Today I have a treat for you! I am giving you a preview of Ernst Zundel's January 2000 Power letter where he talks about the meaning of the Irving Trial, which is to start tomorrow.
I consider this excerpt to be one of the most incisive and important paragraphs about Revisionism of recent years.
But before I do so, let me briefly comment on the CNN cancellation at the very last minute of the scheduled David Irving special.
Yesterday I wrote:
CNN's zine ran a little promo piece today:
The Holocaust - five to six million Jews systematically exterminated by the Nazis. It is an unquestionable matter of fact - right? As surprising as it may seem, the actual events of the Holocaust will come into question this week as a much-anticipated trial gets underway in Great Britain.
British historian David Irving has said there is no documented evidence to prove that there were gas chambers at the Auschwitz concentration camp or that Hitler ordered the extermination of Europe's Jews. When Deborah Lipstadt, a professor of Jewish studies at Atlanta's Emory University, accused him of "joining the ranks of Holocaust deniers" in her book Denying the Holocaust, Irving sued Lipstadt for libel.
Irving . . . has questioned aspects of the Holocaust, such as the existence of gas chambers and how many Jews were killed by the Nazis. (. . . ) British law places the burden of proof on the defendant in libel suits; now Lipstadt must prove that Irving denies the existence of the Holocaust."
We were all ears and anticipation, for 6 p.m. on a Sunday Night on CNN is as good as it can get in TV-Land. During the day, I received many notices from all parts of the continent and even beyond. I was informed that Jeff Greenfield was going to host this CNN talk show. Deborah Lipstadt and David Irving were both scheduled to put in an appearance. We were told that even call-ins would be permitted.
And then - without a warning or an explanation - NOTHING! It seems that someone, at the last minute, must have pulled the emergency brake.
We are still curious about what happened - and many speculate that there might be dissent at highest Holocaust Lobby quarters, for such a show in prime time, broadcast globally, about the Irving Trial, must have felt to many to embody a very great risk that would open the proverbial can of worms!
Talk about media power - to cancel such a show!
Now to Ernst Zundel's reflections about political trials - on the last day before the Irving Trial:
The most important thing to recognize is that courtrooms are contemporary ideological battle fields - and as such, crucially important for the precedents they carve. Even so, they are poor places to discuss and debate controversial issues of history, because defendants and prosecutors frequently chafe under, and are hampered by, rules and requirements imposed by legal procedures. One should think of political trials as very restricted, stilted debates, supervised by a moderator who has absolute power to dismiss virtually any argument or document - a man called a judge.
It must be understood that the judges in Revisionist trials are human beings - men and women who have usually grown up in the same nations and pretty well in the same environment as the accusers or the prosecutors. Judges went to the same schools and had the same doctored, slanted text books and history courses. They earned their grades and diplomas and degrees by largely agreeing with what the instructing professors had taught them and by regurgitating ideologically approved opinions and texts from their recommended reading lists.
This means that judges, prosecutors and jurors are a reflection of the prevailing theory of history - the culture myths of the day. In Nazi Germany it would have been that the Jews were a huge problem for the well-being of the nation. In Stalin's Russia it would have been that capitalists were evil and the proletarian masses were good. In Canada, Germany, the USA, France and England it is the same - there is uncritical acceptance that Hitler was a monster, and World War II was fought by the Allies for a supremely righteous cause - increasingly, as is falsely claimed, to ". . . save the Jews from genocide".
This post-war view of history, laced with Allied propaganda claims of World War II and buttressed by the grotesque Nuremberg trial proceedings and verdicts and the media's incessant, repetitious brainwashing campaign, are what judges and jurors have been exposed to since they were born - in school, in universities and in their daily lives. Every time they turned on the radio, the TV, or picked up a newspaper, every time they went to a library or a bookstore, they were confronted with the same one-sided point of view. There simply was no balance in the information available.
An accused Holocaust or even a World War II Revisionist is never ever judged by an impartial judge or a "jury of his peers". He is always, without exception, judged by a judge or jury of his enemies - at least by the judge's or jury's mindset formed by his enemies.
That was the case for me in Canada in every trial and hearing since 1981. That was the fate of Dr. Faurisson, Fred Leuchter, Fredrick Töben, Germar Rudolf, John Demjanjuk and Frank Walus. So it will be with David Irving.
Of course it is true that David Irving is doing the suing - which means, since he has no attorney to represent him, he is acting as a prosecutor, but there is still the judge and the partial and Steeped-in-the-Myth of the Holocaust culture surrounding this trial and its outcome. The chances that Irving's judge has read or been exposed to even a single serious Holocaust Revisionist text or book are one-in-a-billion.
So David Irving will have to fight an uphill battle - right from the word go! The lapdog media, the mainstream news, the op-ed pieces written by politically beholden commentators, all the TV and radio specials that will be spawned off this trial will appear in prime time, on the front pages of most important newspapers, all reinforcing the traditional view of the Holocaust. The Canadian media admitted that they purposely ran all kinds of pro-Holocaust stories during my trials, to offset our witnesses' testimony!
