Newsletter 246

                                                                                                                              ISSN 1440-9828
                                                                                  May 2005
                                                                                           No 246

German New Medicine® Die Germanische Neue Medizin®

Dr. med. Ryke Geerd Hamer

has been persecuted by the German government for decades. He is currently in a French prison.

Send a postcard to:

Dr Geerd Ryke Hamer

N° d’ écrou: 334750 D 5

Maison d' arrêt de Fleury-Mérogis

7, avenue des Peupliers

Ste. Généviève des Bois

France

The GERMAN NEW MEDICINE® was discovered in 1981 by Dr. Ryke Geerd Hamer, MD.

Dr. Hamer’s research began in 1979 after the tragic loss of his son Dirk (see Biography). Shortly after Dirk’s death, Dr. Hamer was diagnosed with cancer. Since he had never been seriously ill, he assumed that the development of his cancer could be directly related to the traumatic event he had experienced. At that time Dr. Hamer was head internist of a cancer clinic at the University of Munich, Germany. It was there that he began to systematically study his patients regarding the causes, development and healing process of their cancers. What he discovered was revolutionary!

Dr. Hamer found that every DISEASE originates from an unexpected shock experience. He established that such a sudden shock affects not only the psyche, but impacts at the same time (visible on a brain scan) the part of the brain that corresponds biologically to the specific trauma. Whether the body responds to the unexpected event with a tumor growth (cancer), with tissue degeneration, or with functional loss, is determined by the exact type of conflict shock. So far, Dr. Hamer has been able to confirm these discoveries with over 40,000 case studies. Since HEALING can only occur after the conflict has been resolved, the German New Medicine therapy focuses on identifying and resolving the original shock.

Dr. Hamer is the first to prove scientifically that cancer, for example, is not as previously thought a senseless proliferation of deadly cancer cells but rather the result of a Meaningful Special Biological Program of Nature that has been successfully practiced for millions of years of evolution.

The German New Medicine offers a completely new understanding of what we commonly call “diseases”. By understanding the Five Natural Laws that Dr. Hamer discovered, we become free from the fear and panic that often come with the onset of an illness. Truly, a gift to humanity!

THERAPEUTIC MEASURES in the GERMAN NEW MEDICINE® requires common sense

Introduction

Applying common sense would be so simple, so fulfilling, so adequately in tune with the patient’s needs and an important mainstay of professional medical practice. But what seems simple is often the most difficult task to accomplish. It should be remembered that through the ages, our ancestors usually selected the wisest (in terms of common sense) individuals to serve as doctors, sorcerers and medicine men; a person being familiar with the highs and lows of the human soul was considered ’knowing’.

According to the principles of the German New Medicine® (GNM), any therapeutic intervention in the treatment of cancer patients begins with explaining the context, helping the patient overcome his unsettling fear that “metastasizing cells“ are crawling around in his body, and explaining the pathogenesis and progression of his disease, something which he is most likely already aware of. The German New Medicine is diametrically opposed to the traditional medical therapies, including their more exotic fringe applications. In conventional medicine, the patient, the suffering being who endures his ailment, is usually subjected to the mere treatment of his symptoms, with surgery, radiation and chemotherapy, morphine, or else with bran, soy sprouts, mistletoe injections, red beets, right-turning milk bacteria, etc.

The Patient Role

This whole (non-)system has become obsolete. The patient now becomes an active "agent" in the treatment of his disease. He assumes responsibility for resolving a conflict, perhaps with some support, but basically he has to solve this conflict on his own. A real solution is certainly the best and the most viable, a definitive solution. There is no one-size-fits-all approach, no general recipe that may be applied in advance in order to achieve possible solutions. There are only potential ways of optimal resolution, and these differ from patient to patient. Of course, a real solution may not be possible for some conflicts – they require an intellectual approach. A spiritual or religious outlook can be helpful in achieving this, just as the support of a loving friend, after the motto: a shared pain is half the pain. Offering spiritual support in solving a conflict on an intellectual level has certainly been a central element of religion throughout the ages. Based on the principles of the German New Medicine, we can only tell the patient about different ways to resolve his situation. Ultimately, however, it is up to the patient, and up to him alone, which way he chooses. In other words, the patient manages his own therapy, but always assisted by his physician if complications arise.

Yet, a patient going back and forth between the beliefs of standard medicine and the concept of the German New Medicine will feel like being continuously doused with hot and cold showers. Already affected by his ailment, the patient will not keep up his defense for very long. The mere mention of a cancer diagnosis or the term “generalized metastasis“ will propel him into an abyss of utter helplessness. For most patients, the common assumption that a cancer will continue to grow constitutes a death sentence, or an assumed death sentence. Being torn between hope and panic, between activity and passivity, is therefore a catastrophic situation for the patient. Alternating between these “hot and cold showers“ brings on the worst complications.

Complications

There are a number of complications which may also occur during the healing phase. They include not only the reparative processess in the brain, but also the body’s repair mechanisms targeting the cancerous growth. This is a normal occurrence in all reparative process taking place during the vagotonia phase after a so-called disease, such as hepatitis or influenza. The patient perceives it as completely acceptable to be tired and lacking energy for several weeks, or, in the case of hepatitis, for several months. However, a patient suffering from hepatitis during the healing phase, who is tired and worn-out despite feeling well otherwise, will tend to think that this is not normal. Many patients who were still up and about throughout their active cancer disease (sympathicotonus) now become so tired during the ensuing vagotonia that their seeming frailty forces them to stay in bed. Every cancer patient has to learn that this stage is good and desired, that it is, in fact, the optimal stage. A patient who has fractured a bone, for example, will expect to experience pain while the fracture heals. He is told that the broken bone has to regenerate by forming callus cells, and sometimes this hurts. This is basically similar in patients with osteolytic lesions. The osteolysis has to recalcify, the tissue surrounding the bone becomes markedly swollen, and this process is sometimes accompanied by severe pain, especially in the vertebrae, when the foramina intervertebralia (small openings between the vertebrae) are compressed and pushed on the lumbar spine’s neural structures. The pain is almost intolerable in many patients. However, a patient knowing that the pain is part and parcel of the healing process ultimately leading to bone recalcification, will be much better prepared to tolerate this pain. Achieving vagotonia in the healing phase after a state of sympathicotonia in the conflict active phase is like welcoming rain drenching a barren land.

At this point the body’s repair process sets in, not only in the brain lesion caused by the conflict, but throughout the entire body all the “leftover“ or “delayed“ tasks are now being carried out and completed. A previous inflammation, for example, will flare up; bleeding, previously at a minimum level, increases; and weight that was lost is now regained. "Malignant tumors" or necroses are repaired, recalcified, and decomposed by microbes in the body. However, as much as these responses are normal and desired, they may result in complications, such as in bleeding, or swelling caused by the edema, leading to impaired vital functions (e.g. diphtheria impairing the airways, a bronchial carcinoma the bronchia, or a carcinoma the bile ducts). No complication must therefore be underestimated.

