                                                                               ISSN 1440-9828
                                                 January 2007
                                                                                   No 310

Individuals who hate Revisionists because they are Revisionists, failed to stop the conference because the Islamic Republic of Iran’s president, Dr Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, resisted yielding to internal and external pressure to cancel the conference. Any dealings were out of the question and Jewish groups who wished to bribe the organisers in order to stop it were ignored. For example there was an offer to stop attacking Islam if Iran cancelled the conference, something scoffed at by the Iranians. This is moral and intellectual courage objectified, and illustrates my maxim’s reality content: “Don’t blame the Jews, blame those that bend to their pressure!” The Iranians organising the Tehran Conference did not bend to Jewish pressure!

And what happened after the conference? How did the world media react to what had been discussed during the full two-day conference at the various sessions? As usual, factual information about the speeches was not mentioned at all but was swept under the carpet. Instead, the media started their usual sloganeering. The process of defaming individuals had begun, and then progressed to outright personal abuse and use of foul language, usually the refuge of the morally and intellectually bankrupt.

On the world stage Israel’s Prime Minister Olmert visited Berlin and informed German Chancellor Merkel that Israel was indeed a nuclear power. Finally the long known dirty open secret had publicly been acknowledged, much to Mordechai Vanunu’s disgust who had known this secret, and for divulging it, had his humanity robbed for 18 years.

The counter ‘Holocaust’ conference was held in Berlin where attempts were made to focus on ‘Holocaust denial’, and Emory University is granting Professor Deborah Lipstadt’s website $2 million to revamp her material so that it is streamlined in other languages such as Arabic, Farsi, Russian, and others, thereby making the ‘lessons of the Holocaust available to future generations’. This can be seen as a direct reaction to the outcome of the Tehran ‘Holocaust’ Conference, which saw the setting-up of a World Holocaust Foundation that will enquire into the ‘Holocaust’. Its seat will initially be Tehran but ultimately it is aimed to relocate it to its logical place, Berlin.

One of the spin-offs of the Tehran conference is that the Holocaust industry is increasingly switching to the Hebrew word ‘Shoah’, thereby attempting to rescue what is left of the narrative. It indicates that Revisionists have had the desired effect and have done their work, and now ‘Shoah’ believers, of necessity, need to keep changing their story.

When liars are trapped, when they cannot scapegoat anymore, they turn upon their own. This has now happened with a vengeance as the lies of the ‘Holocaust’ industry’s mindset are exposed. I am referring here to the people who attempt to live by the Book, the Torah True Jews who are now in the Zionist’s sight. This has already manifested itself in England where Rabbi Cohen faces extraordinary social and economic sanctions from within the Jewish community that is just shy off physical violence against his person. Austrian Chief Rabbi Friedman is also feeling the heat, so much so that he cannot directly fly from Tehran to his home in Vienna because a government minister has already publicly announced Friedman would be arrested upon arrival at Vienna Airport. Even Australia’s vicious Zionists could not resist projecting their venom on the Torah True Jews. Instead of using civilising and reasoned language, they used expletives of disgust, thereby revealing to the world that their emotional blustering merely reveals how morally and intellectually bankrupt they are. No amount of huffing and puffing will enable them to regain that much desired moral high ground, something they always seek to maintain when propagating their ‘Holocaust’ narrative.

We have witnessed the death-throws of the ‘Holocaust-Shoah’ narrative as it stands in 2006, something that Revisionists such as Willis Carto clearly perceived in 1969 when he published The Myth of the Six Million. I am, of course, aware of the fact that this sentence mentioning Willis Carto will cause some individuals to cringe. But I am merely stating an objective fact – and I shall leave it at that.

The process of disintegration will continue unabated, and perhaps we may recall that just as the multi-billion Enron empire crumbled from within, so will the ‘Holocaust-Shoah’ multi-billion industry disintegrate from within. The question of who is an authentic Jew has been posed by the Torah True Jews at the Tehran conference. These Jews believe in the ‘Holocaust’ narrative but they reject making any reparation claim upon Germany or anyone else, as have the Zionist Jews over these past six decades and continue to do so.

Of interest here is the 20 December 2006 court-ordered release of David Irving from his Vienna jail, something his lawyer, Dr Schaller, at the Tehran conference predicted would happen. Irving, of course, is not really a ‘Holocaust’ Revisionist because he still believes in limited gassings. Such nonsense claim causes me categorically to state: “Anyone who believes in the homicidal gassing story is either ignorant, willingly or unwillingly, of the physical facts, or a liar.” There is no escaping this dialectic except, of course by refusing to delve into the material, for example, as made available in German Rudolf’s classic Holocaust Handbook Series of 21+ volumes. Someone said to me that Irving’s problem rested on the fact that he actually had consorted with Nazis and neo-Nazis, and that this caused him to lose the London 2000 defamation action against Professor Deborah Lipstadt. I corrected this perception by pointing out that this guilt-by-association – BERÜHRUNGSÄNGSTE in German – was not the cause of his failing in his action, but rather the fact that he lied and tried to deny that he had been associating with Nazis and neo-Nazis. After all, the trial’s aim was to remove the so-called derogatory terms from Irving’s character: ‘hater’, ‘Holocaust denier’, ‘antisemite’, ‘racist’, ‘neo-Nazi’, etc.

