physical objective reality ceases to exist and where subjective mental egocentric reality determines a person’s world view. The them-us/friend-foe divide is writ large: God and the Devil vie for our favours, but as we always do God’s bidding, and anyone who opposes our will is by definition in league with the Devil. This witch-hunt-trial mentality suffers no contradictions and is bereft of understanding, compassion and mercy, relying upon the timeless refrain to intimidate and beat into submission: “…for fear of the Jews”. US president George W Bush is the current world political representation of this mind-set.

That this fear of the Jews is a physical fact, and has nothing to do with ‘antisemitism’, was brought home during the November 2003 Sydney Peace Prize conferral upon Palestinian Dr Hanan Ashrawi. The articles below by Phillip Adams and Alan Ramsay set the scene when Australia ’s organized Jews hit out at anyone who supported Dr Ashrawi receiving the Sydney Peace Prize. With some satisfaction I recall advising Phillip Adams that “if I get done in, then you will be next”, and so it has come to pass, though he will not be vilified in the mainstream media as I have been. Adams still insists on hiding behind the catch-all word ‘antisemite’, to give himself more ‘legitimacy’, something that’s so reminiscent of Professor Deborah Lipstadt who pulls out this card when her mind has run out of a rational argument and she exclaims, “there is no debate about the Holocaust!”

Fortunately there are individuals who stand firm against oppression, and do more than just feel sorry for themselves and re-act as a form of self-defence against oppressors. Yet it can be a double-edged sword, as David Irving found out in 2000 when he took his grievance into court. Now in Germany there is lawyer Horst Mahler who has formed an association for those persecuted for ‘Holocaust’ denial. He is now preparing a case that will attempt to gain compensation for those who have been subjected to legal oppression because they refuse to believe in the ‘Holocaust’ lie. We are watching this pro-active stance because it is a ground-breaking initiative, and how it will develop is difficult to predict. Suffice it to say that Mahler’s dialectic approach appears to be a winning formula because if he loses, then the authorities also lose, and if he wins they also lose. He has used the formula that we sometimes use when we say: “Either a person is ignorant of the ‘Holocaust’ facts, or he is a liar.” The problem now is to get it into court, and I can see that the authorities will do everything to block Mahler appearing in court. His life is obviously in danger. Finally Kerry Bolton concisely sums up the relevance of our continuing focus on World War Two history and how it reflects upon today’s troubled times.

Here's Lucy, caving in, taking flight

By Alan Ramsey

The Sydney Morning Herald, 25 October 25 2003

Dr Hanan Mikhail Ashrawi is a woman, a professor of English, an international human rights activist, and a politician. A year ago she was chosen, unanimously, to receive the 2003 Sydney Peace Prize. The Premier, Bob Carr, will present Ashrawi with her award at State Parliament in 12 days. The first four recipients of the annual prize were honoured at functions in the Great Hall of Sydney University. They included South Africa 's Archbishop Desmond Tutu (1999), East Timor 's President Xanana Gusmao (2000) and Australia 's Sir William Deane (2001). However, for Ashrawi, the Great Hall is out of bounds.

This is not because Ashrawi is either a woman, an academic or a political activist. It is because she is a Palestinian. That is enough to ensure a virulent campaign of distortion and ridicule by Jewish critics to brutalise her image and try to have Carr renege on Ashrawi's presentation and the award taken from her. So far Carr has refused to buckle. Not so Sydney University .

Earlier this year the university's chancellor, Justice Kim Santow of the NSW Supreme Court, made it known to Professor Stuart Rees, director of the Sydney Peace Foundation, and to Kathryn Greiner, the foundation's chairwoman at the time, that the Great Hall would be closed to Ashrawi. Rees and an academic colleague, Ken McNabb, took the matter to Sydney 's vice-chancellor, Gavin Brown. In what was called a "difficult and shameful" meeting, Brown confirmed the decision. The campaign now is about maximum political pressure for other corporate and civic sponsors to abandon Ashrawi and intimidate Carr.

