Published by the Institute for Historical Review

http://www.ihr.org/leaflets/denial.shtml

In recent years, considerable attention has been devoted to the supposed danger of “Holocaust denial.” Politicians, newspapers and television warn about the growing influence of those who reject the Holocaust story that some six million European Jews were systematically exterminated during the Second World War, most of them in gas chambers.

In several countries, including Israel, France, Germany and Austria, “Holocaust denial” is against the law, and “deniers” have been punished with stiff fines and prison sentences. Some Jewish community leaders have called for similar measures in North America. In Canada, David Matas, Senior Counsel for the “League for Human Rights” of the Zionist B’nai B’rith organization, says: [1]

“The Holocaust was the murder of six million Jews, including two million children. Holocaust denial is a second murder of those same six million. First their lives were extinguished; then their deaths. A person who denies the Holocaust becomes part of the crime of the Holocaust itself.”

Often overlooked in this controversy is the crucial question: Just what constitutes “Holocaust denial”?

Six Million?

Should someone be considered a “Holocaust denier” because he does not believe – as Matas and many others insist – that six million Jews were killed during World War II? This figure was cited by the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg in 1945-1946. It found that “the policy pursued [by the German government] resulted in the killing of six million Jews, of which four million were killed in the extermination institutions.” [2]

Yet if that is so, then several of the most prominent Holocaust historians could be regarded as “deniers.” Professor Raul Hilberg, author of the standard reference work, The Destruction of the European Jews, does not accept that six million Jews died. He puts the total of deaths (from all causes) at 5.1 million. Gerald Reitlinger, author of The Final Solution, likewise did not accept the six million figure. He estimated the figure of Jewish wartime dead might be as high as 4.6 million, but admitted that this was conjectural due to a lack of reliable information.

Human Soap?

Is someone a “Holocaust denier” if he says that the Nazis did not make soap from the corpses of murdered Jews? After considering the evidence – including an actual bar of soap supplied by the Soviets – the Nuremberg Tribunal declared in its Judgment that “in some instances attempts were made to utilize the fat from the bodies of the victims in the commercial manufacture of soap.” [3]

In 1990, though, Israel’s official Yad Vashem Holocaust center “rewrote history” by admitting that the soap story was not true. “Historians have concluded that soap was not made from human fat. When so many people deny the Holocaust ever happened, why give them something to use against the truth?,” said Yad Vashem official Shmuel Krakowski. [4]

Wannsee Conference?

Is someone a “Holocaust denier” if he does not accept that the January 1942 “Wannsee conference” of German bureaucrats was held to set or coordinate a program of systematic mass murder of Europe’s Jews? If so, Israeli Holocaust historian Yehuda Bauer must be wrong – and a “Holocaust denier” – because he declared: “The public still repeats, time after time, the silly story that at Wannsee the extermination of the Jews was arrived at.” In Bauer’s opinion, Wannsee was a meeting but “hardly a conference” and “little of what was said there was executed in detail.” [5]

Extermination Policy?

Is someone a “Holocaust denier” if he says that there was no order by Hitler to exterminate Europe’s Jews? There was a time when the answer would have been yes. Holocaust historian Raul Hilberg, for example, wrote in the 1961 edition of his study, The Destruction of the European Jews, that there were two Hitler orders for the destruction of Europe’s Jews: the first given in the spring of 1941, and the second shortly thereafter. But Hilberg removed mention of any such order from the revised, three-volume edition of his book published in 1985. [6] As Holocaust historian Christopher Browning has noted: [7]

“In the new edition, all references in the text to a Hitler decision or Hitler order for the `Final Solution’ have been systematically excised. Buried at the bottom of a single footnote stands the solitary reference: `Chronology and circumstances point to a Hitler decision before the summer ended.’ In the new edition, decisions were not made and orders were not given.”

