                                                                               ISSN 1440-9828
                                                                              September 2007
                                                                  No 346

Owing to the pending 24-25 September 2007 Federal Court hearing, this send includes a number of newsletters:

Newsletter 345 – Brockschmidt at his best: >How the Fritz turned into a Moshe<.

No 346: The futility of net censorship – our weapon of mass instruction - locating material >>About the Adelaide Institute<<. We deleted the >>deemed offensive material<<from AI site when HREOC Commissioner Kath McEvoy ordered it removed on 5 October 2000 and confirmed by Federal Court Justice C Branson on 17 September 2002. More historical material – how the legal battle began from the USA when the Simon Wiesenthal Centre found Adelaide Institute’s website and complained, this then taken up by Brisbane’s Courier Mail. The rest of the story is more of the same: verbal abuse, media condemnation and defamation, legal persecution – but never the use of an open public rational debate where principles of reason and understanding guide behaviour.

347 Symposium: Criminalizing Holocaust Denial – Profs Lipstadt and Dershowitz oppose imprisoning those who refuse to believe in the >Holocaust<.

348 Bruce Leichty, US Immigration Attorney for Ernst Zündel speaks out on Zündel and the Politics of >Gotcha<. Australia has the precedent of Dr Haneef, which is connected with Martin Bryant/Port Arthur Massacre, and my comment that Australia is following Canada's model of legal persecution as applied to the Zündel case by pulling the >Security Certificate< card, which the Supreme Court of Canada declared unconstitutional, but after Ernst had already spent two years in prison before being deported to Germany in 2005.

349 – more historical material from the Internet: EFA 10 November 1998 letter to HREOC– never mentioned by Commissioner McEvoy, and the 2003 Dr Fudge article on the Hayward affair – pulped by NZ journal HISTORY NOW. Dr Fudge later himself had problems in the USA finding an academic position at a university on account of having written the article. A university was legally involved with Fudge and I was asked to give a witness statement that I did not know Dr Fudge and had nothing to do with him. Commissioner McEvoy clearly remained silent on the importance of my submitting the Hayward thesis – lying by omission – and having received a letter from Dr Hayward at the end of 1998. It appears that from my submitting the thesis and the HREOC 2 November 1998 public hearing to the 5 October 2000 handing down of the decision, a period of two years, coincides with the process occurring in New Zealand when Canterbury University initiated an enquiry into the Hayward thesis, with the result that Dr Joel Hayward claimed he >>stuffed up<< and apologized to New Zealand’s Jewish community. At the 2 November 1998 hearing, Jeremy Jones handed up evidence that >Holocaust denial< nowhere in the world is >>considered genuine academic research<< - p.19. He also submitted Michael Shermer: Proving the Holocaust. The Refutation of Revisionism & the Restauration of History, 1994.

350 Fear of Crime - Global antisemitism report; Brockschmidt: The Great ABC Global Warming Swindle - from Holocaust to Global Warming – carbon trading etc.

Many Holocaust believers – deny anything else, including the reality of God, but do not deny the Holocaust – these atheists and skeptics have at the back of their mind a unifying principle – a belief – a religion = HOLOCAUST. Now like their dear Marxism, the Holocaust is fading, and so they jump on another unifying principle. C.f early 1970s US psychiatry Association de-criminalised Homosexuality – freed many minds from pleasure oppression – and eliminated a social/criminal scapegoat – the Holocaust and Nazis filled the vacuum for those who were once persecuted/persecutor and now were free.

351. The ADL, US and the world’s premier hate institution, comments on Iran’s December 2006 Holocaust Conference – 1986 London Review of Books >The Nazi Miracle<.

***

During my trips to the Islamic Republic of Iran, I inform students they are witnessing what Europeans witnessed when printing was invented during the 16^th century and priest Martin Luther distributed his tracts attacking the Roman Catholic Church thereby directly causing the Reformation to gain critical momentum.

Likewise the Internet will cause some kind of reformation within Islam as individuals begin to rely less on mediated religious texts as before. Individuals now have access to sacred texts without having to listen to someone interpreting the text for them. This un-mediated direct access to information via the Internet is frightening to the control freaks who have to date determined what information is to be made publicly available.