Lucy Turnbull, Sydney 's Lord Mayor since Frank Sartor joined Carr's ministry after the NSW elections in March, is the latest to fold her tent and take flight. Sartor, as lord mayor, had earlier arranged for the City of Sydney to be a $30,000 annual sponsor, for five years, of the Peace Foundation lecture, which is always given, in a separate function, by the peace prize winner the night before the award ceremony on the first Thursday in November.

On Tuesday this week, in a brief "Dear Professor Rees" letter dated October 20, Turnbull told Rees the Sydney City Council "will be unable to participate in this year's Peace Prize events". That is, the council was blackballing both the lecture and the award ceremony. Turnbull's reasons for doing so were a travesty: the usual ignorant mishmash of allegations forever trotted out by the usual suspects against any Palestinian with international credibility and standing in the peace process.

Lucy Turnbull should read the letter from a Jewish academic at Oxford University published in the Herald yesterday. Then she should go hide her head in shame. The letter responded to Tony Stephens's story in the Herald two days earlier about Turnbull's craven cave-in to the anti-Ashrawi campaign. It said: "Opposition to awarding the Sydney Peace Prize to Dr Hanan Ashrawi has so far been based on historical ignorance, ideological blindness, wilful malevolence or provincial political opportunism." (Are you listening, Malcolm?)

The letter continued: "Dr Ashrawi has been a rare and precious voice of reason in the peace process and her commitment to a just solution has been exemplary. She has consistently encouraged Palestinians to reject violence, despite continuing Israeli territorial expansion and systemic political oppression." (signed) Ben Saul, Tutor in International Law, Magdalen College , University of Oxford , England .

And what does Rees think of Lucy's white feather? He said yesterday: "When I negotiated the sponsorship contract with the City of Sydney , I did so with Frank Sartor, not Lucy Turnbull. She's an interesting person. I've had face-to-face communications with all the major corporate sponsors who support us over this issue. I even flew down to Melbourne to talk to Rio Tinto. But Lucy Turnbull and co are like the Medicis of the Town Hall. She never talks to me. All I got was this summary note a couple of days ago in which, for her own purposes, she completely misinterprets Ashrawi's public statements and says she won't publicly support us this year.

"In other words, she won't be seen in the same company as Ashrawi. She doesn't even want to be seen in the lecture theatre. Apparently it's more than her husband's political life is worth."

Ah, yes, of course - Malcolm Turnbull's much publicised stalking of the Liberals' Peter King in his pursuit of the eastern suburbs' federal seat of Wentworth. Lucy Turnbull has gone to ground since her "Dear John" letter to Rees this week. But a senior business figure phoned Rees on Tuesday to tell him of a conversation he'd overheard at a function the previous night. It apparently included Lucy being told something like: "That wretched King is going around saying you support the Palestinians because you're a party to this peace prize."

Rees commented: "So Hanan Ashrawi gets her name sullied and ridiculed because the Turnbulls want to be more important that they already are."

And Kathryn Greiner? Greiner was chairwoman of the Sydney Peace Foundation for four years until her resignation this year over an issue of solidarity involving her husband, Nick, against the Senate of Sydney University and unconnected with the peace prize bitchiness. She was one of the jury of six who selected Ashrawi unanimously in September last year as this year's recipient (the other five: Rees; social researcher Hugh Mackay; Dr Jane Fulton from University management; Stella Cornelius, Sydney's 83-year-old grand dame of conflict mediation; James McLachlan, a director of Kerry Packer's PBL).

Greiner remains a non-voting member in support of Rees. But two weeks ago, on October 9, she phoned Rees to talk frankly about her concerns with an accelerating campaign against Ashrawi. A file note of their conversation reads:

KG: "I have to speak logically. It is either Hanan Ashrawi or the Peace Foundation. That's our choice, Stuart. My distinct impression is that if you persist in having her here, they'll destroy you. Rob Thomas of City Group is in trouble for supporting us. I think he must have had a phone call from New York . And you know Danny Gilbert [partner in the law firm, Gilbert and Tobin] has already been warned off."

SR: "You must be joking. We've been over this a hundred times. We consulted widely. We agreed the jury's decision, made over a year ago, was not only unanimous but that we would support it, together."