A lack of hard evidence for an extermination order by Hitler has contributed to a controversy that divides Holocaust historians into “intentionalists” and “functionalists.” The former contend that there was a premeditated extermination policy ordered by Hitler, while the latter hold that Germany’s wartime “final solution” Jewish policy evolved at lower levels in response to circumstances. But the crucial point here is this: notwithstanding the capture of literally tons of German documents after the war, no one can point to documentary evidence of a wartime extermination order, plan or program. This was admitted by Professor Hilberg during his testimony in the 1985 trial in Toronto of German-Canadian publisher Ernst Zündel. [8]

Auschwitz

So just what constitutes “Holocaust denial”? Surely a claim that most Auschwitz inmates died from disease and not systematic extermination in gas chambers would be “denial.” But perhaps not. Jewish historian Arno J. Mayer, a Princeton University professor, wrote in his 1988 study Why Did the Heavens Not Darken?: The ‘Final Solution’ in History: “…From 1942 to 1945, certainly at Auschwitz , but probably overall, more Jews were killed by so-called ‘natural’ causes than by ‘unnatural’ ones.” [9]

Even estimates of the number of people who died at Auschwitz – allegedly the main extermination center – are no longer clear cut. At the postwar Nuremberg Tribunal, the Allies charged that the Germans exterminated four million people at Auschwitz. [10] Until 1990, a memorial plaque at Auschwitz read: “Four Million People Suffered and Died Here at the Hands of the Nazi Murderers Between the Years 1940 and 1945.” [11]

Is it “Holocaust denial” to dispute these four million deaths? Not today. In July 1990, the Polish government’s Auschwitz State Museum, along with Israel’s Yad Vashem Holocaust center, conceded that the four million figure was a gross exaggeration, and references to it were accordingly removed from the Auschwitz monument. Israeli and Polish officials announced a tentative revised toll of 1.1 million Auschwitz dead. [12] In 1993, French Holocaust researcher Jean-Claude Pressac, in a much-discussed book about Auschwitz, estimated that altogether about 775,000 died there during the war years. [13]

Professor Mayer acknowledges that the question of how many really died in Auschwitz remains open. In Why Did the Heavens Not Darken? he wrote: [14}

“… Many questions remain open ... All in all, how many bodies were cremated in Auschwitz? How many died there all told? What was the national, religious, and ethnic breakdown in this commonwealth of victims? How many of them were condemned to die a 'natural' death and how many were deliberately slaughtered? And what was the proportion of Jews among those murdered in cold blood among these gassed? We have simply no answers to these questions at this time.”

Gas Chambers

What about denying the existence of extermination "gas chambers"? Here too, Mayer makes a startling statement: “Sources for the study of the gas chambers are at once rare and unreliable." While Mayer believes that such chambers did exist at Auschwitz, he points out that “most of what is known is based on the depositions of Nazi officials and executioners at postwar trials and on the memory of survivors and bystanders. This testimony must be screened carefully, since it can be influenced by subjective factors of great complexity.” [15}

Höss Testimony

One example of this might be the testimony of Rudolf Höss, an SS officer who served as commandant of Auschwitz. In its Judgment, the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal quoted at length from his testimony to support its findings of extermination. [16]

It is now well established that Höss’ crucial testimony, as well as his so-called “confession” – which was also cited by the Nuremberg Tribunal – are not only false, but were obtained by beating the former commandant nearly to death. [17] Höss’ wife and children were also threatened with death and deportation to Siberia. In his statement – which would not be admissible today in any United States court of law – Höss claimed the existence of an extermination camp called “Wolzek.” In fact, no such camp ever existed. He further claimed that during the time that he was commandant of Auschwitz, two and a half million people were exterminated there, and that a further half million died of disease. [18] Today no reputable historian upholds these figures. Höss was obviously willing to say anything, sign anything and do anything to stop the torture, and to try to save himself and his family.

Forensic Investigations

In his 1988 book, Professor Mayer calls for “excavations at the killing sites and in their immediate environs” to determine more about the gas chambers. In fact, such forensic studies have been made. The first was conducted in 1988 by American execution equipment consultant, Fred A. Leuchter, Jr. He carried out an on-site forensic examination of the alleged gas chambers at Auschwitz, Birkenau and Majdanek to determine if they could have been used to kill people as claimed. After a careful study of the alleged killing facilities, Leuchter concluded that the sites were not used, and could not have been used, as homicidal gas chambers. Furthermore, an analysis of samples taken by Leuchter from the walls and floors of the alleged gas chambers showed either no or minuscule traces of cyanide compound, from the active ingredient of Zyklon B, the pesticide allegedly used to murder Jews at Auschwitz. [19]