We distinguish between two types of complications: those occurring in the conflict-active phase (such as disorders arising in a diabetic patient) and those occurring during the healing phase. On the cerebral level, most complications arise during the healing phase when the brain edema, causing pressure on the brain, forms as a sign of healing. At this point everything possible needs to be done to prevent the patient from falling into a coma. In less severe cases coffee, tea, fructose, vitamin C, Coca-Cola or an icepack applied to the head, just as in the olden days, are helpful measures. Of all patients in the healing phase, between 60 and 70 % do not require medication. However, the decision to refrain from administering drugs should only be made once a brain scan has clearly shown that this is not necessary. We can learn a lot from Mother Nature: an animal in the healing phase naturally keeps quiet, sleeps a lot and waits calmly until it reaches a state of normotonia. During this healing phase, no animal with a brain edema would expose itself to direct sunlight because it instinctively knows that the sun would do more harm than good. Cool compresses applied to the hot spot of the brain lesion (Hamer focus) are recommended, especially at night, the vagotonic rest period of the normal day-night-rhythm. Patients in the healing phase suffer most during the night, until 3 or 4 in the morning when the organism switches over to the day rhythm. My experience has shown that 95% of patients survive these complications. As for the remaining 5%, this number could most likely be reduced further, and the critical point passed, through intensive care treatment of patients, in particular those suffering from complications in the brain.

If we know now that practically all cancer diseases will result in cerebral symptoms after the conflict resolution – the patient will now calmly and readily accept temporary headaches, vomiting, dizziness or double vision, etc. as healing symptoms and he will no longer be thrown into fits of panic. In most cases, everything will pass without serious consequences.

Physicians have to regard the many possible complications that could arise just as in any other “disease“: a task to be dealt with. We must remind ourselves constantly, what is the use if the patient doesn’t die from the cancer itself but from a complication that prophylactic care could have prevented? Death is final. Almost all the patients who have come to see me were those labeled as hopeless cases by traditional medicine. And I was forced to see many patients succumb to their illness, patients whom I could no longer help at that point and with the primitive means available to me because my former colleagues chose not to support me. Many of these patients should not have had to die. I am convinced that if only some of my former peers, in particular colleagues specializing in neurosurgery and intensive care, contributed their expertise, we would be able to manage these complications in a very short time.

Therapeutic Measures

Therapeutic measures in the GNM happens on 3 levels (see “Steps of GNM Therapy):

Psychological level: practical psychological therapy, based on common sense approaches

Brain level: progress observation and therapy of cerebral complications

Organ level: therapy of organic complications

When initiating therapy, we must keep in mind that everything happening in the organism happens simultaneously and in a synchronized fashion. Under no circumstances should we be tempted to divide the German New Medicine into subspecialties, with someone taking care of the soul, another the brain, and the third the organs. As a rule, we must distinguish between the conflict active phase - (ca phase) and the healing phase (post-conflictolysis, pcl phase). If the individual is still experiencing an active conflict, the conflict shock or DHS must be determined in order to know the maximum conflict duration, the conflict content and its manifestation in the organs. Moreover, it is very important to identify the conflict progress, in particular its intensity, in order to assess the conflict mass properly.

It is equally important to find out whether the patient is left- or right-handed, and what his current hormone status is: for example, is the female patient sexually mature or has she entered menopause, or does she take contraceptives. The same applies, mutatis mutandis, to male patients.

Conflict Resolution

Resolutions for the conflicts - must be found together with the patient. The better developed the therapist’s intuition and the more pronounced his common sense, the easier it will be to assist the patient in finding a practical real or intellectual solution to the conflict. In my opinion, a conflict solution chosen by the patient seems to be the most beneficial because he will thoroughly agree with it. The patient will only be able to surmount his panic conflict if he is calmed down and reassured, just as any animal will overcome his panic as soon as it feels or sees its den, nest, mother, herd, pack, other animals, etc. Sedatives of any kind only distort the overall picture and might bear the risk of turning an acute active conflict into a subacute, hanging conflict. Any type of agitation is also very dangerous and to be avoided because disturbing or unsettling events, as trivial as they may be, could escalate and trigger a new conflict or a conflict relapse at any time.

When the patient’s conflict has been resolved, carrying out a brain CT scan as soon as possible is important since the imminent epileptoid crisis may trigger a complication which should be assessed in advance. In the case of a territorial loss conflict, the potential of an imminent heart attack may thus be estimated, give or take 14 days, if the time of the conflict resolution and the brain CT scan findings are known. Appropriate counter-measures can then be applied, if necessary. However, there are some types of conflicts which must not be resolved.

SURGERY in the GNM should only be considered if deemed appropriate, e.g. if the natural spontaneous healing process would take too long and result in severe consequences for the patient. For example, a female patient’s breast may have been damaged to the point where the continued biological course would no longer be psychologically acceptable to the patient.

A treatment with MEDICATION is not only a domain of traditional medicine; in the GNM, however, the use of drugs is restricted to alleviating or preventing complications arising during the natural healing process. We do not use medication to treat cancer, in contrast to a so-called chemotherapy approach, which is nothing short of exorcism. You may ask me, well, what exactly is the therapy treatment of a cancer disease?

A wise, charismatic physician will know right away what I mean. Just ask a mother how she handles her child’s sadness. Surprised by this question, she will reply that she does not know how, but that she has always managed to comfort her child and make it happy. Similarly, I cannot supply tried and true rules on how to approach a patient on a “psychotherapeutic“ level, and I can do so even less in terms of therapy treatments for a patient’s family, his supervisor, work colleagues or his neighbours to make them “play along“, especially if they are part of the conflict. We do not only treat the patient, but the persons in his environment must always be encouraged to participate as well. If not, the patient cannot be helped. It is practically a matter of the treating physician’s skill and tact. But often, and God is my witness, the relatives of the uncle, brother-in-law or father are not even interested in keeping the patient alive and possibly further delaying the whole “inheritance business“. This is where therapy truly has its limits!

There is no need for panic in the GNM. Very few successive conflicts, especially panic conflicts, are triggered because the patient, having understood its principles right from the start or even better, before his disease occurred, will react very calmly to the predictable symptoms, in particular to those encountered during the healing phase. He knows that, contrary to common assumptions, that they do not constitute diseases. The patient knows that every single process is part of a meaningful special biological program activated by Mother Nature for his own benefit.

The patient will be able to understand what happens and why it must happen and he will know that 95% of patients treated with the GNM will survive. Certainly, many of us will at one time or another experience a new conflict and suffer a new “cancer“, but this is normal, part of life, and not such a bad thing once you have understood the principles of the German New Medicine.