KG: "But listen, I'm trying to present the logic of this. They'll destroy what you've worked for. They are determined to show we made a bad choice. I think it's Frank Lowy's money. You don't understand just how much opposition there is. We cannot go ahead. If only there was progress in the Middle East , this would not be such a bad time."

SR: "I won't be subject to bullying and intimidation. We are being threatened by members of a powerful group who think they have an entitlement to tell others what to do. This opposition is orchestrated. The arguments are all the same - that Hanan Ashrawi has not condemned violence sufficiently, that she was highly critical of Israel in her address to the UN's Johannesburg Conference on racism, and wilder accusations that do not bear repetition."

KG: "But you're not listening to the logic. The Commonwealth Bank - I was at a reception last night - is highly critical. We could not approach them for financial help for the Schools Peace Prize. We'll get no support from them. The business world will close ranks. They're saying we are being one-sided, that we've only supported Palestine ."

SR: "Kathryn, we need to avoid the trap of even using the language of 'one side'. That's not the issue. We are being bullied and intimidated and you are asking that we give way to it. The letter writers and the phone callers who this group encourage have spent weeks bullying a 25-year-old colleague of mine who handles the foundation's administration. You are asking me to collude with bullying."

KG: "I'll tell you how serious this is. Bob Carr won't come to the dinner. He'll flick the responsibility to [his deputy, Andrew] Refshauge at the last minute. And you won't get the Town Hall. It is more than Lucy's life is worth. They will desert us as well."

SR: "I've never given way to bullying. Public life is too much characterised by cowardice. If we give way I'd be so ashamed I couldn't face myself. The image of the Peace Foundation would be shameful. Our reputation would count for nothing."

KG: "My friend, I am telling you what the reality is. The foundation will be destroyed. I'd hate to see its work come to nothing over this. Our critics are saying it's an awful choice."

SR: "These critics are 'they' and 'them', invisible but powerful people. They stay powerful because they are invisible. They bully and intimidate in the same breath they behave as unblemished pillars of the community. Do you mean to say that in cautious, often gutless Australia we are not going to follow through on this? No. I remain completely committed to our decision."

Watch this space.

As today's column will provoke accusations of anti-Semitism, let me begin with a few words in my defence. A classic philo-Semite, I've long been described as a Jew lover by the anti-Semites in organisations such as Fredrick Toben's Adelaide Institute. I've been dragged before the Press Council by the abominable League of Rights and am proud to say I'm regularly attacked in the hate pages of neo-Nazi organisations.

I'm on the receiving end of stacks of hate mail, up to and including death threats. My home was attacked by an anti-Semitic group that spray-painted racist obscenities all over it, then tried to sledgehammer their way in.

My children grew up in a home with a mezuzah, which consecrates it, on the doorpost. They were taught to respect the extraordinary contribution of Jews to science, philosophy, philanthropy, ethics, civil rights and the arts. My first daughter, named Rebecca, renounced her father's atheism and converted to Judaism. And I've lost count of the occasions when I've launched books by Jewish authors, opened exhibitions by Jewish artists or spoken at Jewish fundraisers or at Holocaust exhibitions or museums.

Yet, with growing frequency, I get letters branding me an anti-Semite. Worse still, I've lost close friends in the Jewish community. Why? Because in recent years I've found it impossible not to criticise Israel 's policies towards the Palestinians.

It is not anti-Semitic to disagree with Israel 's behaviour in the Lebanon or the disputed territories. It is not anti-Semitic to regard Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon as equally culpable with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat in the present mess. And it is not anti-Semitic to protest long and loud against the attempts to denigrate Hanan Ashrawi and those who would honour her.

The behaviour of the so-called Jewish lobby over the Ashrawi issue is not only appalling but extraordinarily stupid. Once again, in its efforts to suppress and censor, the lobby challenges the efforts of its worst enemies to become its own worst enemy.

Take the case of the diabolical David Irving. Australian Jewry succeeded in banning him from entering Australia - the classic Pyrrhic victory. It did not hurt Irving 's cause. Rather, it made him a martyr to his deranged supporters while providing the oxygen of publicity for his books, videos and website.