A confidential forensic examination (and subsequent report) commissioned by the Auschwitz State Museum and conducted by Institute of Forensic Research in Krakow has confirmed Leuchter’s finding that minimal or no traces of cyanide compound can be found in the sites alleged to have been gas chambers. [20]

The significance of this is evident when the results of the forensic examination of the alleged homicidal gas chambers are compared with the results of the examination of the Auschwitz disinfestation facilities, where Zyklon B was used to delouse mattresses and clothing. Whereas no or only trace amounts of cyanide were found in the alleged homicidal gas chambers, massive traces of cyanide were found in the walls and floor in the camp’s disinfestation delousing chambers.

Another forensic study was carried out by German chemist Germar Rudolf. On the basis of his on-site examination and analysis of samples, the certified chemist and doctoral candidate concluded: “For chemical-technical reasons, the claimed mass gassings with hydrocyanic acid in the alleged ‘gas chambers’ in Auschwitz did not take place … The supposed facilities for mass killing in Auschwitz and Birkenau were not suitable for this purpose…” [21]

There is also the study of Austrian engineer Walter Lüftl, a respected expert witness in numerous court cases, and former president of Austria’s professional association of engineers. In a 1992 report he called the alleged mass extermination of Jews in gas chambers “technically impossible.” [22]

Discredited Perspective

So just what constitutes “Holocaust denial”? Those who support criminal persecution of “Holocaust deniers” seem to be still living in the world of 1946 where the Allied officials of the Nuremberg Tribunal have just pronounced their verdict. But the Tribunal’s findings can no longer be assumed to be valid. Because it relied so heavily on such untrustworthy evidence as the Höss testimony, some of its most critical findings are now discredited.

For purposes of their own, powerful special interest groups desperately seek to keep substantive discussion of the Holocaust story taboo. One of the ways they do this is by purposely mischaracterizing revisionist scholars as “deniers.” But the truth can’t be suppressed forever: There is a very real and growing controversy about what actually happened to Europe’s Jews during World War II.

Let this issue be settled as all great historical controversies are resolved: through free inquiry and open debate in our journals, newspapers and classrooms.

Notes

1. The Globe and Mail (Toronto), Jan. 22, 1992.

2. Trial of the Major War Criminals Before the International Military Tribunal (IMT “blue series”), Vol. 22, p. 496.

3. IMT “blue series,” Vol. 22, p. 496.

4. The Globe and Mail (Toronto), April 25, 1990; See also: M. Weber, “Jewish Soap,” The Journal of Historical Review, Summer 1991.

5. The Canadian Jewish News (Toronto), Jan. 30, 1992, p. 8.

6. See: Barbara Kulaszka, ed., Did Six Million Really Die: Report of the Evidence in the Canadian ‘False News’ Trial of Ernst Zündel (Toronto: Samisdat, 1992), pp. 192, 300, 349.

7. C. Browning, “The Revised Hilberg,” Simon Wiesenthal Annual, Vol. 3, 1986, p. 294; B. Kulaszka, ed., Did Six Million Really Die (1992), p. 117.

8. B. Kulaszka, ed., Did Six Million Really Die (1992), pp. 24-25.

9. A. Mayer, Why Did the Heavens Not Darken?: The ‘Final Solution’ in History (Pantheon, 1988), p. 365.

10. Nuremberg document 008-USSR, in IMT “blue series,” Vol. 39, pp. 241, 261.

11. B. Kulaszka, ed., Did Six Million Really Die (1992), p. 441.

12. Y. Bauer, “Fighting the Distortions,” The Jerusalem Post (Israel), Sept. 22, 1989; “Auschwitz Deaths Reduced to a Million,” The Daily Telegraph (London), July 17, 1990; ” Poland Reduces Auschwitz Death Toll Estimate to 1 Million,” The Washington Times, July 17, 1990.

13. J.-C. Pressac, Les Crémetoires d’Auschwitz: La machinerie du meurtre de masse (Paris: CNRS, 1993), p. 148. See also: R. Faurisson, “Jean-Claude Pressac’s New Auschwitz Book,” The Journal of Historical Review, Jan.-Feb. 1994, p. 24.