Democratically-minded individuals welcome this development of a super-information highway because they know that without maximizing one’s information in-take any information output is limited.

It is difficult to conceive that there are individuals who thrive, at the expense of others, by deliberately inducing mental arrested development via the implementation of perverse educational policies. For example, during the 1980s, and on-going, the Victorian Education Department prided itself in offering its students >>value-free education<<!

The dumbing-down of the individual in western democracies, began at the end of the 1960s within government school systems. The results are with us now as succession problems within all branches of human endeavour are felt by a shortage of skilled personnel. The me-generation, afflicted by hedonistic nihilism, cared little about generational thinking and thus failed to nurture an effective succession. In order to cope with the inevitable social conflict spawned by unprincipled nurturing, there is now a heavy reliance on hastily and poorly thought-through legal constructs that threaten to decimate our much cherished democratic mindset.

The fact that during these turbulent times of educational decline the >Holocaust< has become for western democracies the guiding principle, the moral pillar, a substitute religious article of faith not to be doubted, reveals the moral and intellectual decline of all the values that make up western civilization.

The Iranian President, Dr Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, rightly pointed out that in western democracies anything may be doubted, even the existence of God, but not the >Holocaust<.

Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister for Education and Research, Dr M. Mohammadi, discussed this with Jewish French individuals in 2006 who asked him to cancel the December 2006 conference on the >Holocaust<.

Dr Mohammadi says he begins a conversation simply with: >>Do you believe the Holocaust was an historical event? The response is always: >>Yes<<. He then asks: >>Do you believe historical events should be studied?<< Again the answer is: >>Yes<<. Dr Mohammadi then responds: >>Well, that is exactly what we are doing.<< He said that whenever he addresses diplomatic conferences people ask him why have such a conference in Iran, and he replies: >>- because you will not!<<

This Internet-driven >Knowledge Revolution< is a threat to those whose self-interest has been based on exaggerations, distortions deception and outright lies. Now any individual can access an almost unlimited number of websites that will offer information on any conceivable topic.

The stock of human knowledge is not now confined to specialists sitting in their proverbial Ivory towers but in the marketplace where ideas furiously compete to be heard and seen – democracy at its best!

And now I would like to thank those individuals who have made a financial contribution towards this latest court case. Without your support this battle would be a little more difficult – and it is good to know that this work is valued by you, that it comforts those who are sick and tired of hearing about the >Holocaust< because it hurts those who want to be proud of their German heritage, among other things.

Personally I hope for the best but expect the worst outcome in September, and am preparing myself for an enforced holiday.

What kept my spirit up during my 1999 imprisonment was thinking about Rudolf Hess and his decades of unjust imprisonment, and thinking about Peter Rackemann in Queensland who has been a quadriplegic for about 40 years – and who is an ardent Revisionist.

And, of course, there was the mail – the hundreds of letters I received from all over the world. I was in contact with the world through such intimate communications, something Germar Rudolf and Ernst Zündel, among others, are now appreciating as well. You are not alone when letters arrive – but it means also nurturing replies to letters – and not just talking about this sterile >Holocaust< topic.

And uppermost is the importance of having a home within your own mind – being at home within yourself – with God, if you will!

So, having to spend some time at Her Majesty’s pleasure within certain confines reminds me of one correspondent’s comment that with age we don’t really move much beyond our four walls.

In German there is a pithy saying: >Ist der Ruf einmal ruiniert, dann läst es sich leben ganz ungeniert.< - meaning, once your reputation is gone, you can live quite freely without inhibitions.

So, enjoy the latest output because if the legal decision goes against me, then we shall have to sift material with a super fine comb, and during my absence someone will continue, as happened during 1999, to produce material that stimulates but does not offend those who believe in the >Holocaust<.

But the fight to stop this defaming of Germans, of preventing them from grieving their dead by libeling them as >Nazi war criminals< must continue to be opposed.

All other nationals honour their dead, except the Germans who have laws in place that prevent this normal grieving process to be expressed in public - all because of the Jewish >Holocaust< lie, as Faurisson would say!

Until 24-25 September 2007.