Far better to have let him into the country and to confront him. The demolition job done on Irving in the London libel trial shows his vulnerability to scholarly attack. Whereas shutting him out in an attempt to shut him up gives the ill-informed and uninformed the impression that his opponents have something to hide.

If the campaign to keep Irving out of Australia was counterproductive, the attack on Ashrawi - and those of us who admire her - is worse.

I'm one of many who regard themselves as simultaneously pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian, in the sense that we want a negotiated settlement, some sort of two-state solution. Of course we want the suicide bombings to end. But we also want the building of that monstrous wall to cease. And we want to recognise the immense efforts of those, on both sides of the fence – of the wall, of the political abyss - who've spent their lives trying to negotiate a workable and equitable solution.

I've known Ashrawi for many years. The last time we spoke she'd just celebrated her daughter's marriage, the festivities clouded by the explosions of Israeli missiles. Her response was characteristically measured and modulated. She has, after all, spent a lifetime in the firing line, working as a top negotiator between her people and the Israelis, within the maelstrom of Palestinian politics. I've had dealings with hundreds of the most prominent people in public life, not only in Australia but across the world. Their ranks have included quite a few who have won the Nobel Peace Prize. But I've met few I admire as much as Ashrawi.

Now there are attempts to deny her the Australian Peace Prize. First the University of Sydney was cowed into slamming the door of the Great Hall in her face. Then it was Sydney Town Hall , with Lord Mayor Lucy Turnbull's behaviour, calling into question not only her courage but her judgment.

Which brings us to Sydney councillor Kathryn Greiner's attack on the Sydney Peace Foundation, which she'd chaired for four years. Her attempts to have the award to Ashrawi overturned were uncharacteristically craven.

Yesterday, Foreign Minister Alexander Downer bought into the issue, tut-tutting Ashrawi's award. Odd, given that the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade paid for Ashrawi to attend, and address, the Festival of Ideas in Adelaide .

Everyone, it seems, is running scared. At least NSW Premier Bob Carr has refused to back off. Equally admirable, the behaviour of Stuart Rees, director of the SPF.

As a consequence of their bitter experiences over the centuries, Jews have stood at the forefront of human rights and civil rights issues across the world. To be so wrong-headed on this occasion is, therefore, doubly disappointing.

The campaign smacks of an attack on free speech in this country and, yes, on free assembly. And it plays right into the hands of the true anti-Semites.

Editor, NZ Listener ( Sept 13, 2003 – not published).

[Original grammar retained]

Where was K R Bolton during the 1939-46 [sic] conflict did he witness the rounding up of the German Jews, spend nights in an airraid shelter, experience the constant daily bombardment or hounded by the odd lethal “doodlebug” did he witness the air battles whereby hundreds of airmen were shot to hell or meet them minus their faces?

Britain being unprepared didn’t start that war or threaten Europe Hitler did both and his ranting and ravings had to be heard to be believed. Chamberlain came back to Britain with a peace treaty but Hitler had other ideas.

It appears that Bolton is quite happy to fashion history without the basic facts, suggest he reads Churchill’s publications (6 vols) “The Second World War” and Stephen H Roberts book “The House that Hitler built”, Roberts was granted study leave from Sydney University from Nov 35-Mar 37, his sin was to sum-up the New Germany without any prejudice except his approach was that of a democratic individualist – his findings were more than disturbing..

Perhaps Bolton is disgruntled that Germany lost the war and Hitler being such a kind and clever man, then perhaps it is a pity so many innocent NZs {sic] lost their lives so that he could live in freedom, had Hitler been successful the Japanese would be ruling NZ minus the white man and the Maori Battalion.

Finally – having spent my youth in the woman’s’ section of the Royal Artillery in the centre of London I take a dim view of Bolton ’s odd history lesson.

What Churchill did in his spare time was his business and I never saw him drunk on the job.

Count you blessings son. I B…. Feilding (sic) , New Zealand

______

Mr Bolton

I thought you may be interested to hear my side of the story – at least I was THERE!

The Listener declined to publish it! Pity

------------

An Open Letter to the War Generation

K R Bolton , P. O. Box 1627

Paraparaumu Beach , NZ.