This fence-sitting attitude reflects the different agendas that individual Revisionists have. It also reveals Irving’s attitude towards Germans. He knows that the gassing claim still imprisons Germans as a people. Irving’s post-release statement that ‘Mel Gibson was right’, panders to those who oppose Jewish power as such, and does nothing to liberate the Germans from the ‘Holocaust’ dogma, an attitude also found in Dr David Duke’s mindset.

This anti-German sentiment is to a large measure still present within Revisionists generally – that was my personal experience gained throughout my stay in Tehran. This fact certainly implies that Germans cannot rely on individual Revisionists such as Irving to help them liberate themselves from the ‘Holocaust’ stranglehold. I personally felt this anti-German sentiment when the World ‘Holocaust’ Foundation committee was formed. Its secretary-general, Dr Ali Armin speaks Farsi and German only, and hence I wrote up the committee notice in three languages, German, French and English, in that order. Two prominent individuals objected to this. First it was objected that German was spoken during the inaugural meeting where proceedings were translated into English. Then it was objected that the committee notice had German as first language. The ‘Nazi’ tag was liberally used in order to persuade me to remove German as the first language, something I rejected outright – much to the consternation of the fellow who objected, so much so that he fell into a shouting frenzy. All very sad.

The fact that there is an Iranian group of individuals who have also realized this phenomenon was anticipated by me when I titled my August 2006 Washington AFP/ TBR Conference address: ‘Will Iran liberate Germany from Judaism?’ The Foundation Secretary-General implied as much in his statement that the World Foundation’s headquarters would initially be located in Tehran but then, in time, would re-locate to Berlin. That’s a courageous vision – and of course, Torah True Jews would be welcomed to participate in this venture!

When I was invited to address President Dr Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the formal meeting, I mentioned that we saw democracy in action at Tehran University where a group of Iranian students vented their frustrations on the first day of the conference by burning pictures of their president while he was addressing them.

Much was made of this in the western press, but little is made in the western press of the fact that since the conference the world knows that Zionist Jews do not speak on behalf of world Jewry because Torah True Jews refuse to profit from participating in the ‘Holocaust’ industry. Let’s hope that this will bring speedy relief for Ernst Zündel, Germar Rudolf, Horst Mahler, Hans-Günter Kögel, Rigolf Hennig, and those many more languishing in German jails simply because they refuse to believe in the ‘Holocaust’ lies.

ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN - Tehran International Conference: "Review of the Holocaust: Global Vision

Dr Herbert Schaller, almost 85 years old, and still fighting for justice.

______

First of all, I would like to thank the Institute for Political and International Studies for organizing this conference and in particular I would like to take the liberty of expressing my great respect for the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Dr. Mahmud Admadinejad. He was the first important statesman in

the world to publicly raise three facts:

1. - the fact that the guilt of the Germans for the Holocaust has not yet been properly proven;

2. - the fact that anyone who wants to discuss the lack of proof will be persecuted by the Western media and sometimes be subjected to criminal prosecution; and

3. - the fact that in the West the freedom to express one`s opinion –at least in key matters- is a complete fraud.

His Excellency the President, Dr. Ahmadinejad, has thereby dealt a severe blow to the worldwide cartel that forbids any attempt to provide evidence questioning the Holocaust. The Holocaust Problem has historical, political, international law, human rights law, and last but not least criminal law aspects. This Report deals exclusively with the criminal law aspect and especially with the procedures in a criminal case.

I am speaking here neither as a historian nor journalist but solely as a lawyer who has come in contact with the problem of the homicidal gas chambers. The defense attorney is an integral part of the criminal law system and he should contribute to finding a decision based on facts and thereby help prevent the court from making mistakes that are hindrances to fulfilling its mandate.

The defense attorney`s personal opinion about the existence of gas chambers is unimportant. His personal opinion about the homicidal gas chamber question was and will never be expressed in any criminal proceeding. That principle applies also to the writer of this Report.

The question of proof is decisively important in criminal cases against those who deny the existence of homicidal gas chambers. The rules of criminal procedure are determined by what is understood to constitute proof in a criminal case. The laws of criminal procedure are very different from country to country.