Selections from Adelaide Institute's site from June 2000 are shown

[Note: Parts of the here]

About the
Adelaide Institute

We are a group of individuals who are looking at the Jewish-Nazi Holocaust, in particular we are investigating the allegation that Germans systematically killed six million Jews, four million alone at the Auschwitz concentration camp. In our investigations we refuse to be intimidated by anyone because we believe that the first step in any murder investigation is to forensically test the alleged murder weapon. In the Auschwitz murder case, certain individuals wish to prevent us from focusing upon such an investigation.

The latest version of how the Germans gassed millions of Jews at Auschwitz is propagated by Professor Deborah Lipstadt of Emory University in the U.S.A. who claims that mortuaries were converted into homicidal gas chambers. Proof of this is apparently found in so-called “conversion plans”. We have requested of Professor Lipstadt and of the Holocaust Museum, Washington, to provide us with copies of such conversion plans. We are still waiting for them to provide us with these plans.

In the meantime we have noted the original four million Auschwitz death figure has been reduced by Jean Claude Pressac to a maximum of 800,000. This in itself is good news because it means that around 3.2 million people never died at Auschwitz - a cause for celebration.

We are worried about the fact that to date it has been impossible to reconstruct a homicidal gas chamber. Even the Holocaust Museum in Washington informed us that it could not bring one across from Europe because there are none available. This is like a space museum without a rocket or the Vatican without a Crucifix. We are justifiably sceptical about the homicidal gas chamber claims.

We reject outright that a questioning of the alleged homicidal gas chamber story constitutes “hate talk”, is “anti-Semitic”, “racist” or even “neo-Nazi” activity.

The director of the Adelaide Institute, Dr Fredrick Töben, puts it thus:

"If I offend anybody because I show poor taste in my sometime blunt and honest questioning, then I apologise. However, if I offend because I am politically incorrect by asking uncomfortable questions, then I claim it as my right, under the free speech principle, to say these things."

We at the Adelaide Institute also focus on the Jewish-Bolshevik Holocaust, a matter which Australian author Helen Demidenko-Darville has raised in her book The Hand That Signed The Paper. The controversy generated by this novel still continues.

Adelaide Institute associate, Mr David Brockschmidt, sums up the essence of Demidenko-Darville´s ‘crime’ in writing this book:

"The merit of Helen Demidenko-Darville´s novel—and hidden agenda of the anti-Demidenko affair—is that she has revealed a basic historical fact, viz, that Lenin´s henchman, Trotzky (Bronstein) and Stalin´s henchman, Kaganovich, were Jewish mass murderers. This historical fact clearly shows that Jews are not always victims in history, but also murderers. Australia´s mass media has failed to publicise this important fact. Why?"

David Brockschmidt displays his parents´ medal received from the West German government for saving Jews during World War II. The Brockschmidt family was also honoured by the Israeli Government and a tree in their memory has been planted in the Avenue of the Righteous Gentiles, Jerusalem, Israel.

David´s father was also instrumental in providing Oskar Schindler with the trucks which transported the Schindler Jews from Poland to Czechoslovakia. Steven Spielberg, who knew the vital role Brockschmidt played in this operation failed to give credit to David´s father. Why?

These two historical issues—the Jewish-Bolshevik Holocaust and the Nazi-Jewish Holocaust—are worthy subjects for an intellectual enquiry. We are aware of the fact that to venture forth in to such an enquiry can be dangerous. Professor Robert Faurisson (France), Mr David Irving (England), Dr Wilhelm Stäglich, Professor Udo Walendy, Messrs Günter Deckert, Germar Rudolf, Mr Thies Christopherson, Pastor Manfred Junger (Germany), Mr Ditlieb Felderer (Sweden), Mr Hans Schmidt (U.S.A.), and Mr Ernst Zündel (Canada) are people who have suffered physically, mentally and materially as a result of their search for truth in history. The enemies of freedom of speech will use physical and legal violence - persecution through prosecution - to stifle debate on these contentious historical issues. There is a tremendous pressure placed on people who dare touch these taboo subjects. All too often the first thing that snaps is the family unit, followed by professional and social ostracism.

So, be warned - this final intellectual journey is not for the faint-hearted. If you dare to seek the truth, in particular about the alleged homicidal gassings, then you will be smeared, libelled and defamed by those who are intellectual midgets but materialistic giants.