10 November 2003

Mrs B, Fielding

Dear Mrs B

Thanks for your letter.

You assume I “wasn’t there”. How would you know? True, I wasn’t. However, neither am I a youngster. I have seen enough of society, as well as read sufficient history and talked to many people who “were there”, to know that our nation and Western Civilisation generally have taken a wrong turn. This downward cycle of decay is thanks largely to decisions made in regard to Hitler and the World War that was contrived against him.

That our present plight has continued and shows no signs other than the eclipse of Western Civilisation and the white man in favour of a World Dictatorship, is also thanks partly due to your generation which has never grown up out of the bilge it was taught when you were all told what to think about Hitler and Germany.

What did your generation bequeath to subsequent generations? The immediate post-war result was the maintenance of the orthodox debt banking system which Hitler rebelled against, and which itself largely explains why war was declared against him. Communism was spread halfway across Europe .. The Jews were elevated into the most Holy People status, who cannot be criticised, no matter what crimes they commit, including their disproportionate involvement in Stalin’s NKVD torture and murder squads. The British and all other European empires, indebted to NY Jewish banking houses, were obliterated, to be replaced by the American-Jewish Dollar empire that now rules the world. Our youth is drugged and alienated, without ideals or responsibility. Sentiments such as patriotism, nationalism, heroism and chivalry and the traditional roles of women, the family and motherhood are scorned as “old fashioned”. Even Winston Peters is smeared as a “fascist” because he articulates a vaguely nationalistic policy.

In regard to my “not being there”, interestingly, I had several calls of support in response to my Listener letter, both from the war generation, and at least one of whom “was there”. I have also known a few war veterans who came back from the war regretting that they had fought Hitler (and Mussolini), saying that even among the ruins of those two briefly great nations they could see the achievements of National Socialism and Fascism. Unlike most in the RSA, these few returned servicemen spent the rest of their lives vainly trying to wake people up to the way the post-war world was being pushed further into debt slavery and the “New World Order” dictatorship we are now living under, and which you call “freedom”. I have also known Europeans who “were there” under the German occupation, whose memories of the Germans are far different from the tripe we are told.

You say I didn’t see the rounding up of German Jews. Experience the aerial bombardments, the deaths of many heroic airmen etc. Please spare me the moral double standard. German Jews were rounded up as enemy aliens, since their own leaders publicly declared “war” on Hitler the very year he achieved Government, 1933, at a time when there were few restrictions put on Jews. The Jews, under Samuel Untermeyer organised a world economic boycott to try and wreck Germany economically. Jews and their communist allies organised boycotts of shops that sold Germany goods. People were beaten up by Jewish-communist thugs if they tried to resist. You must have seen that in England at the time?

Rounding up “enemy aliens” was practised by every belligerent nation. In New Zealand , Germans, Japanese and Italians were put on Sommes Island . But what is really odd is that the NZ authorities (and presumably the other Allied powers) also rounded up and confined German JEWS as “enemy aliens”. How bizarre is that? How much more extreme than the Germans and Italians.

The practice can be traced to the Anglo-Boer war, which your mother country fought to maintain the diamond and gold monopoly of Rothschild, Beit and Barnato, while the Afrikaners only sought freedom to live their own way. This freedom they never did get. They simply could not be left alone by an empire which – however laudable the heroism of the soldier and the honesty of the civil servant – too often served the interests of Jews such as Rothschilds and Sassoon (recall the Opium Wars fought by your country to maintain Sassoon’s opium trade in China ?). Do you not know that during the Anglo-Boer war the British established concentration camps for the sole purpose of confining Boer women and children? Over 20,000 of these women and children died of typhus and malnutrition in these camps. When do we ever hear of this genocide? We only hear of the Jews, who also died of typhus and malnutrition, thanks partly due to the Allied bombing of German supply lines. Odd isn’t it that when the Germans were evacuating the so-called extermination camps they gave the Jewish inmates a choice of staying behind and waiting for their “Soviet liberators”, yet most chose to flee with the Germans, including the professional Holocaust survivor, Simon Wiesenthal.

