November 25, 1997

Good Morning from the Zundelsite:

"I am saddened that you have so totally severed our relationship. We clearly disagree on the matter of the Holocaust as well as your political views, but I, at least, have made some effort to remain friends on the basis of 'agreeing to disagree.'

You do not seem to be able to handle that. I am frightened for you and appalled by your current activities.

You seem to delight in and thrive on conflict and theories of conspiracy. I cannot imagine living that way, and I am happy that I'm not.

My friend, I think you've gone mad . . . "

"Ernst's advice not to go to Canada was well calculated. You must never forget that here in the United Sates you have the First Amendment to protect you.

You are a marked woman, Ingrid. Right now you wear the "Scarlett Letter" of the Twentieth Century, and not for anything so banal as adultery.

Hans Schmidt and Fred Leuchter were (despite their otherwise laudable virtues) complete and absolute fools in going to Germany and getting themselves thrown into prison. It's time Revisionists understood what they are up against.

Revisionism is not, as Professor Faurisson likes to believe, an "intellectual adventure." REVISIONISM IS WAR against an enemy equipped with all the weapons of Twentieth Century deception.

Going to enemy-occupied territory and daring them to shoot at you is schoolboy technique. It is the schoolboys of 1914 rushing off to the war ". . . that will last two weeks". There is no revisionist Van Schliefen plan which will outflank the enemy. We all ought to know that by now.

David Irving, in my opinion, is a schoolboy - albeit a highly educated one who has actually done his homework. "Look! Behold the truth! I, the most knowledgeable historian of the Third Reich, proclaim the 'gas chambers' and the 'six million' a hoax!"

I don't mean to belittle the well-meaning efforts of anyone in the Revisionist movement. But as a man who killed a lot of Germans once said: "No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by getting the other poor dumb bastard to die for his country."

Stay in the US where you have legal protection for your activities. Let the enemy froth at the mouth. There is no virtue in taking a hit via legal persecution and then writing a book complaining about it."

"War is an instrument of policy. Von Clausewitz's famous dictum.

What policy has underlain America's wars of this century? Whatever the policy is, it is certainly not an American policy.

This can be established easily. The Spanish-American war of the turn of the Century was the last war to pursue the old-fashioned policy of territorial expansion. The Spanish-American war brought the Philippines, Cuba and Puerto Rico under American control. This may or may not have been wise, but it was a tangible result, in keeping with the traditional policy of nations.

But with World War I and all subsequent wars a different policy took over. The objective - at least for the Americans if not for the British and the French - was now "human rights".

Internationalism.

And so it has remained to the present day!

This change is most indicative. A nation does not change its traditional policies unless it is in the grip of a power stronger than itself. There is ***no*** American interest in "no-win" wars, international organizations, or 38th parallel compromises which renew conflicts when certain forces desire it.

A global policy is at work which pays no heed to the needs of individual nations. ***The history of the Twentieth Century has been the history of the liquidation of national power***.

This may be seen in the destruction of the once mighty British Empire, the crushing of Germany in two world wars, and the liquidation of the European colonial empires. The deliberate assault on the white racial backbone of the United States is a continuation of the same process.

There is a conscious international campaign against white power all over the globe. The media-orchestrated campaigns against White South Africa and Rhodesia are illustrations.

This campaign is not new. It was observable in 1917 when an Asiatic country ruled by a thin veneer of Western Civilization was laid low by an alien force.

White power, internationally or domestically, has always been intolerable to a certain group. Communism and Zionism have always been acceptable to this same force.

"Conspiracy delusion" is not an acceptable response. Detectives do not theorize conspiracies; they objectively analyze facts and patterns of evidence.

There is a clear pattern of evidence. There is a modus operandi. There is an identifiable and consistent suspect. There is a documented blueprint which fits the emerging pattern. There is a hoax of fifty years' standing which is being exposed.

The media denounce such analysis. The media denounce Nazism and glorify Israel. The media promote the very trends which they claim are not part of a preconceived pattern.

No analysis can prove a global conspiracy. An analysis can only interpret world events as they have unfolded. If the reader prefers a different analysis, he is welcome to it. The analysis here offered suggests that the re-ordering of the world's affairs proceeds from a preconceived design."

Thought for the Day:

". . . Who was it who said that the poet lives among us as a sort of spy who walks about the earth all day and reports to heaven every night?"

(as sweetly quoted by Peter Lorden, Instauration, August 1997)