If you are mentally strong enough to seek the truth of the matter, then force an open debate. Don't get side tracked by details and always refocus on the basics. Too many individuals drown in a sea of particulars.

People who claim that during World War II, the Germans gassed millions of Jews are levelling three allegations at the Germans:

1.	They planned the construction of huge chemical slaughter houses;
2.	They constructed these huge chemical slaughterhouses during the middle of WWII; and
3.	They used these huge slaughterhouses to exterminate millions of Jews.

Any normal person familiar with bureaucratic red tape will now ask: What proof is there to back up these claims? Firstly, where are the plans of this enterprise? Secondly, where is the budget needed to finance the massive enterprise? Finally, it is inconceivable that such a massive undertaking would get past first base without an executive order. To date, we have been led to believe that ‘a wink and a nudge’ began the alleged extermination project.

We at Adelaide Institute believe that those who level the homicidal gassing allegations at the Germans owe it to the world to come up with irrefutable evidence that this happened.

Instead, these defamers and libellers of the Germans use legal means to stifle debate on the topic. They claim that anyone who asks questions is engaging in ‘hate-talk’, is ‘anti-Semeitic’ is a ‘racist’, even a ‘neo-Nazi’.

If that doesn't work, then physical violence is used to silence those who want to know the truth.

So, come on board if you have the courage to look for truth. We naturally maintain that should—after fifty years—proof of the homicidal gassings be forthcoming, we shall gladly publicise this as well. To date, there has been no proof offered to the world. Robert Faurisson sums it up well; “No holes, no Holocaust!”

We are not ‘holocaust deniers’. We proudly proclaim that to date there is no evidence that millions of people were killed in homicidal gas chambers. That is good news all round. Why would anyone find this offensive? We are celebrating the living who were thought dead. How can this be an offence - unless it offends those who have their snout in the trough which Jewish academic, Dr Frank Knopfelmacher called, “the Holocaust racket”.

If there is to be a mission statement from Adelaide Institute, then it is best summed up in a letter which appeared in The Australian on 22^nd February, 1996. Written by John Buchner of Camden of NSW, nine days before the 2^nd March federal election:

OPEN SEASON ON GERMANS

Phillip Adams referred in a recent column of Review, 13^th - 14^th January 1996, to a number of foreign situations, which are dealt with in a jocular fashion, but he refers to the German people in a contemporary sense as “Nazi swine”. Many people from a German background have settled in Australia and made a significant contribution to it, including serving in its armed forces against the Nazi regime. Their memory is vilified by Mr Adams´ reference. During my school years here, I endured continual vilification because of my German origins and countless “Hitler Salutes”. However, my complaint to you is not motivated by a chip on the shoulder because of these events. Like most Australians, I can take it and abhor the treatment other national groups have received. My concern is that there seems to be a perpetual open season on all Germans, as though all Germans must forever bear the guilt and shame of the Nazi regime. I can bear references to “Nazi Swine”, albeit without amusement. But what of my children? Are my children to be forever classed “Nazi Swine” in this country?

John Buchner

Camden, NSW

Interestingly, a climate of political correctness pervaded the run-up period to the 2^nd of March federal elections, with Liberal and National candidates coming in for some sharp rebukes from their Labor colleagues over publicly-made alleged racist statements. For example, there was Bob Katter who lashed out at “enviro-Nazis”, “femi-Nazis” and “slant-eyed ideologues”. Only the latter statement created an uproar. The “Nazi” word has been used by a number of politicians from all parties because it still has a sting to it. After all, everything done by the Germans prior to and after World War II is eclipsed by what is alleged to have happened at Auschwitz concentration camp. The argument is always “from Mozart, Beethoven and Wagner to the homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz”. That's the card pulled out by anyone who is faced with competition from a German-born Australian or Australian of German descent.