As for “rounding up” your Government rounded up without charge or trial under Reg. 18B, 1000 of its own citizens (many, perhaps most, World War I vets) and threw them into jails and camps, some in such conditions that they died prematurely. Some of those incarcerated were arrested whilst on active service.

As for the aerial bombings that scared you… Ever heard about what happened to Dresden and Hamburg and a dozen other German cities –undefended, open cities? They were firebombed. The heat was so intense a fire-storm would result. People would literally melt into the pavement. After the British had bombed Dresden , crammed with refugees from Eastern Europe fleeing the Red Army – American fighters shot anyone who moved – children, mothers with babies… That was a real “holocaust” in a literal sense.

I suppose you will tell me (or yourself) that Hitler initiated the bombing of civilians during the war? WRONG. It was initiated by the British. John Speight, principal secretary of the Air Ministry, admitted this after the war, so don’t harp back that it is German propaganda.

You state that Britain didn’t start the war or threaten Europe . You must have a short memory. Britain declared war on Germany . It cynically offered Poland a guarantee of military protection knowing full well that it couldn’t fulfil such a promise. But the result was achieved; war against Hitler, at the cost of millions of European lives, and the destruction of much of Europe ’s culture. Hitler was involved in negotiations with Poland over the return of Danzig and Memel (German districts handed over to Poland after World War I). Do you have the foggiest idea how the German ethnic minority in Poland was being treated by fanatical Polish chauvinists, who had their own territorial ambitions on Germany ? Hundreds of elderly farmers, whole families, mothers, babies, little children, were being murdered and mutilated by armed Poles.

Of course you’ll say that there were no such atrocities, just German propaganda to justify Hitler’s invasion. Well, Germany invited journalists and forensic experts from neutral countries to examine the mass graves. The same method of neutral verification was soon afterwards again undertaken when the Germans found that the entire Polish leadership stratum had been killed by the Soviet Army and buried at Katyn. Your British Foreign Office was still claiming until quite recently that this was a German atrocity, even after the Russians had admitted responsibility! Churchill and Roosevelt knew who was responsible but kept it from their people.

Once the British had made their bogus promise to protect Poland , the Poles called off all negotiations with Germany . The genocide against the German ethnic peasant families in Poland continued. Poland was the first to mobilise its armed forces against Germany . When the German army stood at the outskirts of Warsaw , the Polish Government even then refused to surrender. Hitler warned that Warsaw was to be bombarded. He asked the Polish Government to evacuate civilians. The Polish Government refused. And it is Hitler who is called the war criminal! When the USSR attacked Poland and took half the nation, why didn’t Britain and France declare war on the USSR ? After the war, at Yalta , the USSR was handed half of Europe . What happened to the moral humbug about the “rights of small nations”? Churchill would not even allow the Free Polish Army to participate in the victory parade in London .

And how did this “victory” end? Communism triumphed over half of Europe . Alien Jews got dumped on Palestine , backed by the USSR . The Zionists conducted an IRA style terrorist campaign against the British mandate authorities, and even murdered one of their own wartime saviours, Count Bernadotte, the UN envoy.

The Red Army raped its way across Europe , not only ravishing German women, but Hungarian, Polish… Millions of women were raped by the Soviet Army. How many were raped by the Germans? Even the arch anti-Nazi journalist William Shirer admits in his Rise and Fall of the Third Reich as to the correct behaviour of German soldiers towards those they conquered.

The USA inaugurated the Morgenthau Plan, named after the Jewish US Secretary of the Treasury, Henry Morgenthau Jnr., and devised primarily by his assistant Harry Dexter White, another Jewish communist later exposed as a Soviet spy. Did your rulers ever tell you about the Morgenthau Plan? It was the blueprint for the Allied occupation of Germany . German industry was dismantled and shipped en mass to the USSR . Agricultural production was forcibly cut. The aim was to starve Germans into extinction, like Stalin’s Jewish commissar Kaganovich had starved millions of Ukrainian peasants to death. For several years after the war Germans were deliberately kept on a ration the calories of which were insufficient to sustain health. Millions died. Just like millions of ethnic Germans died when they were forcibly rounded up from their centuries old ancestral homelands in Eastern Europe and put on a forced long march back to Germany . Several million German POW’s died of contrived malnutrition AFTER the war, in Eisenhower’s concentration camps. This has quite recently been exposed by Canadian journalist James Bacque in his book Other Losses. Millions of innocent, defeated Germans were exterminated AFTER the war by the Allies and the USSR , yet we only hear fictitious blather about the supposed “Holocaust”. Why? Whose interests are still being served after all this time? Think!