That judge will have to be an angel, wiser than Solomon and fairer than Christ, not to be influenced by all that pervasive Holocaust hysteria. There simply are no people of flesh and blood, not even those with judges' robes, walking this earth who could purge their hearts and minds of a lifetime of accumulated impulses, brain washings and mind warpings by those convincingly done TV specials and films like Schindler's List.
Keep that in mind as the trial unfolds!
Then there is the all-important next variable - in this case, the personality constellation and mindset of David Irving, his unique traits, his own emotional snail house, his cultural baggage and national as well as ethnic stereotypes he has grown up with. Believe me, these factors - all of which make up a person's being - determine how we act and react, especially under pressure. There is the physical, emotional and, yes, even the mental strength of a person under siege to be considered. All have a direct bearing on the preparation, the conduct and ultimately the outcome of such a trial.
Let me tell you, speaking as one who has been through a series of these political trials: They are one of the most difficult experiences a person can be subjected to - they are nerve-sapping, draining, debilitating, health-destroying ordeals! I remember sitting on my sunroof - for hours, days and weeks, in silence, alone, trembling uncontrollably after months and months of this strain. I was so exhausted and drained at times that I felt that all that was left of me was an empty shell. After each trial, it took me months, sometimes years, to recover. At times I wonder if a trial victim ever really recovers. I know I have not. Those vicious, unfair trials have changed me forever!
Remember also: I was the lucky one. I had capable lawyers, brilliant advisors, skilled researchers, a thousand helping hands and loving friends who cooked meals, ran errands, typed texts, handled the money, did the banking, answered the phones etc. And yet, I remember how lonely I was, how isolated within my soul, and how desperate I felt at moments, longing for the day and hour when all this would be over.
Some of you will say: "But, Ernst, David Irving is tougher than you were. You are a sensitive artist - he is an intellectual brawler. He is one flamboyant, articulate, outgoing guy. He is better educated than you were. He is better looking - taller, stronger, more aggressive, mentally sharper. He is media-genic. He has better recall of his facts. He has a near-photographic memory. He is used to playing the role of a literary star in urbane circles."
The list could go on and on - all of which I will grant my critics. But even David Irving is a human being - and the ordeal is still ahead of him.
I have known of David Irving for almost 40 years and known him personally for 14 years now. I have seen him and experienced him "up close." I have laughed with him when he told his funny, often hilarious jokes, and I mentally withdrew from him when I saw a side of him I did not particularly care for. I have seen him when his guard was down, when he was tense, tired and irascible. I have seen the "other side" of David Irving when he felt betrayed, crossed, thwarted or compromised.
I don't know where he will house his witnesses - I don't even know if he will call any. I have only heard sketchy details about his apparent strategy. He does not want my advice and rejects well-meaning offers of help from others - maybe out of fear of being still further compromised by any associations with people like me, Dr. Faurisson and others. He seems to think, or at least used to think up until a few months ago, that his libel suit was strictly that - that he could steer free of the Holocaust with all its lies, distortions, false claims, forged documents and impossible "science".
I predicted over half a hear ago that David Irving would have a Holocaust trial whether he liked it or not, that our enemies would see to it, that they wanted him to be the means with which they could rescue their "world view" - their version of history. They are hoping that a victory for their side in the Irving Trial will be perceived and can ultimately be parlayed into a devastating blow against the whole Revisionist movement - a movement which is scaring the living daylights out of the whole Holocaust industry, from the Simon Wiesenthalers to the Wiesels, the Goldhagens, the Hilbergs and the van Pelts!
Irving is their hoped-for means to accomplish this. If they defeat him, they can hang on to their schemes just a little bit longer. You can sense this and read it between the lines in every published statement, in every press release, in every sound bite devoted to the subject. Remember, our enemies have character and behavior profiles of their opponents, formulated by the most competent experts in the field of profiling, in and outside law enforcement. They know more about David Irving, Dr. Faurisson, Fred Leuchter, you and me than even our own mothers. Trust me - these people know the threat the Irvings, Faurissons and Zündels of the world pose to their unconscionable, lucrative racket. They are desperate - and desperate people, if they feel themselves cornered, will do desperate things. They will use every means, fair and foul, from intimidation to bribery, from arson to bombs - and, yes, if need be, bullets! - to stop the historical truth from emerging and destroying their carefully constructed edifice of lies.
In hindsight, I was lucky that I lost - and lost and lost in the lower courts - for the Canadian state tormented me, fined me, jailed me and destroyed my business in the many years of litigation. My enemies were jubilant, and the media were on their side. In the end, when I won by one slim vote in the Supreme Court of Canada, my victory was anti-climactic. By that time, they did not have to kill me. They had effectively gagged me by a judge's sweeping gag order for over a decade - and that, they thought, gained them time and sufficed to keep the benefits of Holocaust victimhood rolling in.
When I did not give up, they decided to burn me out. When I still refused to run or to surrender, a powerful bomb was mailed to me to finally accomplish their goal - to eliminate the accuser by assassination.