However, one fundamental principle can be recognized worldwide: whoever has to function as a judge over a defendant will in no case want to condemn and punish without having made use of all available and relevant means of evidence and proof. In practice this means that no court in the world will sentence a defendant accused of murder and convict on the basis of mere witness statements or confessions when there exists sufficient material for a DNA analysis of clues and traces remaining from the crime.

Witness statements and confessions in and of themselves do not constitute proof. They only become evidence by the fact that the court believes the subjective assertions of the witnesses or the confession of the accused. However, witness assertions involve numerous factors of uncertainty. In many criminal cases an objective examination of factual proof is possible and even necessary. A factual proof creates clear and exact knowledge in contrast to a mere belief in the correctness of human assertions. Factual proof can absolutely and completely refute many witness assertions, but no mere assertions can ever refute factual proof. There are many types of factual proofs. In the case of holocaust accusations, there would be, for example, soil testing with radar equipment, archeological investigations, chemical tests on material, expert reports on the effects of Zyklon B and diesel engines, etc.

In courts in Western countries, expert reports from specialist areas of natural science and forensic investigations are always used to analyze and clarify factual situations, which have left behind visible traces that can be studied by the natural sciences. Only in the area of the holocaust accusations are any and all submissions of factual proof not only omitted but even forbidden.

Since 1989 I have been defending persons accused of holocaust denial in Germany and Austria. Along with Colonel Hajo Herman, I defended General Remer. In both Germany and Austria, I have defended Gerd Honsick. I am now defending David Irving in Austria and Ernst Zündel in Germany. All the courts have rejected all motions to submit proofs. There was acquittal only in Austria where eight jurors decided the question of guilt or innocence. There are no acquittals in these cases when the judge decides the question of guilt or innocence.

The courts reject all motions to submit evidence because of judicial notice about the homicidal gas chamber. [“Judicial notice” is used to translate the German word “Offenkundigkeit,” which means “obviousness.” If something is alleged to be “obvious,” then it cannot be questioned or even discussed in the court.] It is completely wrong to use judicial notice. A fact based on judicial notice is not a real fact. Rather it is only an opinion about a fact. This opinion can be correct but can also be false.

The ugly reality is that the courts do not demand any factual proofs. And Article 21 of the London Statue of August 8, 1945 forced the courts not to demand any factual proof. That dominates and controls all holocaust trials right up to today. There is a very long list of people who have suffered and still suffer a serious loss of freedom because they questioned the holocaust. David Irving is in Austrian prison and Ernest Zundel in German prison. Forty-two friends of Gerd Honsik spent a total of 114 years in prison because they peacefully express opinions that did not advocate violence. In Germany every year c. 10,000 people are prosecuted and persecuted for holocaust denial.

In my Report I hope to have contributed to removing the widespread ignorance about the lack of proofs in the question of the homicidal gas chambers. At this Conference in Teheran, it has been publicly established that there are no proofs for the existence of homicidal gas chambers, although sufficient evidence had been available for a long time to show that there were no proofs for homicidal gas chambers. May the public determination of the lack of proofs lead to an objective analysis and clarification by an unprejudiced international investigating committee.

In the limited time available here, the unbelievable extent of the violations of laws and human rights of revisionist researchers could only be briefly indicated. However, I would be happy to answer any of your questions.

In concluding my Report permit me a glance back into history and a reference to the fact that the forefathers of the Germans of today and the forefathers of the Iranians have already one time successfully cooperated to fight an empire. In the year 378 AD before the decisive Battle of Adrianople between the Goths and the Eastern Roman Empire, Germans established diplomatic relations with the Persian Empire and agreed on a common undertaking against Eastern Rome. As a consequence it could be simultaneously attacked from the North and the East. In this battle the Germans assured their later victory over the Roman Empire and thereby relieved the Persians from Roman pressure. Today the world sees itself once again facing a mighty empire. Therefore, the question has recently arisen of any and all possible forms of peaceful cooperation that could save the lives and freedoms of the peoples of the world.

I thank you.

This item from Gerd Honsik, the Austrian exile living in Spain, is an optimistic view of what German judiciary should be doing. Gerd Honsik ran the two quotes past Dr Schaller, who then confirmed their authenticity. It appears that unwittingly Ernst Zündel’s judge, Dr Meinerzhagen, slipped up when he admitted during trial that an independent commission should have investigated Auschwitz. He stated this in the course of justifying why he rejects The Rudolf Report as an expert report. Gerd Honsik likens this to Adolf Hitler initiating an international enquiry into the Katyn Massacre that was initially blamed on the Germans, where an international commission found out the truth, i.e. that Germans did not commit the massacre but that it was done by the Soviet Union. Now Judge Meinerzhagen blamed the Revisionists for not having done what the judiciary should have done a long time ago.