In Poland , under Communist rule, concentration camps were set up for Germans still left behind. They were totally brutalised, mainly by Jewish commissars. This fact is related by Jewish author John Sack in his book An Eye for An Eye. Sack has been dammed by his fellow Jews. One of the worst commissars was Solomon Morel who is now an Israeli citizen. The Polish Government wants him returned from Israel to face criminal proceedings. Israel refuses to extradite him, citing statute of limitations. The same applies to other Jewish communist torturers resident in Israel , wanted in Lithuania and Latvia for war crimes. Yet, the Zionists hunt down any elderly German or other European who fought against communism, they can get their claws onto. One old man was extradited on a stretcher from the USA to the USSR where he was shot, because he had fought with the Germans against Stalin, like millions of other Europeans of all nationalities. One Polish retiree, Frank Wallus, had his savings and health wrecked, trying to prove he was a young Polish farm worker during the war; not an SS officer. Innocent old people continue to be harassed, and even when travelling bands of perjured Jewish witnesses are proven to have lied under oath, they are never brought to justice.

The only reason the genocidal Morgenthau Plan was abandoned was that it was having a disastrous impact upon the post-war reconstruction of the rest of Europe . Churchill’s own plan was to drop anthrax bombs on Germany . Do you have any idea what anthrax is like? If this had taken place, Germany would still be uninhabitable. The bombs were being manufactured. However, it was decided that the war would be over via conventional means by the time sufficient anthrax bombs were manufactured. Did your wartime masters ever tell you about that?

So what was Hitler’s “crime”. And why is he still being demonised, even though his alleged “war crimes ”have now been shown to have been inventions of Allied war propaganda (of the type that told Britons during World War I about the bayoneting of Belgium babies and the crucifixion of Canadian soldiers, etc.). Why is he still so feared?

It is because he inaugurated a new form of government that was based on the folkish community, where “the common interest {comes} before self-interest”? Youth were given a sense of purpose, were clean living, worked at a stretch of Labour Service regardless of class or family wealth. Even William Shirer remarked on the callow, unhealthy English youth, in comparison to the healthy vigour of German youth. Workers and management worked together, and Marxist class war was finished. Few communists and others who had for years opposed Hitler landed up in camps. Most converted to National Socialism, because they saw the social justice they were fighting for actually coming to life under National Socialism, whereas Marxism only gave the workers theories. The arts were subsidised so workers could attend the opera and orchestral performances, at a time when culture flowered as never before or since. I’m damned if my wife and I can afford to go to orchestral performances, other than the free ones sometimes put on by students. Yet German workers could do this 70 years ago thanks to Hitler. Holidays were subsidised for workers to go on luxury cruises. One such cruise liner specifically built by the Labour Front for workers was the Wilhelm Gustlof, which was at the close of the war sank as it conveyed wounded whilst serving as a Red Cross ship.

How did Hitler make Germany a prosperous nation, find work for 6,000,000 unemployed, until there was a labour shortage, whilst the rest of the world languished in depression? Rearmament you’ll say. Nonsense. According to A J P Taylor, hardly a pro-German historian (Origins of the Second World War), Germany wasn’t even on a total war economy until several years into the war, and well after the Allied states. Hitler reformed the financial system. Under NZ’s First Labour Government of the 1930s State Housing was built with 1% loans from the Reserve Bank. Hitler used similar methods but on a grander scale. The state issued credit at low interest. Couples could get low interest loans for mortgages, which were further decreased with the birth of each child, so that couples could actually have their low interest debt totally cancelled within a short time.