I draw this to the attention of the worldwide community of researchers, academics, writers, film producers and lawyers because I want you to understand the gravity of the hour. I also want people to prepare for the post-Irving trial battles. For win or lose, the war for Truth in History will go on, in spite of who wins or who loses this one round - and an important round it is! I know this, maybe better than most. But it will not be the final battle - not by a long shot.
That the enemy has a well-oiled network of friends, informers, media flaks, terrorizers and enforcers in government and in the private sector can be seen by the way they handled the "Germar Rudolf Exposé" operation. Let me recap what plays here.
Germar Rudolf is crucial for the Irving Trial and argument as it is evolving because his scientifically impeccable Rudolf Report improved on and strengthened the Leuchter Report. The Holocaust Lobby knew for years where Germar was, that he lived in England, where he lived, that his marriage was falling apart from the strain. They allowed him to leave England, come to America, give a few speeches, publicly even - even though the Germans had an international arrest warrant out for him. England, a member of the European Economic Community, let Germar come and go and work - seemingly unhindered. They knew about his precarious financial situation, who published his magazine, where and when. They knew a great deal because they are intertwined with government intelligence agencies and have stooges at every level of government - even in the cabinets in Canada, America, Australia, England and continental Europe. They officially and covertly intercept faxes, phone calls, e-mail and letters. They bug cars, offices, bedrooms and, I bet you, even outhouses in their paranoia, fearful of being found out. They do this with government approval and cooperation. They bide their time, and when the time is ripe and good for them, they strike. I have seen it and experienced it a hundred times!
A few weeks ago, they struck at Germar Rudolf. Only when Germar seemed to be a threat to their strategies in the Irving Trial by possibly being called as a powerful witness, did they cause a ruckus, first in the press - as though they had ". . . flushed Rudolf out of hiding" - exposing his marital problems, disclosing where he lived, and visiting and intimidating friends, neighbors, even his landlord. It was disgracefully apparent what they did - and, for us seasoned veterans, why they acted as they did.
Unless Irving can pull a rabbit out of his hat, Germar Rudolf has been effectively sidelined because he has been forced into being a fugitive in hiding and on the run again, one step ahead of his pursuers. Britain will now attempt to arrest Germar under the German warrant and extradite him to Germany if and when they "catch" him - and thus knock out the most competent chemical expert Irving could have offered as a witness.
So that is the state of affairs on the eve of this history-making trial.
In spite of what I have been through for the last twenty years, inside and outside the courtrooms, I would rather be in that court instead of David Irving, aided and assisted by Doug Christie and Barbara Kulaszka, my fine legal team, advised by Dr. Faurisson, Mark Weber, Ted O'Keefe, Dr. Butz, and all the other Revisionist scholars. I feel for David Irving in these weeks and months. I hope he finds a fair judge and a free-from-behind-the-scenes, corruption-influenced legal system. Count Tolstoy's ordeal, and the corruption in that rather similar case, do not auger well for the British justice system. (Irving's judge was the lawyer for Tolstoy's enemies. . . ) My prayers and good wishes go out to him, and I hope that Revisionists the world over will close ranks, one more time, and assist him, whether he asks for their help or not.
And Lipstadt? I say that Deborah Lipstadt is the Sabina Citron of the Year 2000. Both had evil intentions, and malice was their advisor. They believed that victory over Revisionists would come easy. Yet where would Revisionism be, had it not been for Sabina charging me - and where will Revisionism be ten, twenty years from now, thanks to Lipstadt and her entourage of the American Jewish Committee and their hangers-on?
I say in spite of all of the above that this will be a good year for Revisionism. Wave after wave of publicity will be exposing their lies and distortions, and these waves of publicity will be lapping at the sand castles built by our enemies. The in-rushing surf will make them crumble, and the outflowing undertow will wash them out to the sea as mere grains of sand. The shores will be altered, but shores there will be.
In the end, the struggle for Human Freedom will continue. The court transcripts will be mined by historians for years and decades to come. Whoever loses will appeal - if there are appeals in such cases. The battle will be costly, but it is worth every penny and every ounce of strength. Human freedom will be the winner in the end, even if David Irving and Revisionism should suffer a temporary setback. The public mood is rapidly changing against our enemies. Too much is already known by millions the world over. The shake-down of the Swiss was one of the turning points. To quote Abe Foxman of the American-based ADL - ". . . we bludgeoned them and bludgeoned them and bludgeoned them - but at what price?"
Indeed - at what price to the Jewish community, in the long run?
=====
Thought for the Day:
"What other countries do is none of America's business unless it constitutes a threat to America's interests; and by this criterion, there has not been one single war, from the Civil War to the bombing of Yugoslavia, which has been justified.
"A commitment to freedom is more than just a commitment to one's own freedom: It is a commitment to leave others alone, and in particular to allow them the freedom to find their own way in this world, irrespective of how imperfect their behavior may be."
(Letter to the Zundelsite)
Back to Table of Contents of the Jan. 2000 ZGrams