***

Sensation im Zündel-Prozeß

Richter Meinerzhagen macht sich die bisher kriminalisierte Forderung des Revisionismus zu eigen: Eine unabhängige Gutachterkommission hätte Auschwitz untersuchen sollen! Damit verwischen sich die Grenzen zwischen dem Standpunkt Faurissons, Ahmadinedschads und Zündels, also dem unseren, auf der einen und dem des Gerichts auf der anderen Seite.

Den vorliegenden Bericht eines ungenannten Augenzeugen vom 33. Prozeßtag im Zündelprozeß ließ ich mir vorsichtshalber von Rechtsanwalt Dr. Herbert Schaller auf die Echtheit der Schlüsselzitate hin bestätigen.

Im Zuge der Begründung der Nichtanerkennung des Rudolf-Gutachtens zeigte Richter Meinerzhagen auf, wie denn ein Gutachten aussehen müßte, das den Holocaust auf seine Richtigkeit hin glaubhaft überprüft. Dabei erhebt er – gewollt oder ungewollt – jene Forderung der Revisionisten, die von der deutschen und der österreichischen Justiz bisher als Verbrechen gewertet worden ist.

Hier der Text der Schlüsselstelle des Gerichtsbeschlusses vom 12.1.2007 wörtlich in vollem Wortlaut:

"Der Antrag von Rechtsanwalt Jürgen Rieger, dem sich Rechtsanwalt Dr. Schaller in vollem Umfang, Dr. Bock beschränkt auf die Verlesung des Rudolf-Gutachtens, gestellt in der Hauptverhandlung vom 22.12.2006, gerichtet auf die Einführung des Gutachten des Gaskammerexperten Leuchter und des Gutachtens von Germar Rudolf, wird zurückgewiesen, weil die beantragten Beweisaufnahmen für die Sachentscheidung ohne Bedeutung sind."

Der Satz, mit dem das Gericht das Rudolf-Gutachten zurückweist und der nun folgt, ist deckungsgleich mit dem Credo der Revision. Als "Meinerzhagen-These" wird er nun wörtlich zum Schlachtruf der Revisionisten werden. Er lautet:

"Bei einem solchen bedeutsamen und gleichsam sensiblen Thema wie der Überprüfung der Gaskonzentration im Mauerwerk der Gaskammer bedürfte es, um überzeugende Ergebnisse zu erzielen, einer unabhängigen Gutachterkommission von Wissenschaftlern verschiedener Disziplinen und möglichst verschiedener Nationalitäten, um jedem Zweifel an der Seriosität eines solchen Gutachtens zu begegnen."

Damit hat das Gericht erstmals einbekannt, daß es eine solche Untersuchung, wie sie hier beschrieben und verlangt wird und wie sie Hitler etwa seinerzeit erfolgreich und korrekt gegen den erlogenen Mordvorwurf von Katyn in Auftrag gab, im Falle des sogenannten" Holocaustmord-vorwurfes" niemals durchgeführt worden ist. Ob sich das Gericht mit diesem Satz eine Hintertür offenlassen wollte, um sich nach einer allfälligen Wende durch dieselbe vor der Amtshaftung flüchten zu können oder ob es nur unter dem Trommelfeuer der Sachargumente der drei furchtlosen und brillanten Verteidiger eingebrochen ist, kann noch nicht beurteilt werden.

Die Unterlassungssünden, die das Gericht entrüstet einmahnt, sind allerdings real existierende Sünden. Jedoch es sind nicht die Sünden Zündels, Leuchters und Rudolfs, sondern die der Justiz selbst. Denn alles, von dem das Gericht jetzt verlangt, daß es hätte geschehen müssen, hätte die deutsche Justiz selbst veranlassen müssen. Der Richter, der diese von Meinerzhagen eingemahnte Pflicht zuletzt vergaß, ist Meinerzhagen selbst. Nun wirft er seine eigene Unterlassungsünde den verfolgten Revisionisten vor. Die Fundamente der Nachkriegsordnung beginnen zu wanken.

The Advertiser Columnist,

Mr Rex Jory, Adelaide

Dear Rex

Bearing in mind that you and your staff have black-listed me in your newspaper, I make public the following letter to you by sending it through our email list and by placing it on Adelaide Institute's website. Thank God for free expression on the Internet - still!

I have been advised that the Advertiser is preparing to run an article on me that is designed to smear my family's reputation - to coincide with my appearance on 6 February 2007 before the Federal Court of Australia where I have to answer a contempt of court charge brought against me by Australia's leading Zionist, journalist Jeremy Jones.

From personal experience I know you are good at this kind of thing, and I think you may recall that my facing you at one of the South Australian Press Club luncheons and advising you in no uncertain terms that what you had written about me was below the belt. I think you said that I should re-locate out of the State of South Australia, or something like that.