Some patients might be doubtful in view of the fact that the GNM therapy approach does not embrace traditional medical (dis-)beliefs. However, the comprehension of GNM principles logically dictates to a large degree what type of therapy should be used.

GNM therapy comes as close as possible to what we regard biologically sound for humans and animals alike. It is not a “medicine that can be swallowed“ – as was aptly described by a former patient. This does not mean, of course, that we do not employ medication if we find it useful and good for the patient. In fact, all medication with a positive symptomatic effect should be used for the benefit of the patient, but only after asking ourselves first if the doctor would prescribe it to his own wife.

Dr. med. Mag. theol.

Ryke Geerd HAMER

AMICI DI DIRK

Ediciones de la Nueva Medicina, S.L.

Camino Urique, 69

Tlf. 952 59 59 10 – Fax: 952 49 16 97

Apdo. de Correos 209

29120 – ALHAURIN EL GRANDE

The beginning of spring

March 20/21, 2005

Dear Friends of the German New Medicine:

This letter should have been one of joy, one celebrating life outside the walls of this concentration camp from which I was supposed to be released yesterday, March 19, 2005 {link to letter 15-03-05}. At the last minute, the authorities “changed their mind“. The prison administration had told me three times that I would definitely be released on Saturday, March 19, 2005. I suspect that they are trying one last time to force me into a conditional release, as they have done on March 3rd at 4:30 in the early morning. The situation is becoming increasingly precarious and quite unbearable for the French – if I don’t sign a paper saying

a) that I am guilty

b) that my detention was legally justified

c) and accepting several other conditions: not to leave France for 7 years, no longer talk about GNM, put up “bail“ of €150,000 …

Signing the paper would mean that the first instance were “in the bag“, I would have “served“ the sentence (9 months minus one fourth = 6 months) plus 3 weeks, this would bring us to March 30, meaning that I should be released by the middle of next week at the latest. But even this would only be justified with my signature because the Cour de Cassation will decide that the whole trial, even the verdict of the first instance (which I have already “served“) were illegal. This means that on March 31 I would begin serving the sentence for the even more illegal second instance.

The French are loosing it. Cost it what it may, they are dead set on forcing a conditional release. And they were so sure because nobody has ever refused a conditional release. I don’t know if the Cour de Cassation will still schedule a hearing on the German New Medicine. My lawyer is expecting to be summoned to the Cour de Cassation any day now. The second lawyer for the Cour, Neuer, seems to have conveniently “met his maker“. He had it let slip that the whole French justice system was corrupt. Apparently his “brotherlings“ didn’t like that very much. Shame on him who thinks this evil! It seems he never woke up, they found him in his bed, dead. But despite this little hitch – it can’t be long now. On the last few steps before the finish line, the crocuses have overtaken me: Good for our GNM. My friends, everyone knows now that the German New Medicine can’t be stopped.

On May 14 and 15 Madrid, Spain will be hosting a congress on cancer with representatives of alternative medicine and organized by Spain’s largest medical journal. I was supposed to chair this event. Many doctors will be there to nominate a „self-proclaimed magic healer and quack“ for the Nobel Prize, an award I never wanted. However, given the current circumstances, I must contemplate with my German friends whether it is not time to fulfill my promise of waltzing with the devil’s grandmother in hell if it is for the good of my patients.

Alas, you can see tremendous things are happening!

Even the many robbers (the “Meta”-gang and their Scientology cronies) won’t continue with their murky affairs to confuse and dilute the GNM, as it happens at the moment, even by alleged friends. All this will soon get settled and cleared up by itself.

The one thing I am looking forward to – as much as you – is the fact that no more patients will be killed by chemotherapy. I am absolutely certain that we will succeed together before long. And then even the gutter press which, for 24 years, has made a united front and torn us apart, won’t be able to touch us!

For now I thank you all for your selfless support. Without you and your help – practical, mental and financial – I most certainly could not have made it it Europe’s most awful gulag! Let the crocuses bloom!

Long live the German New Medicine!

May it grow and blossom in our hearts, just as the crocuses of spring!

With my warmest wishes at the arrival of spring

Your Ryke Geerd

P.S.

You can see, with all of you supporting me – and Dirk and my 999 female guardian angels – nothing can beat me!

Holocaust shame of FDR David Nason, New York correspondent, 11April 2005

Titled Call the Next Case, the plot had FDR summoned before the Bar of History to explain why he had done so little to try to save the Jews from Nazi extermination. The jury was 12 dead Jews from a death camp crematorium.

Hecht was part of a Zionist group that had urged immediate US action when the existence of Nazi killing centres such as Auschwitz became known in 1942. Despite a nationwide campaign, the group had only limited and all-too-late success.

Now, with the war almost ended and the full, unspeakable horror of the Nazi genocide becoming clear, Hecht wanted to embarrass FDR before the world by having his play performed in San Francisco during the opening session of the UN.

But as he wrote, Hecht's acid pen was interrupted by a faltering voice on the radio announcing that FDR had died. In the hours that followed, Hecht listened as tributes for the man he judged "a stranger to love and goodness" flooded in.

"No more tear-compelling eulogies had ever hit the nation since the death of Lincoln," Hecht would later write. "More than a president had died for them. Some of their own strength and hope had also gone out of the world."

Americans continue to revere FDR and tomorrow's 60th anniversary of his death will no doubt produce another of those orgies of patriotic reflection that are as much a part of the country as baseball and hot dogs.

Thousands of words will be devoted to how FDR saved the US from the Great Depression, reformed a rotten banking system, put the country back to work with his New Deal and created a social security safety net. And, of course, how he and the US won World War II.

Much less attention will be paid to the little FDR said about the Holocaust when, from 1942 on, he knew so much; how US immigration quotas for European Jews were deliberately left unfilled – sometimes by up to 90 per cent – by FDR's administration before and during the war; and how FDR's anti-Semitic State Department blocked rescue attempts of Jews while preventing the dissemination of Holocaust information at home.

[Birdman jbryant@lzy.net comment, April 11, 2005 5:58 PM: I have heard this before. If it is true, we need some explanation if we are to maintain -- as much evidence shows -- that FDR was Jewish and was eager to get America into the war for the sake of 'his people'. Perhaps the explanation is to be found in Zionism, which was willing to sacrifice fellow Jews for the sake of Israel, and was quite comfortable with the notion that emigrating Jews should either come to Israel or die. Can any of you historians out there give us some help on this important challenge to revisionism?]

And that's leaving out the biggest crime of all: the US War Department's repeated refusal to bomb the railway lines that took Jews into death camps such as Auschwitz or the gas chambers where thousands upon thousands of Jews were murdered daily.

The reason always given was that scarce resources could not be diverted from the primary task of defeating Hitler. Tragically, US planes were sent on missions to bomb factories not 10km from the Auschwitz horrors on several occasions but no one bothered to order a strike.