It is from this basis that we take it as our right to challenge the taboo topic´s veracity - did the Germans operate homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz? It is too cheap for us to decry our work as that of “hate-mongers”, “anti-Semites”, “racists” or “neo-Nazis”. Let us repeat; we are not deniers of the Jewish-Nazi Holocaust. We affirm that to date there is no proof that millions of people were gassed by Germans in homicidal gas chambers. Dare you join us in this continuing intellectual adventure of the 21^st Century?

http://www.learntoquestion.com/resources/lessons/intro/index.html

http://www.learntoquestion.com/resources/lessons/intro/tour/sites/about_adin.html#

______________________________________________________________________________

ON LINE opinion - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Censoring the Adelaide Institute's Web site is futile

By Terry Lane
Posted Thursday, 30 November 2000

The Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commissioner has ordered Adelaide man Dr Fredrick Toben to change the contents of his web site, or else.

Dr Toben is sceptical about the use of gas chambers by Nazis for the mass extermination of Jews. He says that it didn't happen, or is grossly exaggerated. And if that is what he sincerely believes, as offensive as some people may find it, how can he be forced to pretend that he doesn't believe it?

Are we to take it that the Human Rights commissioner is going to order every outspoken person who offends some group or other to desist and apologise? Will Philip Ruddock be forced to declare that Aborigines did invent the wheel? Or will Bill Hayden be compelled to retract his assertion that some Aboriginal children were better off separated from their parents?

Toben is saying on his web site that he doesn't believe that the Nazis used gas chambers to murder Jews. He is making a claim of fact that can be proven or disproved by evidence. It does not need to be censored in advance of the argument.

However, we know all that. Some of us believe in the principle of free speech, even though it means that we must from time to time defend the rights of individuals whose speech is morally repulsive or even fantastic and mendacious. And some of us want to prohibit speech that offends or hurts, on pain of penalty for the persistent speaker.

As one who believes in the right of the citizen to be wrong and offensive I am interested to know how the speech prohibitionists intend to stop the mouths of those they don't like. Can it be done in a free society? To what low level of thought control are we prepared to go?

In totalitarian nations where total control on ideas has been tried they have come up with some novel mechanisms. In the old Soviet Union you had to get a government licence to own a duplicating machine. But neither the Soviets nor the Chinese thought to impose proper controls on the fax, which led to things getting out of hand in the late 80s.

Now we have the Internet, and Dr Toben's Adelaide Institute web site appears to be located on an American server. The Human Rights commissioner will get short shrift if she appeals to the US administration to close down a web site. They don't do that sort of thing in the USA because they believe that the good order of society is not threatened by a few people who choose to hold and disseminate improper opinions.

But suppose that the commissioner, Ms McEvoy, could persuade the Americans to revoke the first amendment to their constitution, she would not be able to leave it there. She would have to effect a total ban on Dr Toben speaking in public, or even having private conversations. He would have to be a banned person, in the old South African sense of the term.

His mail would have to be censored, his telephone cut off, his computer and fax confiscated and all his friends, who might republish his ideas locked up in solitary. Anyone holding similar opinions would have to be banned. Has she thought this thing through?

Some zealots who believe in free speech might think that, in the service of their convictions, they should re-publish the Toben web site, not because we agree with it but because of the principle at stake.

German-born Dr Toben may be trying to clear his people's name. If a Japanese-Australian were to publish a revisionist history of WWII in which the Japanese Imperial Army is a bunch of softies, totally committed to prison reform, would the Human Rights commissioner ban it because the RSL petitioned her to? I think not.

If Toben is telling the truth, nothing will stop it. If he is a malicious fantasist, then he will be ignored. We should test his assertions, not silence them.

This article was first published in the Sunday Age Perspective column on October 15 2000.

Terry Lane is a Melbourne-based radio broadcaster and writer. http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=1126

_{© The
National Forum and contributors 1999-2007. All rights reserved.}

Home
Who is Willis Carto?
Revisionism v. denial
Holocaust denial
The deniers
Antisemitism
Articles
Updates
Further reading
Links
Support us!

contact

E-mail

feedback

Correspondence

Adelaide Institute

Founded: 1994

Location: Adelaide, Australia

Director: Fredrick Toben

Web site: Adelaide Institute

Since its foundation in 1994, the Adelaide Institute has quickly become the leading Holocaust denial group in Australia, despite the fact that it is essentially the personal crusade of its founder Fredrick Toben.