However, should there be some truth in this current assertion, then I would request you not do anything like this. I was advised that my 84-year-old mother would not survive such an attack.

Ironically, my mother knew Rupert Murdoch's sister who, until her death, lived in the area where mother has her farm. I wonder how she would have looked upon you and the staffers who have been assigned to this hatchet-job on the Töben family's good name?

I say all this in the knowledge that as far as I am concerned there is nothing surrounding my family's reputation of which we ought to be ashamed.

Of course, the 'Holocaust' allegation levelled against us are in this respect a horrendous smear job on any German or anyone who has a German background. After investigating the 'Holocaust' matter I conclude that it is not just mere puffery but outright lies, hence my quest objectively to look at the facts of such allegations. I wonder why you would resort to smearing anyone who has an argument to present about the 'Holocaust'. Are you fearful of losing your job, i.e. were you to run with my arguments? Why fall into the trap of smearing someone whose views you do not like?

So, Rex, be a good boy and stay with the balanced approach, as you did in today's column, 'Targeting Lara hypocritical nonsense', 18 January 2007.

Sincerely Fredrick Töben

***

From: Jory, Rex

joryr@adv.newsltd.com.au

Sent: Friday, 19 January 2007

To: Adelaide Institute

Subject: RE: The Advertiser smear job on Fredrick Toben to come?

Dear Fred,

1. I am unaware of any black list which includes you - or anyone else for that matter. I have not spoken directly to the editor but I would be very surprised, extremely surprised, if there was any ban or constraint. Of course there may be legal constraints involving the courts, but that is quite different.

2. I am unaware of any plans to launch a smear campaign against you or your family. Where this information came from I am not sure but it cannot, reliably, have come from within this office because - at least to my knowledge - no such proposal has been discussed. However, I am not privy to every decision.

It is likely we would, as a matter of course, report any public hearing but that does not constitute a smear.

3. I have never suggested you re-locate out of South Australia. I may not agree with all of your ideas but I would vigorously support your right to assert them provided they were within the general laws of our community. On

the same basis, I think as a personality you add colour and even intellectual vigour to our community.

4. You assert that I have been assigned to be part of a hatchet job on the Toben family. That is simply not true. Returning to point two, I am unaware of any such plans and I am certainly not involved in any such plan. No one has spoken to me about your case. I was unaware until today that it was approaching.

5. I object to your condescending references at the end of your e-mail ("be

a good boy etc"). That is hardly an adult way to discuss the issue.

Equally, raising some distant connection between your family and Rupert Murdoch cuts no ice.

I repeat. I know nothing about any real or imagined smear campaign.

While I cannot categorically rule it out, nothing of this type has come to my attention and if it was discussed I would probably counsel against it.

Rex Jory

***

FT responds:

Thank you, Rex, for your reply, and I am sorry if the 'good boy' reference upset you. It was not meant to be condescending but rather designed to take the sting out of the seriousness of the email content.

***

From: James Damon jdamon@austintx.net

Sent: Friday, 19 January 2007

To: Adelaide Institute

Cc: joryr@adv.newsltd.com.au

Subject: Advertiser Smear Job

Dear Mr. Toben,

I just read your interesting message, which was forwarded by a friend at the University of Texas.

The situation you describe is very similar to the situation we face locally with our daily newspaper monopoly "The Austin American Statesman" which refuses to print letters skeptical of "Holocaust" allegations.

It is striking that newspapers as far apart as Australia and Texas should share in such a concerted effort to defend the sanctity of the "Holocaust Industry" as Prof. Finkelstein calls it (or "Shoa Business" as less generous Jewish critics of Zionism call it.) Prof. F. presumably has considerable knowledge of the subject since both his parents were interned at Auschwitz during the War.

He points out that according to the laws of actuarial science, there would be around 40,000 "Holocaust" survivors if the Germans had murdered 6 million Jews, including all those too young to work; yet the Prime Minister of Israel reports that around a million survivors are still alive, for whom the German government continues to pay billions of dollars in compensation.

Alas, as Prof. Finkelstein points, very little of this compensation reaches the actual "survivors."

A rational person of average intelligence cannot fail to notice a discrepancy between the figures of 40,000 and a million "survivors," surely enough to warrant objective inquiry.

One would expect real old fashioned journalists to rush to investigate!

The impartial observer notices that the criminalization of such investigations is acknowledgement that the more the public learns about "Holocaust," the more skeptical it becomes.

Yours for real history, J M Damon, Austin, TX.

Newspaper editors fined for publishing anti-Semitic letter

10/Jan/2007

HELSINKI (EJP)--- A Finnish court has found a newspaper editor guilty of inciting racial hatred after he published a reader’s letter which approved of the Holocaust.

Antti Toiviainen, chief editor of Finnish regional daily Uusimaa, was fined 1,050 euros by a Porvoo district court in southern Finland on Tuesday.

