Yesterday I did an hour-long interview with a television journalist working for one of the major European television syndicates, sent all the way from Germany to investigate the state of affairs of the "dangerous" Revisionist movement - suppressed and persecuted by most governments, yet of great interest to investigative journalists worldwide, especially the younger ones who often take the initiative to find out for themselves.
Meeting this young journalist and his camera team was a memorable experience - I am sure cutting both ways, for he learned as much as I did. More details of this interview will be sent in my monthly newsletters to my loyal Zundelsite supporters.
Two of the points I stressed were those of systematic defamation and demonization employed by our opposition in trying to stem the truth from coming out and spreading in the general population about what's widely called the "Holohoax". Of course, ultimately censorship really never works - as exemplified by the Doug Collins case.
Here he is, yet one more time and in his own words, pertaining to a huge smear campaign unleashed by the Canadian Jewish Congress in response to an article this Canadian-based veteran reporter wrote.
Note: Word for word this is the most expensive column ***ever*** written and then published in a Canadian newspaper--costing the North Shore News a princely sum of $203,000 to defend against the zealots at the British Columbia Human Rights Commission, spurred on by a complaint of the Canadian Jewish Congress, complainant in a misnamed "human-rights" case. As it happened, the CJC's complaint against the columnist Doug Collins and the North Shore News was dismissed in November 1997. (Not that the case is yet finished...)
Doug Collins, a native of the United Kingdom, served with the British army during the Second World War, and then with the British control commission in postwar occupied Germany. An award-winning journalist, he has worked for several Canadian daily newspapers. His career has also included work in television and radio. He is the author of several books.
The essay published here is reprinted from Doug Collins' most recent book _Here We Go Again_, an anthology of his writings reaching back 15 years. The book is available from Colpress [P.O. Box Box 91831, West Vancouver, B.C., Canada V7V 4S1] for $20 Canadian.
For more information write:
douglas_collins@bc.sympatico.ca
Here is the amazing column that sent the Holocaust zealots into an absolute tailspin. ***Copy it and pass it on to let people know how the Human Rights sharks try to intimidate and impowerish legitimate newspapers and politically incorrect journalists***!
Hollywood Propaganda | Doug Collins
North Shore News | March 9, 1994
Prophecy is risky. But today [March 9] I prophesy that the Steven Spielberg movie "Schindler's List" will run away with the Academy Awards. I make that forecast without having seen it and without having any intention of doing so, since it must be the 555th movie or TV program on the "holocaust."
Fifty years after the war one tires of hate literature in the form of films. British Columbia schoolchildren are being trooped in to see this effort. In the name of piety, of course. But wasn't it Elie Wiesel, a major holocaust propagandist, who said the world should never stop hating the Germans? Such indoctrination goes on even though Germans born after 1925 or so are no more responsible for the Hitler period than are the Eskimos.
Why we are getting such an overdose of a bad thing? One reason is that it is profitable in more ways than one. Billions of dollars are still being paid out in compensation to Israel and "survivors," of whom there seem to be an endless number--paid out by those same Germans who were not responsible for Hitler. Anyway, "Swindler's List" will hit the Academy bell because Hollywood is Hollywood and what happened to the Jews during the Second World War is not only the longest lasting but also the most effective propaganda exercise ever. It is so effective that the mere mention of Auschwitz makes even babes feel guilty. Dr. Goebbels himself couldn't have done any better. And didn't. From his seat in hell he must be envious.
Hardly a day goes by but that press, radio and television don't mention something about the six million. The figure is nonsense, but media folk go on parroting what everyone "knows." I used to do the same. That's the safe way, too, for as a recent [Dec. 1993] article in Vanity Fair magazine put it, if you question the official version you can expect trouble. But that's an understatement. You will be damned as "anti-Semitic", "racist" and even "Nazi". After half a century of this the moguls of the movie world reckoned the time was right to cash in a big way. And Spielberg reckoned it was time for him to cash in, too.
"Movie of the year! Spielberg takes on the Holocaust!" screamed the cover-page in _Newsweek_ magazine [Dec. 201. You would have thought the war had just ended and that the film was the biggest event since the Battle of Britain. Critics have fawned on it, especially in the US, where many of them work for Jewish-owned media and know how to adjust their safety belts. Others simply reflect what they have been programmed to reflect. Only one critic has described Spielberg's effort as three hours of propaganda. He was with the Jewish-owned _New York Times_. Good for him. And them. The exception that proves the rule.
In time of war, propaganda is justified. Fifty years on, it's a bit much. But it comes about because the Jewish influence is the most powerful in Hollywood. One is not supposed to say that, of course. It's the ultimate in political incorrectness. But would it be out of order to say such a thing if the Catholics ran Hollywood and we got a stream of Catholic propaganda? I don't think so.
There have been many holocausts but most of them had hardly warranted a paragraph, let alone movies. Has anyone ever made a film about the two million Armenians killed by the Turks? Or the slaughter of 500,000 Indonesians? How about the uprooting of ten million Germans from their homes in East Prussia and Silesia, the murdering of tens of thousands of them by the Red Army and the raping of their women, young and old? In August 1945, Winston Churchill warned that terrible things were d happening. I myself watched masses of desperate refugees steaming into the British Zone of Occupation. (And yes, I know what the Germans did to the Russians.)
The Japanese were also skilled in the killing game. Didn't they murder countless Chinese? And Brits and Aussies remember how prisoners were worked and starved to death. And beheaded. But there has been only one movie on the miseries of life and death in South East Asia - "Bridge on the River Kwai." Certainly, there has been no constant propaganda barrage. So now it's all licky-licky for the Japanese. But not for the Germans.
Am I suggesting that Hitler wasn't Hitler or that hundreds of thousands of Jews didn't die in the camps and elsewhere, as did many non-Jews? No. But propaganda is selective and Hollywood propaganda is the most selective of all. So I won't be watching the Academy Awards. Let me know if my little prediction is wrong.
Thought for the Day:
"It does seem rather paradoxical, that someone who fought in a war to retain the right to freedom of speech is now being persecuted for exercising that right."
(Letter to the Zundelsite)