Toben's own personal account of his interest in the Holocaust reveals knowledge of Holocaust denial arguments since the early 1970s; however, it was not until the 1990s that his views started to become expressed publicly. Having demonstrated against war crimes trials in the early 1990s in Adelaide, in 1993, Toben founded a group called "Truth Missions" (of no relation to that of David McCalden's similarly-named body. In 1994, Truth Missions became the Adelaide Institute - so named in response to the Sydney Institute of Gerard Henderson, and formed to provide a more cohesive face to a small group of like-minded individuals.

The Adelaide Institute is essentially a one-person operation that seeks to give legitimacy to Toben's activities. Consequently, the group's activities and fate mirror closely those of Toben. For instance, whilst Toben was incarcerated in Germany for much of 1999, the group was headed by Geoffrey Muirden, who is also a member of John Bennet's Australian Civil Liberties Union. During this time, the Adelaide Insitute became less active, other than the notable exception of Richard Krege's trip to the site of the Treblinka death camp.

Toben is not the only individual involved with the group, even if the Adelaide Institute is essentially his operation. Until early 2000, Toben's sidekick was David Brockschmidt, whose parents helped Oskar Schindler save Jews during the Second World War. Indeed, Brockschmidt demonstrated against the Spielberg film Schindler's List for neglecting to mention the role that his parents played. Brockschmidt has recently become active once more in the Adelaide Institute's activities.

Another Adelaide Institute is the Tasmanian Olga Scully, who has faced legal proceedings for her distribution of Holocaust denial propaganda in her local Launceston community.

This site was last updated on April 26, 2005. Problems with the site? Email the webmaster

http://www.williscarto.com/adelinst.html

Home
Who is Willis Carto?
Revisionism v. denial
Holocaust denial
The deniers
Antisemitism
Articles
Updates
Further reading
Links
Support us!

contact

E-mail

feedback

Correspondence

Welcome to williscarto.com

This web site is being censored by Google's French site. Please Click here for further information

Welcome to www.williscarto.com - Resources against Holocaust denial and Antisemitism. This site has been created to complement existing resources about antisemitism in general, and in particular one of its newest forms - Holocaust denial.

It does not claim to examine every aspect of antisemitism, but is designed to provide detailed information about specific aspects - primarily Holocaust denial, but also other forms. Divided into the categories displayed on the left, it examines the important aspects of the phenomenon.

This site is also very much an ongoing project, and visitors should not expect that the site provides a thorough overview at this stage. Frequent updates shall be made, time permitting, and frequent visits are recommended to view the latest material. Information about the latest updates is provided (last updated: April 26, 2005).

If you experience any problems with the functioning of sections of this site, please send a mail to let us know.

Want anonymous Internet surfing? Try the Cloa k

This site was last updated on April 26, 2005. Problems with the site? Email the webmaster http://www.williscarto.com/index.html

Click Here to Visit our Sponsor

Correspondence

Nizkor http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/australian/adelaide-institute/correspondence/

June 8, 1996: Nizkor queries the Adelaide Institute regarding the four million gambit and Pressac's morgue-conversion documents.
June 22, 1996: Adelaide replies to Nizkor with a rambling letter, touching briefly on the topics raised. (Their copy of the letter was at http://www.adam.com.au/~fredadin/extra5.html#reply but is now at http://www.adam.com.au/~fredadin/mccarthy03.html, or, if that doesn't work, try looking for a link to it from http://www.adam.com.au/~fredadin/adins.html#views. The same goes for the rest of this correspondence.)
July (?), 1996: Adelaide adds two postscripts to the open letter.
September 2, 1996: Nizkor replies to Adelaide, dissecting their non-responses and pointing out their dishonesty.
October 6, 1996: Adelaide replies with a "fire-side monologue" (which Nizkor was not aware of until December 21).
December 21-26, 1996: Töben and McCarthy exchange a number of letters.

Adelaide Institute From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This article does not cite any references or sources.

Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. (help, get involved!)

Unverifiable material may be challenged and removed.

This article has been tagged since October 2006.Established in 1994, the Adelaide Institute was formed from the former Truth Mission that was established in 1993 by Dr. Gerald Fredrick Töben. The Adelaide Institute is a Holocaust denial group in Australia and is considered to be anti-Semitic by Australian and international human rights groups.