So why is it that such a significant aspect of FDR's presidency is so little recognised and why, during this 60th anniversary of the liberation of Hitler's death camps between February and May 1945, has US remembrance of the Holocaust been so muted?

According to Laurel Leff, author of a recent book on The New York Times's failure to properly report the Holocaust, the answer has as much to do with Jewish denial as anything else.

"The FDR issue is a very traumatic one for American Jews because so many were deeply devoted to him," Leff said yesterday. "FDR was the first president to care about Jews as a constituency group. He produced the policies that returned them to prosperity. In return they backed him all through the war.

"But when historians began uncovering the full story of the Holocaust it was very difficult for American Jews to assimilate the two. And it still is. Among Jews here there is still no clear consensus on FDR."

Leff says it is easier to understand the US's subdued reflection of the Holocaust, something that is hard to fathom for outsiders given the US obsession with the war on terror, the national insistence that September 11 represents one of history's most monstrous acts and the outpouring of emotion at last year's 60th anniversary of D-Day.

At the White House the Holocaust silence of President George W. Bush has been nothing short of extraordinary for someone always so ready to decry evil. In fact, Bush's actions have spoken louder than his words. In February he sent Vice-President Dick Cheney to join 30 world leaders in Poland for the 60th anniversary of the Red Army liberation of Auschwitz.

And last month, at the opening of the Yad Vasem Holocaust museum in Jerusalem, an occasion that drew the largest gathering of world leaders in Israel since the funeral of slain president Yitzhak Rabin in 1995, Bush didn't even bother to send someone from the administration. Instead he sent New York mayor Michael Bloomberg.

But rather than a sign of national shame over its Holocaust record, Leff thinks the US's indifference reflects the nation's insular and egocentric approach to its history.

"Americans like to be central to the story and to be the heroes," says Leff. "That's why last year's D-Day was so big. You had the 'Greatest Generation' thing happening and there was something easy to applaud.

"But the trouble with the liberation of the death camps is there are no heroes. Even the word liberation is a misnomer. What you have is piles of bodies and most of those left alive would die soon anyway.

"The Holocaust was really a failure of the democracies to understand ourselves as people and the depths of what we could do. But Americans find that hard to commemorate because there's this thing about being the heroes."

A concern that history books used in US schools might reflect precisely that mindset now has the David Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies planning a comprehensive review of such texts.

The institute already produces an annual report on Holocaust denial and has long been infused with a Hechtian determination for the truth to be better known about the US's shameful record in ignoring the plight of Europe's Jews.

According to institute director Rafael Medoff, a preliminary examination of two commonly used school texts "indicates the need for a more extensive survey".

He said one text failed to explain that early 20th century US immigration quotas discriminated against southern and eastern Europeans because they were predominately Jewish or Italian Catholics. "Moreover, there is no reference to the fact that the quotas blocked most European Jews from finding haven from Hitler," Dr Medoff said.

Another section referring to Hitler's rise to power in Germany during the 1930s speaks of the Nazi leader's use of propaganda to "whip up hatred towards various minority groups". "This passage does not acknowledge that the Jews were Hitler's target," Dr Medoff says.

Last month Dr Medoff attacked a new FDR biography that claimed the president would have ordered the bombing of the gas chambers had he realised the centralised nature of the Nazi exterminations.

"Historians long ago demonstrated that the president received detailed information on the extent and nature of the Nazi genocide well before the spring of 1944, when bombing was first considered," Dr Medoff said. "As David S. Wyman wrote in his Abandonment of the Jews, the era's most prominent symbol of humanitarianism turned away from one of history's most compelling moral challenges."

Or as Hecht, who never finished Call the Next Case, wrote in 1954 about his feelings the day FDR died: "In my mind his chief monument remained -- the dead Jews of Europe."

Former Yahoo chief cleared in Nazi case

A Paris appeals court on Wednesday cleared former Yahoo president Timothy Koogle of charges that he justified crimes against humanity by permitting the sale of Nazi objects on Yahoo's auction site.

Koogle, who left Yahoo in 2001, became interim chief executive of Internet company Friendster last year.

The legal battle started in May 2000, when France's Union of Jewish Students and the International Anti-Racism and Anti-Semitism League sued Yahoo for allowing Nazi memorabilia, including flags emblazoned with swastikas, to be sold on its auction pages.

The case led to a landmark ruling in France, with a court ordering Yahoo to bar access to the Nazi items and to remove related messages, images and literature from its site. Yahoo's French subsidiary, Yahoo France, now removes Nazi material from its site, in accordance with French law barring the sale of Nazi-related memorabilia. Yahoo would be subject to heavy fines for failing to comply with French law.

Yahoo in turn sued the French rights groups in U.S. court in December 2000, asking it to declare the French court's decision "not recognizable or enforceable in the United States." The Internet media company said that the French court's order violated its First Amendment rights.

Yahoo won that round, but a three-judge panel of the appeals court overturned the decision in August 2004. The panel ruled that U.S. courts cannot supersede orders from a foreign court when the foreign litigants have not brought the battle into the U.S. legal system.

----- Original Message -----

From: Filmer

To: info@adelaideinstitute.org ; jbryant@lzy.net

Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 1:34 AM

Subject: ANSWER

IN mid-April, 1945, acclaimed Jewish author and screenwriter Ben Hecht was sitting at a desk in a California hotel room writing a one-act play around the proposition that US president Franklin Delano Roosevelt was complicit in Hitler's mass murder of European Jews.
Gents,
My comments in Blue. A Mass murder of European Jews is often claimed but NEVER once proven.
Hecht was part of a Zionist group that had urged immediate US action when the existence of Nazi killing centres such as Auschwitz became known in 1942. Despite a nationwide campaign, the group had only limited and all-too-late success. Now, with the war almost ended and the full, unspeakable horror of the Nazi genocide becoming clear, Hecht wanted to embarrass FDR before the world by having his play performed in San Francisco during the opening session of the UN.
The American Govt has enough files PROVING that there were NO killing centers (see article at the bottom of this mail)
Thousands of words will be devoted to how FDR saved the US from the Great Depression,reformed a rotten banking system, put the country back to work with his New Deal and created a social security safety net. And, of course, how he and the US won World War II.
Much less attention will be paid to the little FDR said about the Holocaust when, from 1942 on, he knew so much; how US immigration quotas for European Jews were deliberately left unfilled – sometimes by up to 90 per cent – by FDR's administration before and during the war; and how FDR's anti-Semitic State Department blocked rescue attempts of Jews while preventing the dissemination of Holocaust information at home.