14. A. Mayer, Why Did the Heavens Not Darken? (1988), p. 366.

15. A. Mayer, Why Did the Heavens Not Darken? (1988), pp. 362-363.

16. IMT “blue series,” Vol. 1, pp. 251-252; Nuremberg document 3868-PS, in IMT “blue series,” Vol. 33, pp. 275-279.

17. Rupert Butler, Legions of Death (England: 1983), pp. 235-237.

18. See: R. Faurisson, “How the British Obtained the Confession of Rudolf Höss,” The Journal of Historical Review, Winter 1986-87, pp. 389-403.

19. See, for example: B. Kulaszka, ed., Did Six Million Really Die (1992), pp. 469-502. See also: M. Weber, “Fred Leuchter: Courageous Defender of Historical Truth,” The Journal of Historical Review, Winter 1992-93, pp. 421-428
( http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v12/v12p421_Weber.html )

20. “An Official Polish Report on the Auschwitz ‘Gas Chambers’,” The Journal of Historical Review, Summer 1991, pp. 207-216.

21. G. Rudolf, Gutachten ueber die Bildung und Nachweisbarkeit von Cyanidverbindungen in den ‘Gaskammern’ von Auschwitz (London: 1993) ( http://www.vho.org/D/rga/ ); The Rudolf Report (in English) ( http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/trr/ )

22. “The ‘Lüftl Report’,” The Journal of Historical Review, Winter 1992-93.

This essay is adapted from a text first published in 1992 by the Canadian Free Speech League.

About the Author

Barbara Kulaszka is a Canadian lawyer who practices law in Brighton, Ontario. She is best known for her work in free speech cases. During the 1988 “Holocaust trial” in Toronto, she served a co-counsel (with Doug Christie) for defendant Ernst Zundel. In 1999 she was awarded the “George Orwell Award” by the Canadian Free Speech League.

Print Friendly Page

With thanks to Reverend Maritz of the South African Church of Creativity for the image below.

Cailen.

“… KILL THE WHITE MAN!!! … feed them to some starving pigs … it is not hard to exterminate these bloody devils from Europe all of them ….”
From the ANC Youth League, Facebook Page. 21 January 2012

Print Friendly Page

A clearly terrified Prime Minister Gillard is shielded from the marauding rabble
Image: http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/national/cue-whitney-houston-heres-julia-gillards-bodyguard/story-e6frea8c-1226254942911

Image: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2092021/Julia-Gillard-rescued-Australia-Day-Aboriginal-protesters-shes-dragged-safety.html

Police have stated that no criminal charges will be made against the Aboriginal "activists."

Prime Minister Gillard's shoe was also stolen during the affray and is being kept for sale on eBay.

https://www.google.com/search?q=prime+minister+gillard+aboriginal+activist+australia+day+attacked&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&channel=suggest

Cailen.

Update Jan 28: The blame has now shifted from violent Abos to blaming possibly “white supporters” (try telling one of those “white supporters” that they are not Aboriginal – not Indigenous to this land and you will find yourself charged under Racial Vilification Laws for denying their “Aboriginality”) and when they can, totally ignoring the violence to falsely accuse Opposition Leader Tony Abbott of “inciting violence” with “racist” speech. Other elements have chosen to concentrate on the fact that the problem began because Prime Minister Ju-Liar Gillard’s staff have been discovered to have been involved in instigating the violence of the day – although they only intended for Abbott to be on the receiving end in an attempt to make their Ju-Liar look good.

The other thing – and possibly this is the most important and most disgusting of all the lies being passed around after Canberra’s Black Power Race Riots is the claim from all media and government sources that this is the first instance of Aboriginal violence in more than 200 years. What a load of HORSE SHIT! Check your history, check your murder rates, your records of violence … IF you are able to discover the truth, you will find that Whites are always being bashed by groups of Australia’s wonderful Indigenous people. It is almost always for racial reasons. If it’s not because the victim is White so he must have something worth stealing, or Abos out for another episode of bashing “White c*nts,” then it’s part and parcel of a Black Deaths in Custody or Land Rights March.