[edit] Activities of the Institute

[hide]

Members of the Institute have in the past been active in organisations such as Australians For Free Speech, which held a rally in 1994 . The Institute has also been implicated in distributing Holocaust denials through mainstream and alternative publications. Letters to the editor and talk radio appear to be the favourite means of disseminating the worldview of the Institute. Prior to the opening of the film Schindler's List in Adelaide, members of the institute were implicated in distributing Holocaust denial pamphlets on the street and through the mail, apparently targeting those of Jewish background. Additionally, members of the Institute sent Holocaust denials to prominent Australian newspapers masquerading as objective movie reviews, some of which reached publication.

The Institute's stated goal is exposing "the Holocaust myth". The activity of the Institute seems to have declined since its initial burst of activity in the middle 1990s. The Institute does however still maintain a website on which statements on various issues are regularly posted.

[edit] Legal action against the Institute

The Adelaide Institute website triggered the arrest of Fredrick Töben in Germany in April 1999. Töben was sentenced to 10 months in prison, but had already served seven months during trial, and was released upon payment of a $5000 bond.

The Institute's website drew the attention of the Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC) in 2000. HREOC found that the Adelaide Institute had breached section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act by publishing material on the website, the consequences of which were "vilificatory, bullying, insulting and offensive" to the Jewish population; HREOC ordered Töben to close the site and apologise to the people he had offended. Because rulings of the HREOC are not enforceable at law, the case was also brought before the Federal Court of Australia, which ordered in 2002 that certain material be removed from the Adelaide Institute web site.

The Order of the Federal Court of Australia was that the Adelaide Institute should remove from its website any material which conveys one or any of the following imputations:

· there is serious doubt that the Holocaust occurred

· it is unlikely that there were homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz

· Jewish people who are offended by and challenge Holocaust denial are of limited intelligence

· some Jewish people, for improper purposes, including financial gain, have exaggerated the number of Jews killed during World War II and the circumstances in which they were killed

It has been noted by human rights organisations that the Institute has failed to fully comply with the order of the Federal Court of Australia and still publishes materials that it was ordered to remove in the 2002 judgement. Thus far no organisations have taken additional legal action against the Institute.

[edit] Associates of the Institute

· Arthur Butz, American Holocaust denier and author of the book "The Hoax of the Twentieth Century: The Case Against the Presumed Extermination of European Jewry";

· Mark Weber, the current head of the Institute for Historical Review (IHR);

· David Thomas, member of the "Campaign to Decriminalize Holocaust History";

· Doug Collins, the first journalist to face a human rights complaint over four articles he wrote about the Holocaust and Jews, and who the called the Holocaust movie Schindler's List "Swindler's List";

· John Tuson Bennett, one of Australia's longest and most active Holocaust deniers, active in the Holocaust denial movement since the late 1970s;

· Jürgen Graf, as a Swiss citizen and author of several books about Holocaust denial, Graf was prosecuted, along with his publisher, Gerhard Förster, for denying the gas chambers and the six million figure. In July 1998 a Swiss court sentenced him to 15 months imprisonment, and to pay a large fine, because of his denial writings.

· Robert Faurisson, France, Europe's leading Holocaust denier and known as the principal teacher of Ernst Zündel, German Holocaust denier and pamphleteer who was jailed several times for publishing hate literature.

· Germar Rudolf, German Holocaust denier

· Robert L. Brock, an African-American anti-Semite, who prominently allies himself with white supremacists

· Ingrid Rimland, a Canadian Holocaust denier, whose writings are regarded in Canada as hate material

· Olga Scully, Tasmanian woman, who has faced legal proceedings for her distribution of Holocaust denial propaganda.

[edit] See also

· Nation of Islam and anti-Semitism

· Racism

[edit] External links

· The Adelaide Institute Web Site

· Australian Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission 2000 Media Releases

· Federal Court of Australia Toben v Jones (2002)

· Encyclopaedia of right-wing extremism

· Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adelaide_Institute"

Categories: Articles lacking sources from October 2006 | All articles lacking sources | Holocaust denial

Home > Comments and Articles > The Adelaide Institute

Comment and Opinion - http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles/comment/toben.htm

The Adelaide Institute

Editorial 27 October 1999

An Australian citizen, Dr Fredrick Toben, was arrested in Germany in April 1999 and will go on trial in early November. Toben is a Holocaust revisionist who runs The Adelaide Institute, a site which has been featured here for some time. It is apparently that web site (located in Australia) which has triggered his arrest. I have no time for Toben's opinions, but I believe that his arrest is an outrageous assault on free speech. That someone can be charged with a crime in one country for an opinion published in another country of which he is both a resident and a citizen should frighten anyone who puts their words on the Internet or in a book.