[Birdman jbryant@lzy.net comment, April 11, 2005 5:58 PM:

I have heard this before. If it is true, we need some explanation if we are to maintain -- as much evidence shows -- that FDR was Jewish and was eager to get America into the war for the sake of 'his people'. Perhaps the explanation is to be found in Zionism, which was willing to sacrifice fellow Jews for the sake of Israel, and was quite comfortable with the notion that emigrating Jews should either come to Israel or die. Can any of you historians out there give us some help on this important challenge to revisionism?]
And that's leaving out the biggest crime of all: the US War Department's repeated refusal to bomb the railway lines that took Jews into death camps such as Auschwitz or the gas chambers where thousands upon thousands of Jews were murdered daily.
SEE ARTICLE BELOW
The reason always given was that scarce resources could not be diverted from the primary task of defeating Hitler. Tragically, US planes were sent on missions to bomb factories not 10km from the Auschwitz horrors on several occasions but no one bothered to order a strike.
BTW A NUMBER of Concentration Camps were bombed and thousands of prisoners were killed by Allied bombing raids. In Dora-Mittelbau only 24hrs before US Tanks arrived, an air attack killed 1700 prisoners. Buchenwald was hit a number of times so was Bergen -Belsen. Auschwitz was bombed but not seriously.
So why is it that such a significant aspect of FDR's presidency is so little recognised and why, during this 60th anniversary of the liberation of Hitler's death camps between February and May 1945, has US remembrance of the Holocaust been so muted?
According to Laurel Leff, author of a recent book on The New York Times's failure to properly report the Holocaust, the answer has as much to do with Jewish denial as anything else. "The FDR issue is a very traumatic one for American Jews because so many were deeply devoted to him," Leff said yesterday. "FDR was the first president to care about Jews as a constituency group. He produced the policies that returned them to prosperity. In return they backed him all through the war.
"But when historians began uncovering the full story of the Holocaust it was very difficult for American Jews to assimilate the two. And it still is. Among Jews here there is still no clear consensus on FDR."

At the White House the Holocaust silence of President George W. Bush has been nothing short of extraordinary for someone always so ready to decry evil. In fact, Bush's actions have spoken louder than his words. In February he sent Vice-President Dick Cheney to join 30 world leaders in Poland for the 60th anniversary of the Red Army liberation of Auschwitz.

And last month, at the opening of the Yad Vasem Holocaust museum in Jerusalem, an occasion that drew the largest gathering of world leaders in Israel since the funeral of slain president Yitzhak Rabin in 1995, Bush didn't even bother to send someone from the administration. Instead he sent New York mayor Michael Bloomberg.
But rather than a sign of national shame over its Holocaust record, Leff thinks the US's indifference reflects the nation's insular and egocentric approach to its history.

"Americans like to be central to the story and to be the heroes," says Leff. "That's why last year's D-Day was so big. You had the 'Greatest Generation' thing happening and there was something easy to applaud.

"But the trouble with the liberation of the death camps is there are no heroes. Even the word liberation is a misnomer. What you have is piles of bodies and most of those left alive would die soon anyway. AND Most of the bodies left lying around were caused as a direct result of Allied bombing hindering supply of food and medical supplies to the camps. In Buchenwald for example most of the bodies were residents of the city of Weimar that had been killed in the bombing and taken to the camp for cremation BECAUSE the bombing had also destroyed the crematories in the city itself.

"The Holocaust was really a failure of the democracies to understand ourselves as people and the depths of what we could do. But Americans find that hard to commemorate because there's this thing about being the heroes."

He said one text failed to explain that early 20th century US immigration quotas discriminated against southern and eastern Europeans because they were predominately Jewish or Italian Catholics. "Moreover, there is no reference to the fact that the quotas blocked most European Jews from finding haven from Hitler," Dr Medoff said.

Another section referring to Hitler's rise to power in Germany during the 1930s speaks of the Nazi leader's use of propaganda to "whip up hatred towards various minority groups". "This passage does not acknowledge that the Jews were Hitler's target," Dr Medoff says.

Last month Dr Medoff attacked a new FDR biography that claimed the president would have ordered the bombing of the gas chambers had he realised the centralised nature of the Nazi exterminations.

"Historians long ago demonstrated that the president received detailed information on the extent and nature of the Nazi genocide well before the spring of 1944, when bombing was first considered," Dr Medoff said. "As David S. Wyman wrote in his Abandonment of the Jews, the era's most prominent symbol of humanitarianism turned away from one of history's most compelling moral challenges." BULLSHIT

Or as Hecht, who never finished Call the Next Case, wrote in 1954 about his feelings the day FDR died: "In my mind his chief monument remained -- the dead Jews of Europe."

THE 'DEATH MARCHES'

THAT SAVED LIVES

In late 1944 with Soviet Forces rapidly advancing on Germany from the east, the German authorities in AMT D in Oranienburg that were responsible for the Concentration Camps, ordered the Camp Commandants in the countries east of Germany to gather as many prisoners as were mobile, issue them with rations, and evacuate them to camps in Germany.

With all available trucks and trains involved in the German defence against advancing Soviet forces, the SS were forced to march the prisoners West.
The Jewish Author Elie Wiesel who was a prisoner in Auschwitz at that time writes of how he, on getting ordered to prepare for evacuation, rushed to the Auschwitz Camp Hospital to make sure his sick father was not left to be liberated by the Russian forces but taken off on the 'death march' with the 'murderous SS'.   (Strange but true)

The Prisoners (and the SS) marched for days, freezing and with only the food they could carry, those that fell and could or would not go further , were shot. This sounds very callous but in reading that we need to keep in mind following;
a) These were Prisoners, many dangerous
b) Nobody could or would carry these people.
c) Being shot was probably a less callous form of death than being left to starve. freeze or be left to be 'liberated' by the Soviets they were fleeing.
These marches are today known as 'Death Marches' and the 'official' history books still tell us that the Nazis , forced these prisoners to march west because, even in the late stages of the war, they were not willing to do without their 'slave labourers'.

However, hidden away in the Archives of the Franklin D Roosevelt library in Hyde Park New York lies the true story of why these thousands of prisoners were marched off from Poland, Tschechoslovakia , Hungary etc to Germany.

The factual story of these so-called Death Marches shows the German Authorities did it, because it was 'requested' of them by the Allies.

In September 1944 the Polish Prime Minister in exile S. Mikolajczyk, on hearing that survivors of the Warsaw Rebellion were to be imprisoned in Auschwitz, began claiming that the "Beast" (as he called the Germans) was intending to murder all concentration camp prisoners before they retreated westwards.

On October 12th 1944 the German authorities, in an effort to quell the rumours, issued official Press Reports DENYING that they were murdering or intending to murder Prisoners in the Camps.

By November 1944 Jewish and Polish sources in London were pushing to have the Allied Airforces bomb Auschwitz.