But the truth about Abo violence is something you will rarely discover when going through official channels. When a White is beaten by non-Whites of any ethnicity and the police become involved, the police almost always try to find a way to end the investigation before it starts. They may close their notebooks and just nod their heads in understanding, or they may threaten you with charges of Racial Vilification if you attempt to make an official complaint. Other times they will just shrug and say it’s not their fault, they are only following orders. And even when the non-White is arrested and convicted, the judge will speak of his understanding of the hard life or difficult upbringing that the perpetrator has been forced to lead. The sentence will be set to the required minimum and it will be recorded as an uneventful criminal act with no racial overtones. Hence there are no – or near enough to no records in Australia that show racially motivated Aboriginal crime.

I wonder how many thousands have died over the years while hearing shouts of “WHITE C*NT!” as they are kicked to death?

And yet, although I blame the Abos for their criminal behaviour and the support it induces within their own community, the ones I hold to account are the White Race-Traitors who have gone out of their way to make it a crime to tell the truth in this once great nation. Without a doubt, Aboriginal Australians will be granted their much sought sovereign land and be able to separate themselves from White Australia; but for you Whites, there is no sovereign escape plan – for you there is only a noose waiting at the end a rope. Remember that Prime Minister Ju-Liar Gillard, Abbott and the rest of you Race-Traitors: You can flee in terror from the “Aboriginal activists” today, but tomorrow, when we come after you, you will be forced to pay for your sins against the White Race – and no amount of running will save you.

Cailen.
Another victim of Black violence brought on by White Race-Traitors.

Print Friendly Page

Adelaide Advertiser | November 08, 2011

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/men-bash-rob-pedestrian-on-hampstead-rd-northfield/story-e6frea83-1226189091862

A MAN was bashed and robbed by a group of five men in Northfield late Monday night.

The 33-year-old was walking along Hampstead Road, near Hargrave Street, at about 11.15pm when he was approached by five men of African appearance.

He was pushed to the ground and assaulted before the group stole his backpack, wallet and cigars.

Anyone with information are asked to contact BankSA Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000,
or http://www.sa.crimestoppers.com.au.

Print Friendly Page

Google Search: Andrew Bolt Racial Vilification Decision

Editorial: Court muddies the waters for free speech

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/opinion/editorial-court-muddies-the-waters-for-free-speech/story-e6freabl-1226154437456

Melvin Mansell | The Advertiser | September 30, 2011

THE full ramifications of this week’s Federal Court judgment against Melbourne columnist Andrew Bolt for breaching racial discrimination laws are still unknown.

But there is no doubt the decision has further muddied the waters for proponents of freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

[snip]

There is perhaps a tendency to take for granted concepts such as freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

But to remain a free country we need to be able to discuss any subject without fear. If you don’t like the views of Andrew Bolt the answer is not to shut him down. The answer does not lie with less debate. The answer lies with more debate, more talking, more exchanging of ideas.

Anything else diminishes us as a society.

(To Melvin Mansell,)

While I agree with your defence of Andrew Bolt, I say bollocks to your hypocrisy! As Editor of the Adelaide Advertiser, you are guilty of shutting down discussion, exchange of ideas and debate on any subject that does not match your totalitarian, Marxist ideology. That you choose to defend Andrew Bolt is not testimony to your belief in freedom of speech, but is instead testimony to your belief in a dictatorial press, libelling the non-politically correct as a matter of due course. You rightly fear for your own livelihood, but you are a bloody hypocrite and you know it.

Cailen Cambeul of Oaklands Park.

Print Friendly Page

It appears that a certain racial and religious element didn’t like the truth being told about the Oslo murderer. See http://sacreator.com/blog/norway-mass-murderer-anders-behring-breivik-is-anti-racist-pro-homosexual-and-pro-israel. Ah well, at least unlike last time, they were very polite and left within minutes. And without confiscating any computer equipment and tax records this time! They were in and out so fast I didn’t even get a chance to say the five words: “I have nothing to say.”

So if somebody tries to tell you that we do not have a political or ideological police force in Australia, tell ‘em their dreamin’.

Cailen.