People might ask why I object to Dr Toben's arrest when I was overjoyed at the arrest of not-a-medical-Dr Hulda Clark. The difference is simple. Toben's opinions may be offensive buffoonery and misguided nonsense but those opinions can't hurt anything except people's feelings. What Clark says and does can actually kill people by deceiving those with terminal or serious illnesses and encouraging them to give up proper medical care.

Update 15 November 1999

Dr Toben was sentenced to 10 months in prison, but the judge ruled that, as he had already served seven months since his arrest, he could be released upon payment of a $5000 bond. The odd length of the sentence, which just happened to allow immediate release, and the small financial penalty (bond, no fine) suggest that the judge was doing the minimum he had to do to comply with the ludicrous laws and keep his job.

More - 22 October 2000

It is again my unfortunate and anomalous duty to complain about the treatment of Dr Frederick Toben and his ghastly Adelaide Institute web site. The Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission has ordered him to close the site and apologise to people he has offended. Dr Toben may be a daft buffoon for all I know (I have never met him) (*) , but all there is on the site is a collection of words. Dr Toben denies that the Holocaust happened (or at least that it happened in the manner and scale that most people think) and he is wrong, but closing his site will not stop people talking the way he does and will only make him look like a martyr.

Rulings of the HREOC are not enforceable at law, but this ruling will encourage people to use the Commission in attempts to silence critics rather than use what I believe to be more effective tactics such as highlighting their nonsense, ridicule, or even offering convincing counterarguments. I am often asked why I use this site to "publicise" things I don't like, and my answer is that the first step to combat something you don't like is to expose it to examination. As Mohamed Ali said, you "can't hit what [you] can't see".

(*) I said above that "Dr Toben may be a daft buffoon". Since then, I have attended a conference where Dr Toben was a participant. I didn't get a chance to talk to him, but I don't think the "daft" part fits. I also respect his courage in turning up to an event where he was unlikely to be warmly welcomed. It says much about how civilised people behave that Dr Toben was able to sit in the same room as people implacably opposed to his views (including the person who initiated the HREOC complaint) and even be allowed to speak. Yes, there were some examples of body language and seating choice which indicated that some people would have preferred Dr Toben to be elsewhere, but nobody ever suggested throwing him out or silencing him. I wonder whether the same courtesies would be extended to a dissenter at a Holocaust denial conference.

None of this, of course, should be construed as me giving any support to Dr Toben's views. On his site, I agree with the words "and, "the, and "but" and not much else. The fact that we all turned up in the right place at the right date and time shows that there are things on which we can agree. I suspect, however, that this is close to the limit of consensus.

In September 2002, the Federal Court of Australia ordered that certain material be removed from the Adelaide Institute web site. I believe that the answer to speech is more speech, not suppression. You can read my comments about free speech here.

Digg this page Add to Reddit Post to del.icio.us

- 1996 -

From: Declan McCullagh - declan@well.com

Subject: Australian atty-general investigating Adelaide Inst.'s web site?

To: fight-censorship+@andrew.cmu.edu

About the Adelaide Institute

OPEN SEASON ON GERMANS

Censoring the Adelaide Institute's Web site is futile

contact

feedback

This site was last updated on April 26, 2005. Problems with the site? Email the webmaster

contact

feedback

This site was last updated on April 26, 2005. Problems with the site? Email the webmaster http://www.williscarto.com/index.html

Adelaide Institute From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

//<![CDATA[ if (window.showTocToggle) { var tocShowText = "show"; var tocHideText = "hide"; showTocToggle(); } //]]> [edit] Activities of the Institute

Contents

[edit] Legal action against the Institute

[edit] Associates of the Institute

[edit] See also

[edit] External links

Comment and Opinion - http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles/comment/toben.htm

About the
Adelaide Institute

[edit] Activities of the Institute