On the 18th November 1944 Assistant Sec. of War Mr John J. McCloy wrote to Mr John K Pehle of the War Refugee Board explaining that the US Govt had decided NOT to bomb the camps because the bombing would require precision bombing and the aircraft needed for such bombing did not have the range capacity. The use of heavy bombers would endanger the prisoners unnecessarily.

In December 1944 the American Embassy in Bern (Switzerland) bought forward two 'intelligent Jewish Women' (US description) who had escaped one evacuation transport from Auschwitz and made it through to Switzerland, and these women had willingly testified to the Americans that the Germans were NOT murdering prisoners in Auschwitz, there were NO indiscriminate shootings and most of the deaths in the camps were caused by malnutrition, disease and illness.

On January 22 1945. German authorities reported to the Irish Dept of External Affairs that all rumours of 'mass exterminations' or murders were devoid of all foundation and they were actually trying to keep them alive.

The US Foreign Dept then contacted the German authorities through their consulates in Ireland and Switzerland and informed them that the USA had taken notice of this assurance, and expected that ALL inmates of all concentration and work camps be kept alive by the German authorities.
The only way the German authorities could keep this promise when retreating, was by evacuating the Prisoners west to Germany, and away from the Russians.

Unfortunately the German promise could not cover what foreign troops might do to the Prisoners, as was the case where the German authorities on their retreat, left Polish Militia Troops guarding Auschwitz Camp, and the Poles. on noticing the arrival of Russian Troops, set about shooting the remaining prisoners.

Source:   "Auschwitz und die Allierten'    von Dr.    A. Schickel.   85110 Dunsdorf   Ortstrasse 5.     1995

----- Original Message -----

From: <RePorterNoteBook@aol.com>

To: <undisclosed-recipients:>

Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 5:03 AM

Subject: Should asking questions be a crime? --The Case For Open Debate

The Case For Open Debate
Winter 2005

http://vho.org/Intro/GB/Flyer.html

Professor F. Littell has said: You can't discuss the truth of the holocaust.
That is a distortion of the concept of free speech. The United States should
emulate Germany, which outlaws such exercises. --Mind-boggling! Don't you
think?

THE CONTEMPORARY ISSUE

Should asking questions be a crime? If you develop doubts about the
Holocaust, isn’t the only way to get rid of these doubts by asking questions? A lot of
individuals and groups are enraged by those who ask critical questions about
the Holocaust. These doubters, who call themselves Revisionists, are often
defamed as "Holocaust deniers."

Every other historical issue is debated as a matter of course, but
influential pressure groups have made the Holocaust story an exception. Anyone should be
encouraged to investigate critically the Holocaust story in the same way they
are encouraged to investigate every other historical event. This is not a
radical point of view. The culture of critique was developed millennia ago by
Greek philosophers like Socrates, and was renewed centuries ago during the
Enlightenment.

THE HISTORICAL ISSUE

Revisionists agree with establishment historians that the German National
Socialist State singled out the Jewish people for special and cruel treatment. In
addition to viewing Jews in the framework of traditional anti-Semitism, the
National Socialists also saw them as being an influential force behind
international communism and behind the so-called international "finance capital,"
which they held responsible for the worldwide economic crisis and for the
impoverishment of German workers. During World War II, Jews were considered to be
enemies of the German State and a potential danger to its war efforts, much like
the Germans, Italians, and Japanese were viewed in the U.S. Consequently, Jews
were stripped of their rights, forced to live in ghettos, conscripted for
labor, deprived of their property, deported, and otherwise mistreated. Many
tragically perished.

In contrast to establishment historians, Revisionists claim that the German
State had NO policy to exterminate the Jewish people (or anyone else) in
homicidal gas chambers or by killing them through abuse or neglect. Revisionists
also maintain that the figure of six million Jewish deaths is an irresponsible
exaggeration, and that no execution gas chambers existed in any camp in Europe
which was under German control. Fumigation gas chambers, both stationary and
mobile, did exist to delouse clothing and equipment to prevent disease at POW,
labor, and concentration camps and at the fighting front. It is highly likely
that it was from this lifesaving procedure that the myth of extermination gas
chambers emerged.

Revisionists generally hold that the Allied governments, and in particular
the Soviets, decided to carry their wartime "black propaganda" of German
monstrosities over into the postwar period. This was done for essentially three
reasons. 1. The Allies felt it necessary to continue to justify the great
sacrifices that were made in fighting two world wars. 2. The Allies wanted to divert
attention from, and to justify, their own particularly brutal crimes against
humanity. Soviet atrocities alone caused the death of uncounted millions of
civilians in the Soviet Union and in all countries of eastern and central Europe.
American and British saturation bombings of German and Japanese cities causing
over a million civilians to be burned or buried alive. 3. The Allies needed
justification for postwar arrangements involving the total dismantling of German
industry, a policy of starvation causing the deaths of many millions of
German civilians, the robbing of German patents worth trillions of dollars, and the
annexation of large parts of Germany into Poland and the USSR. These
territories were not disputed borderlands but consisted of 20% of the entire German
territory. The twelve million Germans living in these regions were robbed of
their property and brutally expelled. More than two millions perished during this
most heinous ethnic cleansing of world history.

During the war, and in the postwar era as well, Zionist organizations became
deeply involved in creating and spreading Holocaust stories. Their purpose was
to drum up world sympathy and support for Jewish causes, especially for the
creation of the State of Israel. Today, the Holocaust story, which is perceived
as a crime of a right-wing regime, plays an important role for
leftist-internationalist groups, for Zionist organizations, and for groups within Jewish
communities. It is the leaders of these political and propaganda organizations
who continue to work to sustain the orthodox Holocaust legend and the myth of
German monstrosity during World War II.

Those who claim that these interpretations are anti-Jewish are reading into
them something which simply is not there. Revisionists do not claim that Jewish
leaders or organizations did anything in the war and postwar era which the
Allied Governments themselves did not do.

For those who believe that the Nuremberg Trials revealed the truth about
German war crimes, it is a terrible shock to discover that the then Chief Justice
of the U.S. Supreme Court, Harlan Fiske Stone, described the Nuremberg court
as "a high-grade lynching party" for Germans (Alpheus T. Mason, Harlan Fiske
Stone: Pillar of the Law, New York: Viking, 1956, p. 716).

The Photographs

We’ve all seen "The Photographs." Endlessly. Newsreel photos taken by U.S.
and British photographers at the liberation of the German camps, and especially
the awful scenes at Dachau, Buchenwald, and Bergen-Belsen. For instance, look
at the one at the top of this leaflet. These photos and films are usually
presented in a way in which it is either stated or implied that the scenes
resulted from deliberate German policies. The photographs are real, but their
interpretation is false.