Related
http://sacreator.com/blog/sa-government-raid-2006
http://sacreator.com/blog/to-the-police-complaints-authority

Question: Are you required to allow police into your home if they are not carrying a warrant?

Answer: No. See Plenty v Dillon – 1991 – HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.

Print Friendly Page

MSM

THE suspect in the twin attacks that killed at least 92 people in Norway was a member of a Swedish neo-Nazi Internet forum, a group monitoring far-right activity says.

http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/norway-suspect-anders-behring-breivik-was-a-member-of-nazi-web-forum/story-e6frfku0-1226100562007

---

“I will be labelled as the biggest (Nazi-) monster ever witnessed since WW2,” the text’s author writes, while discussing the preparation of his “martyrdom operation”.

http://www.news.com.au/world/twin-attacks-gunman-opens-fire-on-youth-camp-car-bomb-explodes-at-pms-office/story-e6frfkz9-1226100157179

---

Breivik’s brazen act – much of which was spelled out in a “manifesto” published online – has raised concerns over the right-wing terrorism in Europe.

In the 1500 page document, he boasted of 80 “solo martyr cells” in Western Europe that aimed to overturn governments that tolerated Islam.

http://www.news.com.au/world/explosion-at-office-of-norwegian-tabloid-newspaper-vg/story-e6frfkyi-1226101712907

While the mainstream media continue to push the Oslo bomber as the archetype of the modern blonde haired, blue eyed Right Wing terrorist, here’s some information on the true ideological background of the Oslo bomber and Utoya shooter.

With thanks to Balder’s Blog http://blog.balder.org/?p=1241.
If Balder’s Blog is unavailable, please make use of the following Google Cache link:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:9qpQZny-AdgJ:blog.balder.org/+balder+blog

Anders Behring Breivik - Zionist, Free Mason

The perpetrator was a regular poster on several Norwegian Internet media, notably the blog http://document.no, which is run by Hans Rustad, a former left wing journalist. Hans Rustad is Jewish, and extremely pro-Zionist, and warns against Islamization, violence and other problems connected with Muslim immigration. Many regular contributors on his blog naturally more or less share his views.

They represent an ideology where the importance of ethnicity is played down or dismissed completely, and the need for the preservation of Western cultural and democratic values is commonly used as the substitute key argument against immigration. Their rhetorics and activities are almost completely focused on Islam and Muslims; other immigrant groups such as Vietnamese, Chinese, non Muslim Africans and other groups are routinely painted as ‘harmless’, or even as ‘positive contributors to society’.

Utoya - The Previous Day - Boycott Israel

This is the currently most popular strain of the anti-immigration movements in Europe, as represented by Geert Wilders’ Freedom Party, the Danish People’s Party, the Sweden Democrats, and in Germany the so called ‘Pro-movement’, of which Pro-Cologne is one of the most active, as well as several recently new established parties with a similar ideology . In England the EDL is connected to this ideology, together with groups such as SIOE and its local chapters, The Danish Free Press Society and their magazine Sappho, and some others. Note that the SIOE uses the slogan: ‘Racism is the lowest form of stupidity! Islamophobia is the height of common sense’.

Their American allies are people such as Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, Daniel Pipes, etc. The dedication to the Zionist cause, and their rejection of classical nationalist ideas such as the importance of ethnicity, sets them apart from the sincere nationalist parties such ad the British National Party, Front National (France), Jobbik (Hungary), and NPD (Germany – and the only clearly National Socialist inspired movement of those mentioned).

Their heroes are mainly Jews such as German Henryk Broder, the French Zionist Bernard Henry Levy, British Melanie Philips, Bernard Lewis, to mention just a few, and many more. The Flemish Nationalists fall somewhere in between, and are mainly traditional Nationalists with no love for the US, Zionism or Israel, who are trying to adapt to a new pro-Zionist image, inspired by the success of Geert Wilders’ Freedom Party in Holland, and the Danish People’s Party in Denmark.