The letter writer, whose identity was not disclosed, was also found guilty of inciting racial hatred and was fined 570 euros.

The letter was also published in the leftist newspaper Kansan Uutiset paper. Chief editor Janne Maekinen had refused to run the letter but it was later published due to a technical fault or a human error. The chief editor was ordered to pay a fine of 400 euros for failing to meet his obligations as editor.

Desirable Holocaust

In the letter, which was published in July, the writer wrote that the persecution of Jews by the Nazis was “a desirable measure” .

According to the large circulation Finnish newspaper Helsingin Sanomat, prosecutions for inciting hatred against an ethnic group are unusual in Finland.

State Prosecutor Mika Illman argued that there are limits to the constitutional guarantee of freedom of expression.

"The purpose of the constitution is to protect human dignity. The letter defamed the Jews, as it presents the ethnic group in question as a target against which extremely violent measures are permissible and desirable,” he said.

The writer rejected the charges as “ridiculous”.

The court nevertheless found that the piece could not be justified even as a bad joke.

Representatives of both newspapers admitted that the article was of bad taste.

http://www.ejpress.org/article/12794

***

German-Jewish Official: New Hitler Movie Not So Funny

IsraelNN.com, Jan-14-07

The head of Germany's Central Council of Jews said that a new movie that purports to make fun of Hitler could actually generate empathy for him, by its portrayal of the Nazi leader as "a comic figure who had a bad childhood." Speaking at the opening of the new movie "Mein Fuhrer" this week, Steven Kramer said that the film "gets people to suffer with him, to say 'this poor guy.'"

In the film, director Dani Levy, a Swiss-born Jew who lives in Berlin, portrays Hitler as a drug addict who plays with a toy battleship in the bathtub, dresses his dog in a Nazi uniform and takes acting tips from a Jewish concentration camp inmate. In response to criticism that he was minimizing the Holocaust, Levy said "I don't portray, discuss, or joke about the Holocaust victims - just the Nazis."

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=119359

***

From Monsters and Critics.com, Europe News

Germany unlocks horror tale of World War II "comfort women"

By DPA, Jan 14, 2007

Fuerstenberg, Germany - Breaking a long-time taboo in the world of Nazi horrors, German history officials unveiled Sunday an exhibition on the 'comfort women' exploited by male concentration- camp inmates.

Between 300 and 400 women were forced to provide sexual services to queues of slave labourers from the Nazi armaments factories.

'These brothels were provided as a 'performance incentive' so that the male prisoners would increase their output,' said Horst Seferens of the Brandenburg Monuments Foundation, which funded the exhibition at the Ravensbrueck Concentration Camp Memorial.

Most male prisoners never admitted after their release that they had exploited the women, who also kept the story of their shame secret. The Nazis employed hundreds of thousands of Jews and political prisoners to keep their weapons factories running.

The women were selected from Ravensbrueck camp, the main Nazi site for detaining women, and sent to 10 other concentration camps.

'In the story of the concentration camps, the SS's exploitation of women inmates for men inmates has been just so covered up and avoided by everyone,' said Insa Eschebach, head of the memorial. 'And what did come out was just so distorted and prejudiced against the women.'

Items in the show include eyewitness interviews, some of the Nazis' index cards on the victims describing them as 'brothel women,' and the vouchers that were given to male inmates to be redeemed in sexual services.

Historians said the story had so embarrassed the women that the Nazis responsible were never prosecuted after the War. The camps were run by the SS, the Nazi Party's own paramilitary organization.

http://news.monstersandcritics.com/europe/news/article_1245881.php/Germany_unlocks_horror_tale_of_World_War_II_&quotcomfort_women%22

***

Mon 15 Jan 2007

Nazi convictions have only 'symbolic value'

FRANCES D'EMILIO IN ROME

THE Italian premier, Romano Prodi, yesterday expressed dismay that the convictions of ten former Nazi SS members - for the 1944 slaughter of hundreds of civilians near Bologna - have only "symbolic" value since the defendants are unlikely ever to serve their sentences.

"It was one of the most savage crimes of the last war, a real massacre," Mr Prodi said of the killing of more than 700 people in the small town of Marzabotto, in the Apennines, north-central Italy, by retreating Nazi troops during the Second World War.

An Italian military tribunal convicted the ten German soldiers and acquitted seven other defendants. The defendants were all tried in absentia and are believed to live in Germany. Germany amended its laws last year to allow extradition of its citizens to stand trial abroad within the EU. However, difficulties with the extradition process meant the convictions hold only "symbolic value", Mr Prodi said.

"[The convictions] on the one hand give the sense of the need that justice should always come in these cases, on the other hand [there is] also frustration at why it didn't come sooner."