Even mainstream historians admit that there was no German policy at any of
those camps to kill the internees. In the last months of the war, while Soviet
armies were invading Germany from the east, British and U.S. bombers were
destroying every major city in Germany with saturation bombing. Transportation, the
food distribution system, medical, and sanitation services all broke down.
That was the purpose of these air raids, which was the most barbaric form of
warfare in Europe since the Mongol invasion.

Millions of refugees fleeing the Soviet armies were pouring into central and
western Germany. As a result of the ongoing war, of starvation, and epidemics,
millions of civilians were dying all over Germany. The camps were not
exempted from this tragedy. Camps that were still under German control were
overcrowded with internees evacuated from the east. By early 1945, these inmates
suffered from malnutrition and epidemics like typhus and cholera, to which many
succumbed. When the press entered the camps with British and U.S. soldiers, they
found the results of that. They took "The Photographs."

Still, at camps such as Buchenwald, Dachau, and Bergen-Belsen tens of
thousands of relatively healthy internees were liberated. They were there in the
camps when "The Photographs" were taken. There are newsreels of these internees
walking through the camp streets laughing and talking. Others picture exuberant
internees throwing their caps in the air and cheering their liberators. It is
only natural to ask why you haven’t seen those particular films and photos
while you’ve seen the others hundreds of times.

Documents

It is often claimed that there are "tons" of captured German documents
proving the Jewish genocide. When challenged on this, however, only a handful of
documents are produced, the authenticity or interpretation of which is highly
questionable. If pressed for reliable documentation, it is then claim that the
Germans destroyed all the relevant documents to hide their evil deeds, or the
absurd claim is made that the Germans used code language, whispered verbal
orders, or conveyed orders through a meeting of minds.

As a matter of fact, all available documentation and material traces indicate
that there was no order for a mass murder of Jews, no plan, no budget, no
weapon—that is, no gas chamber—and no victim—that is, not a single autopsied
body has been shown to have been gassed.

Eyewitness Testimony

During medieval witch trials, many witnesses told similar accounts about
broom-riding witches and the devil. Since most statements were made independently
of each other and without pressure, this was taken as evidence that the
stories must be true; material evidence was never produced. "Common knowledge," a
word invented in those days, and social expectations formed the basis of these
accounts, not the truth.

Today, we face the same "common knowledge" produced by 60 years of one-sided
mass media propaganda and massive social and sometimes even legal pressure to
conform to certain views. To support their theories, anti-Revisionists depend
almost exclusively on "eyewitness" testimony produced in this poisoned
atmosphere.

During the war crimes trials many "eyewitnesses" testified that Germans made
soap out of human fat and lamp shades from human skin. Allied prosecutors even
produced evidence to support these charges. For decades, highly respected
scholars at the most prestigious universities in the world sanctioned these
stories, leading us to believe that such stories were "irrefutable truths." But
within time, many such stories have become untenable: In 1990, Yehuda Bauer,
director of Holocaust studies at Hebrew University, Tel Aviv, admitted: "The Nazis
never made soap from Jews…" (Jerusalem Post, Int. Ed., 5 May 1990, p. 6).

Bruno Baum, a former communist inmate in Auschwitz, was allowed to brag in
summer 1945 in a Soviet newspaper: "The whole propaganda which started about
Auschwitz abroad was initiated by us [German communist inmates] with the help of
our Polish comrades." (Deutsche Volkszeitung, Soviet paper in occupied East
Germany, 31 July 1945). Thus, it is not surprisingto learn that during several
trials in Germany, it emerged that the testimony of witnesses from eastern
Europe had been orchestrated by communist authorities.

During a trial against an alleged former camp guard in Jerusalem, even the
Israeli court had to admit that all witness testimony was not credible, which
resulted in the defendant’s acquittal.

The only two witnesses who were ever cross-examined had to admit in 1985 that
their accounts were not true: Arnold Friedman confessed of never having
experienced what he had claimed, and Rudolf Vrba admitted of having used poetic
license to "embellish" his statements. Vrba is one of the most famous Auschwitz
witnesses. However, once asked if all claims Vrba had made about Auschwitz in
the famous movie Shoa were true, Vrba replied: "I do not know. I was just an
actor and I recited my text." He told this with a sardonic smile to his Jewish
friend Georg Klein (G. Klein, Pietà, Stockholm, p. 141).

During and after the war there were "eyewitnesses" to mass gassings at
Buchenwald, Bergen-Belsen, Dachau, and other camps in Germany proper. Today,
virtually all recognized scholars dismiss this testimony as false.

Establishment historians, however, still claim that mass gassings happened at
several camps in Poland. The evidence for this claim is, in reality,
qualitatively no different to the false testimony and evidence for the alleged mass
gassings at the camps in Germany proper.

With regard to confessions by Germans at war crimes trials, it is now well
documented that many were obtained through coercion, intimidation, and even
physical torture, just like during the medieval witch trials.

Auschwitz

In 1990, the Auschwitz State Museum revised the old propaganda claim of four
million murdered humans down to one million—base not upon facts, but upon
estimates! In 1994, a French scholar reduced this figure further down to less than
700,000, and in 2002, another mainstream Holocaust scholar reduced the
Auschwitz death toll to 500,000—again not based on facts, but on "estimates."

The Auschwitz Museum has put on display piles of hair, boots, and eyeglasses,
etc., but there is neither evidence for the origin of these items nor for the
fate of their former owners. While such displays are effective propaganda,
they are worthless as historical artifacts.

In a videotaped interview, the Auschwitz Museum authorities admitted that the
gas chamber shown to tourists is a "reconstruction," again not based on
facts, but only on unverified eyewitness claims. The Museum’s tourist guides,
however, tell visitors that all they see is genuine…

Whereas some mainstream scholars claim that the Auschwitz crematories, whose
morgues supposedly served as gas chambers, were the "absolute center" in the
"geography of atrocities," other mainstream scholars claim that the mass murder
did not take place in those crematories, but elsewhere. Revisionist, however,
want certainty, not speculations and estimates.

Jewish Population Losses During World War II

Only two monographs were written so far on the question of how many Jews lost
their lives during World War II. The first is a revisionist book concluding
that some 300,000 perished. The second is authored by several recognized
historians claiming that some six million died. Whereas the Revisionist book takes
into consideration demographic changes of the Jewish population in all
countries, the mainstream book compiles its figures by simply subtracting the number
of Jews alive in Europe a few years after the war from those alive in Europe
several years before the war. It ignores that the Jewish population in America,
Israel, and other countries outside of Europe had increased by almost six
million in this period of time, as a result of a new Exodus. Thus, those who had
left Europe were simply declared to be Holocaust victims.

The Hidden Genocide

Those who promote the Holocaust story complain that "the whole world" was
indifferent to the genocide which allegedly was occurring in German occupied
Europe. They claim that this was due to some great moral flaw in the nature of
Western man, or that people did not realize the enormity of what was happening.
It is true that the world responded with indifference. But perhaps it was
because they did not believe it.

