Copyright (c) 1997 - Ingrid A. Rimland
* expert Holocaust revisionist Dr. Robert Faurisson, a scholar on ancient documents from Lyon II university in France,
* Dr. William Lindsey, the retired chief research chemist of the giant American chemical company, Dupont, and Ernst's advisor on the chemical properties of Zyklon B etc,
* Dr. Russell Barton, who had been in Bergen-Belsen immediately after its liberation as a young medical student for the British authorities,
* Thies Christophersen, a German who had been stationed near Auschwitz during the war and toured Auschwitz - even lived there with wife on their honeymoon,
* Ditlieb Felderer, the Swedish researcher who had taken thousands of photographs of Auschwitz during the 1970s during almost 30 visits,
* Frank Walus, a Polish American who was falsely accused by Simon Wiesenthal of being a Nazi war criminal,
* Dr. Gary Botting, a professor of literature, and author and newspaper columnist Doug Collins, both of whom testified to the literary and freedom-of-speech issues in the case,
* Jim Keegstra, the school teacher charged with spreading hatred against Jews in his classroom, and
* Pierre Zündel, the accused's oldest son.
Lastly, Ernst himself took the stand as the final witness.
The Crown attempted to suggest that Ernst wanted to see a civil war to effect
change.
Ernst disagreed and spoke of precisely how he was attempting to effect change.
Said Ernst, who can be quite schoolmasterly:
"You need the truth. It is like this. You are in a large room a number of people, all minding their own business, not realizing that among them there is a pickpocket on the loose.
"Now that pickpocket is a danger to each person in that room!
"Until such time that the light of publicity - in this case the light of the law, maybe - points at him and follows him throughout the room, nobody has to touch the man; nobody has to beat the man; nobody has to arrest the man.
"All you have to do is expose the man.
"And with publicity, that's exactly what you can do. These people who are lying about the Holocaust are only a problem until such time that their racket has been exposed through truth." (Transcript, 1985, p. 4260)
Ernst described why modern Germany had failed to refute the Holocaust propaganda:
"These propaganda claims against Germany were made. Germany was in ruins, defeated. The entire German leadership of that particular time was either rotting in jail, was either executed, was starved to death, or was somewhere in the Soviet Gulag, so the German people were virtually abandoned.
"What was left was emigree leadership that had left Germany in the thirties, largely Jewish, communists who came back with the communists or quislings who occupied positions and were given the positions by the Allied powers."
People sometimes get angry with Ernst when he uses the term "quisling" because, used either as a noun or as a verb, it is based on a Scandinavian patriot whom many still hold dear. During his trial, Ernst explained the meaning of this word as he understood and used it:
"A quisling is properly understood to be a person who is appointed by an occupying power doing the services of somebody else. And the constitutional conference that was held in Bonn to set up the West German State was hand-picked by the occupying authorities, and they rejected people when they didn't toe the line that the Allies had laid down for Germany.
"So therefore we started out with an occupational government, and it has been self-perpetuating, however much they want to cloak themselves in democratic trappings." (Transcript, 1985, p. 4344-45)
With respect to the "West, War and Islam," one of the two documents
on which the "false news charges were laid - the other being "Did
Six Million Really Die?" - Ernst testified that at the time it was
published there was tangible agitation by the Zionists for war in the Middle
East (which happened before long) and he was attempting to help diffuse
the situation through dissemination of information to the elite of the West
hoping for funds from the elite of the wealthy Arab and other Islamic countries
to remove negative stereotypes of the Islamic peoples in the minds of Westerners.
In this four-page pamphlet, Ernst had urged leaders of the Islamic nations
to spend money on public information campaigns, not weapons.
The pamphlet had stated:
* "For the cost of one airplane, a whole nation could be informed about the true aims of one or more Islamic countries.
* For the cost of one tank, a public information film could be produced and shown over and over again to Western audiences, eager to be informed.
* For the cost of one anti-tank missile, a small booklet could be published and sent to the newsmedia representatives of the West.
* For the cost of one artillery shell, a well-trained speaker could present the Islamic case at a university symposium or international gathering.
* For the cost of one rifle, 500 information-packed tape cassettes could be sent to radio stations around the world.
* For the cost of one rifle bullet, stamps could be bought to mail ten letters bearing the message of truth and understanding to remote corners of the world.
"Are Islamic leaders so isolated in their thinking that they cannot
grasp the importance and practicality of these suggestions?" he wanted
to know. "Are expensive and rapidly obsolescent weapons preferable
to propaganda which can bring about peace? . . . There is a better way,
the way of truthful information, our way."
There IS a better way. I wish the Arab countries would listen to what Revisionism
has to say.
Ingrid
"Genocide by starvation and sickness is now the preferred weapon of the rich against the poor because, like the neutron bomb, it kills people and preserves property."
(Ramsey Clark, former U.S. Attorney General, speaking on the consequences of economic sanctions against Iraq)