Nazi troops slaughtered more than 700 villagers - mostly women, children and the elderly - in what was ostensibly a hunt for resistance fighters. They lobbed grenades at civilians locked in a house and sprayed machine-gun fire to hit a row of children.

Known as the "Butcher of Marzabotto", Walter Reder, a major in Adolf Hitler's élite SS guard, was captured after the war by British forces in Austria, convicted in Italy in 1951 and given a life sentence for ordering the deaths of the villagers.

Reder was released from prison in 1985 at the request of the Austrian government because he was suffering from a serious stomach ailment.

The Italian military tribunal also ordered the convicted defendants to pay a total of about 100 million (£65 million) in damages to the few survivors and relatives of the victims, but there is little chance of any money being paid since many of them are living on modest pensions.

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com:80/international.cfm?id=72362007

***

Hilali like Hitler: Muslim leader

Natasha Robinson & Richard Kerbaj

January 15, 2007 12:00am

A PROMINENT Muslim leader has likened Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali to Adolf Hitler, saying the outspoken mufti is doing as much damage to Islam in Australia as the German dictator did to Christianity.

The Australian Federation of Islamic Council's legal adviser, Haset Sali, labelled the sheik's recent diatribe on Egyptian television against Western "liars and oppressors" as insane and said the comments had horrified thevast majority of Australian Muslims.

"He has been about as helpful to Islam in Australia as Adolf Hitler was to Christianity during the Second World War," Mr Salisaid.

"Hilali increasingly chooses to rewrite what he thinks should be in the Holy Koran, and his sick and vile comments in his recent interviews are not only un-Islamic but also inhumane and highly disgraceful."

The sheik, who is still holidaying in Egypt in what was supposed to be a self-imposed exile, went back on Egyptian television at the weekend to apologise for his comments that immigrants had more right to live in Australia than "Anglo-Saxons who arrived ... in shackles".

The mufti said his comments had been taken out of context -- the same claim he repeatedly made following the furore that erupted after he likened immodestly dressed women to uncovered meat.

The sheik's musings on his adopted country, which aired in the Egyptian television interview last week, stretched to bizarre claims about Australia's "nudist streets" and beaches.

"There are nude beaches in Australia, and if one goes there wearing clothes is fined (sic). And there are streets like that, too."

NSW Premier Morris Iemma dismissed Sheik Hilali's defence that he had been again taken out of context. "He is a man who, really, we should not attach too much credibility to, because he just doesn't have any," Mr Iemma told Southern Cross radio.

Sheik Hilali also said during the interview screened last week that the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks had influenced a judge who handed down a 55-year sentence to Lebanese Muslim gang rapist Bilal Skaf.

He had claimed that prior to September 11 the "worst crime in Australia had received seven years' jail".

The sheik's spokesman in Australia, Keysar Trad, conceded yesterday that the comment was inaccurate.

"The seven-year reference is a generalisation," Mr Trad said.

"We know that that's not an accurate statement. He wasn't trying to be accurate. He was just making generalisations and nothing but generalisations to stress a point."

Mr Trad said Mr Sali's comments were tainted by his involvement in the brawling over AFIC leadership.

"I'm disappointed in him," Mr Trad said. "In the circumstances it's debatable whether hecan make a fair comment or not."

John Howard was nonplussed yesterday at being labelled "Mr Me Too" by Sheik Hilali because "he wait for any news from America to say, 'me too'."

"The sheik's great problem is that he's becoming a standing embarrassment to his own community," said the Prime Minister.

"He is hurting their reputation in the eyes of their fellow Australians and I ask them in their own interests to do something about it."

But AFIC, which has the power to abolish the position of Mufti of Australia, is in receivership and fresh elections for a new executive board are not expected until next month.

Mr Sali, who was once close to the sheik but has become a fierce critic, said Australian Muslims needed a head Mufti as much as they needed a "crocodile in the back garden" and described Sheik Hilali was like "a bull in a china shop.

"In reality, Sheik Hilali is no longer the Mufti for Australia," Mr Sali said. "Although when it suits him he likes to call himself the Mufti of Australia."

***

MOVIE REVIEW | 'VERDICT ON AUSCHWITZ'

The Unvarnished Reality of the Holocaust

By NEIL GENZLINGER, January 11, 2007

The timing may be coincidental, but for perspective on the hanging of Saddam Hussein it would be difficult to do better than a viewing of “Verdict on Auschwitz,” a stark, emotionally draining documentary on the trial in Frankfurt of 22 defendants accused of being part of the Nazi death machine.

The film, initially produced in 1993 by a German public television station for the 30th anniversary of the start of the trial, seems ragged and disorganized by the current standards of American documentaries, but that doesn’t detract from its power. Instead it enhances it, serving as a reminder that Hollywood treatments of the Holocaust, as excellent as some of them have been, are no match for the unvarnished reality.