It is certain that if there had been "killing factories" in Poland murdering
millions of civilians, then the Red Cross, the Pope, humanitarian agencies,
the Allied governments, neutral governments, and prominent figures such as
Roosevelt, Truman, Churchill, Eisenhower, and many others would have known about it
and would have often and unambiguously mentioned it, and condemned it. They
did not! The promoters admit that only a tiny group of individuals believed the
story at that time—many of whom were connected either with Jewish or with
Communist propaganda agencies. The rise of the Holocaust story reads more like
the success story of a PR campaign than anything else.

Winston Churchill wrote his six volume work The Second World War without
mentioning a program of mass-murder and genocide. In his book Crusade in Europe,
Dwight D. Eisenhower also failed to mention gas chambers. Was the weapon used
to murder millions of Jews unworthy of a passing reference? Was our future
president being insensitive to Jews?

Examples of Propaganda

During and after the First World War, that is between 1916 and the late
1920s, mainly American Jewish organizations were claiming that six million Jews(!)
would suffer terribly in poverty stricken Eastern Europe. In this context, it
was claimed that eastern European Jewry would face a Holocaust if they did not
receive massive funding. With such propaganda, millions of dollars were
raised in the United States, which at the end were mainly used to finance the
Soviet revolution in Russia.

On 22 March 1916, that is during the First World War, the British newspaper
The Daily Telegraph published an article falsely claiming that the Germans had
murdered 700,000 Serbs in gas chambers. On 25 May 1942, that is during the
Second World War, the same newspaper reported that the Germans had murdered
700,000 Jews in Poland in gas chambers.

How can we tell that the second story is true, if we know that the first is a
lie? In 1944, the British Government asked the British media and churches to
help spread anti-German propaganda, which it had been putting out already for
a while, in order to distract from the atrocities it expected to be committed
by the Soviets as soon as they invade Germany. In its circular, the British
government expressed its regret that, after the exposure of WWI propaganda lies,
greater efforts would be necessary to succeed this time.

POLITICAL CORRECTNESS AND REVISIONISM

Many people are bewildered when they first hear Holocaust Revisionist
arguments. The arguments appear to make sense, but "How is it possible?" The whole
world believes the Holocaust story. It’s just not plausible that so great a
conspiracy to suppress the truth could have functioned more than half a century.

To understand how it could very well have happened, one needs only to reflect
on the intellectual and political orthodoxies of medieval Europe, or those of
National Socialist Germany or the Communist-bloc countries. In all of these
societies the great majority of scholars were caught up in the existing
political culture. Committed to a prevailing ideology and its interpretation of
reality, these scholars and intellectuals felt it was their right, and even their
duty, to protect every aspect of that ideology. They did so by oppressing the
"evil" dissidents who expressed "offensive" or "dangerous" ideas. In everyone
of those societies, scholars became the "Thought Police."

In our own society, in the debate over the question of political correctness,
there are those who deliberately attempt to trivialize the issues. They claim
that there is no real problem with freedom of speech in our society, and that
all that is involved with PC are a few rules which would defend minorities
from those who would hurt their feelings. There is, of course, a deeper and more
serious aspect to the problem. In American society today there is a wide
range of ideas and viewpoints which the mass media will not allow to be discussed
openly. Even obvious facts and realities, when they are politically
unacceptable, are denied and suppressed. One can learn much about the psychology and
methods of the Thought Police by watching how they react when just one of their
taboos is broken and Holocaust Revisionism is given a public forum.

First they express outrage that such "offensive" and "dangerous" ideas were
allowed to be expressed publicly. They avoid answering or debating these ideas,
claiming that to do so would give the Revisionists a forum and legitimacy.
Then they make vicious personal attacks against the Revisionist heretics,
calling them political names such as "hater," "denier," "anti-Semite," "racist,"
"terrorist," or "neo-Nazi," even suggesting that they are potential mass
murderers. They publicly accuse the Revisionists of lying, but they don’t allow the
dissenters to hear the specific charge against them or to face their accusers so
that they can answer this slander.

Revisionists are frequently accused of being hate filled people who are
promoting a doctrine of hatred. But Revisionism is a scholarly process, not a
doctrine or an ideology. If the Holocaust promoters really want to expose hatred,
they should take a second look at their own doctrines, and a long look at
themselves in the mirror.

Anyone who invites a Revisionist to speak publicly is himself attacked for
being insensitive. When Revisionists do speak publicly, they are regularly
shouted down and threatened. Libraries and bookstores face intimidation when they
consider handling Holocaust revisionist materials. All this goes on while the
majority of library, media, college, and university administrators sit silently
by, allowing political activists to determine what can be said in the media
and read in libraries.

Next, the Thought Police set out to destroy the transgressor professionally
and financially by "getting" him at his job or concocting a lawsuit against
him. It is sometimes often deceptively claimed that Revisionist scholarship has
been proven false during a trial, though courts of law can never decide any
scholarly debates; they can only impose dogmas.

Finally, the Thought Police will inevitably "straighten out" that segment of
academia or media that allowed the Revisionists a forum in the first place.

Some administrators in academia hold that university administrations should
take action to rid the campus of ideas which are disruptive to universities.
This is an open invitation to tyranny. It means that any militant group with
"troops at the ready" can rid the campus of ideas it opposes and then impose its
own orthodoxy. Coward administrators might find it much easier and safer to
rid the campus of controversial ideas than to face down a group of screaming
militants. But it is the duty of university administrators to insure that our
universities remain a free marketplace of ideas. When ideas cause disruptions, it
is the disrupters who must be subdued, not the ideas.

CONCLUSION

The influence of Holocaust Revisionism is growing steadily both here and
abroad. In the United States, Revisionism was launched in earnest in 1977 with the
publication of the book The Hoax of the Twentieth Century by Arthur R. Butz.
Professor Butz teaches electrical engineering and computer sciences at
Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois.

Those who take up the Revisionist cause represent a wide spectrum of
political and philosophical positions. They are certainly not the scoundrels, liars,
and demons the anti-Revisionists try to make them out to be. The fact is, there
are no demons in the real world. People are at their worst when they begin to
see their opponents as an embodiment of evil, and then begin to demonize
them. Such people are quite prepared to harm their opponents. The logic of their
argument is that you can do anything you want to a demon. We should not allow
such a logic to prevail.

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

Castle Hill Publishers
www.VHO.org

If you wish to learn more about Holocaust revisionism, we recommend our free
brochure with answers to the most frequently asked questions and links to
articles and entire books available on this topic. Those wishing to verify the
truthfulness of the statements made above, can visit our vast Internet database
at www.vho.org and download many scholarly articles and books about this topic,
including many references to primary sources, forensic research, and much
more.

e-mail:
chporder@vho.org

+++++++

============================