The German financial system broke away from the international banking system. Germany instituted barter in trade. Germany was capturing new markets in South America , e.g., away from Britain and the USA . The financial system was described in Sir Henry Kelliher’s popular 1930s home journal The Mirror. Kelliher was a highly regarded businessman and on the board of the BNZ. He was a lifelong monetary reformer. The First Labour Government even paid him tribute for the work he’d done to bring about a Labour Government, which had committed itself to financial reform, albeit one it largely reneged on, causing the resignation of the great Labour politician John A Lee. Kelliher published the truth about Germany in his popular magazine. I have copies of the articles. Germany was made economically self-sufficient - autarky. It was no longer enslaved to international finance.

Other nations and statesmen have tried that. The American colonists tried to issue colonial scrip and the colonies became prosperous without having to borrow from the usurers who controlled the Bank of England. The bankers responded by forcibly wrecking the value of the scrip, which threw the colonies into depression. The consequence was the American Revolution against the bankers, as clearly stated by Ben Franklin. Abraham Lincoln tried to finance the civil war with the Lincoln Greenbacks; this also caused consternation among the international bankers. Kennedy started issuing state currency that was not issued by Federal Reserve, which is controlled by the international bankers. Guernsey adopted a similar system, as did the Austrian town of Woergl , which became prosperous during the depression but was made to stop. Many have tried. Hitler did, and created a prosperous, happy nation in the midst of a world depression; something the international bankers could not allow.

Now we have a post-war world gone to ruin. Our youth, in particular, is being corrupted by the lack of heroes and role models, other than drugged and doped music and movie ‘stars’. Everyone is out for themselves, all dance around the golden calf. Jesus drove the moneychangers out of the Temple . The Pharisees had Him crucified. Hitler drove the moneychangers from the German nation. The descendants of the same Pharisees had him crucified, and are still doing so. In fact, the same criminal gang who thinks they’ve been ‘chosen’ to rule the world is crucifying our whole Western Civilisation.

The same criminal gang who decided that the British and the other European empires were no longer necessary for their purposes. Remember when after the war, Britain was heavily indebted to the NY bankers, Roosevelt reminded Churchill that the post-war world has “no use for reichs”, meaning all the old European colonial empires were to be destroyed in favour of the Jewish American Imperium? The stupid Churchill at one point said to his boss Roosevelt, “I believe you’re trying to do away with the British Empire .” How different that was from Hitler’s attitude towards the British Empire , which he viewed as one of the great sources of stability in the world. Hitler’s foreign policy aims always included an alliance with Britain , as stated in Mein Kampf. He stated to his generals that he would offer German soldiers for the protection of the empire in exchange for recognition of territorial aims in Eastern Europe , which after all was not in Britain ’s sphere of interest. That is why he spared the British army at Dunkirk , holding back his tanks whilst the British evacuated. Hitler foolishly hoped that some among the British Government were men of honour whom he could deal with. He offered generous peace terms many times while he had the upper hand. I know you don’t believe me, because it’s not part of the “official storyline”; but it is cited by British military historians of the calibre of J F C Fuller and Lidell Hart. Now what do we have? Is the USA with its pseudo-culture really a worthy successor to the great nations of Europe with its heritage of High Culture?

I am no Hitlerite. But I do know what is leftover war propaganda when I see it, and I do know that our world is still very much suffering from the consequences of that war. For example,. it was anti-Hitler propaganda which obscured the German discovery of the link between tobacco and cancer. How many lives could have been saved had this information not been buried under anti-Hitlerism? Hitler had public health policies we are now only beginning to talk about, and fools such as Peter Dunne refer to “health nazis”.

You say that it is a pity the Listener did not publish your letter. But what new insights are you trying to teach? What have you learned over the decades that is anything other than the same banal, hypocritical tripe that has been forced fed on us on a daily basis for the past 60 plus years. Do you realise that this Germanophobia is still agitating British children to abuse German youngsters when they visit Britain ? Remember the little boy on Stewart Island who didn’t want to go to school because of the anti-German taunts? (Holmes show).

Shame on you madam, and do not presume to know what I have seen or understand. Give some manner of repentance, for your generation has cost my generation and others dearly.

Yours sincerely

K R Bolton

Please regard this as an open letter, although I will of course eliminate you own details, to preserve your privacy, should I circulate it elsewhere. -