Rolf Bickel and Dietrich Wagner built the film around audiotapes of the trial, which included testimony by more than 200 Auschwitz survivors. The prosecution’s painstaking case offers contrasts with the trial of Mr. Hussein, which has been faulted by some rights groups, but so does the long delay in pursuing the defendants. Which is more unsettling, the relatively quick justice meted out to Mr. Hussein, or the picture of the midlevel managers of Auschwitz living free of repercussions for almost 20 years after the war?

Another point of comparison: against the chutzpah of the Nazis in this film, Mr. Hussein, with his protestations and weak attempts to turn the tables, registers as a pipsqueak. In a particularly jaw-dropping clip, Adolf Eichmann, whose conviction in an Israeli court in 1961 was a sort of prelude to the Frankfurt trials, blames higher-ups for his crimes and applies the V-word to himself.

“The subordinates of these superiors are now victims,” he says. “I am such a victim, and it should not be forgotten.” Some defendants at the Frankfurt trial tried similar hogwash, claiming they did not know that mass murder was taking place in their camp. It rings ludicrously hollow, a reminder that those who take responsibility for their own actions fare best in the eyes of history.

VERDICT ON AUSCHWITZ

The Frankfurt Auschwitz Trial 1963-1965

Opens today in Manhattan.

Directed by Rolf Bickel and Dietrich Wagner; in German, with English subtitles; directors of photography, Armin Alker and Dominik Schunk; edited by Sigrid Rienäcker; produced by Gerhard Hehrleine; released by First Run Features. At the Quad Cinema, 34 West 13th Street, Greenwich Village. Running time: 180 minutes. This film is not rated.

***

Iran's UN Human Rights Envoy Questions Holocaust, Ban Ki-moon Urged to Respond

Geneva, January 11, 2007 — Only weeks before the UN’s annual commemoration of the Holocaust, Iran’s Geneva envoy to the UN Human Rights Council has sent a letter to the UN questioning the Nazi genocide of six million Jews. [Click for Iran letter.] Distributed today by the UN in Geneva, the letter was sent by Ambassador Alireza Moayeri to Council President Luis de Alba.

UN Watch, the Geneva-based human rights monitoring organization, called on UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, President de Alba and Human Rights High Commissioner Louise Arbour to strongly condemn what is only the latest offence in Iran’s ongoing campaign to both deny the Nazi genocide and incite a new genocide through President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s repeated calls to “wipe Israel off the map.”

Moayeri’s letter defends the December state-sanctioned conference in Tehran featuring former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke and others as “an academic event.” According to Moaveri, “the number of perished” is a particularly “legitimate question,” and there are “serious opposing ideas over the issue.”

UN Watch Executive Director Hillel Neuer issued the following statement:

UN Watch condemns this outrageous questioning of the horrors of the Holocaust only weeks ahead of the UN Annual International Day of Commemoration for its Victims.

Nothing could be more obscene than using the forum of the world’s foremost human rights body to question the most evil crime against humanity, upon whose ashes, as Kofi Annan recently said, the UN was founded.

UN Watch also condemns the letter’s demonization of Zionism, the expression of the Jewish people’s UN-approved right to self-determination, as an ideology “charged with hegemonic racial desires.”

It is exceedingly ironic and the height of hypocrisy for Iran to defend the conference by invoking freedom of opinion after it has just been slammed by the UN General Assembly for its repression of journalists and lack of basic political freedoms. The General Assembly severely condemned Iran as one of the world's worst human rights violators in its resolution A/C.3/61/L.41. (See UN Watch report on the resolution.)

It is further ironic that Iran’s letter was distributed to the Human Rights Council on the same day that UN human rights experts urged Iran not to execute seven Ahwazi Arabs after a secret trial the experts called a “mockery of due process requirements.”

Iran’s calling Israel racist is beyond the pot calling the kettle black. Its president repeatedly calls for the destruction of a UN member state, and now it is about to execute seven minority Arabs on bogus charges. Human Rights Council members should act immediately to prevent Iran from carrying out the executions.

UN Watch urged new UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to strongly condemn Iran today for its Holocaust denial and contempt for the principles of the UN Charter.

Similarly, High Commissioner Arbour, who has yet to apply her moral weight to bear on this issue, must speak out immediately and forcefully.

UN Watch is a Geneva-based human rights organization founded in 1993 to monitor UN compliance with the principles of its Charter. It is accredited as a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) in Special Consultative Status to the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) and as an Associate NGO to the UN Department of Public Information.

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com:80/international.cfm?id=72362007

Nazi convictions have only 'symbolic value'

The Unvarnished Reality of the Holocaust

Menuhin's son forced to resign over 'anti-Semitic' interviews