Members of the pro-Zionist groups and parties often paint their non philosemitic fellow nationalists as Nazis, anti-Semites and racists, copying the rhetorics the left wing PC-brigade uses against themselves, and try to present a more polished image towards the mainstream. They are also much better connected to mainstream politicians than the traditional nationalists, and at times are supported by mainstream newspapers,

The mainstream press usually judges these groups more favorably then traditional nationalists, who are invariably accused of being ‘Nazis’.

Anders Behring Breivik, the Norwegian bomber and gunman also pursued this line of thought:

Posted on 2009-09-14 10:57:20 as a reaction to post by ‘Caper’ http://www.document.no/anders-behring-breivik

Caper,

I didn’t see that the EDL as it is today is what we would have wanted. But it is essential that the intellectual conservative forces (unofficially) offer political and ideological schooling to our youth between 15 and 25. Who else is to do that?

We cannot despise the young in society and refuse to come closer to them only because they lack ideological training, since it is exactly OUR (culturally conservative intellectuals) responsibility to do so.

Bawer [referring to homosexual anti-islamist Bruce Bawer] is probably not the right person to work as a bridge builder. He is a liberal anti-Jihadist, and in many ways not a culturally conservative. I have my suspicions about him being TOO paranoid [with reference to his homosexuality). It could seem as though he fears that ‘cultural conservatives’ will become a threat against homosexuals in the future. Therefore he refuses to take his chance to influence them into a positive direction? That seems completely irrational.

It has to be said that many organizations such as VB [probably referring to the Flemish nationalist party Vlaams Belang] needs to go through many ‘reforms’, before they reach our level.

Anyway, we are not in a position where we can pick and choose our partners. That’s why we have to ensure that we influence other culturally conservatives to take our anti-racist pro-homosexual, pro-Israeli line of thought. When this direction has been taken we can take it to the next level.

The consolidation MUST continue, and people must contribute by influencing (in stead of isolating).

More from Balder

Former Australian Prime Minister John Howard mentioned in Manifesto.

”Luckily, not all Christian leaders are appeasers of Islam. One of the intelligent ones comes from Australia, a country that has been fairly resistant to Political Correctness. … Prime Minister John Howard has repeatedly proven to be one of the most sensible leaders in the Western world.”

http://www.smh.com.au/world/australian-leaders-mentioned-in-manifesto-20110726-1hxhd.html

Which immediately brings to mind …

Google Search: http://www.google.com/search?q=john+howard+best+friend+israel

One of our best friends defeated

Many Australian Jews and Israelis will be deeply saddened to lose a leader whose genuine and unremitting friendship captured their hearts. John Howard was unquestionably one of Israel’s greatest champions among world statesmen and a unique friend of the Jewish people.

His outspoken support for Israel during the difficult days of the second intifada and Second Lebanon War set him apart from other leaders, including those who regarded themselves as friends of Israel. He regarded his principled support of Israel as a moral imperative and displayed contempt for the political correctness exemplified by the Europeans at international forums who were inclined to distance themselves from supporting Israel even when, by all objective criteria, the Jewish state held the moral high ground.

http://wordfromjerusalem.com/?p=229
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1195546752375&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

---

Israel feels tarnished as critics apply apartheid tag

“John Howard was instinctively, as a conservative, a friend of Israel. … I regard him as a Christian Zionist – he understands and has some sympathy for us. Australia gives me enormous pride.”

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/israel-feels-tarnished-as-critics-apply-apartheid-tag-20091116-ii8j.html

---

A Distant Affinity: The History of Australian-Israeli Relations

John Howard’s personal sympathy and regard for Israel, which he first visited privately as a young man in 1964, is something he declares regularly and is reflected in his government’s policy. As opposition leader he expressed “on behalf of the Opposition, to the people of Israel and to those of Jewish persuasion within Australia…our respect and admiration for their contribution to the cause of peace around the world.”[104] Shortly after taking office, he declared himself a “long-standing friend of Israel.”[105] In 2000 he declared, “The personal affection I have for the state of Israel, the personal regard I have for the Jewish people of the world, will never be diminished. It is something I hold dearly, something I value as part of my being and as part of what I have tried to do with my life.”[106] In 2002, he called himself an “unapologetic and long-standing friend of Israel.”[107] In 2007, he spoke of the “personal commitment I have to the relationship between Australia and the State of Israel” and the “precious bilateral relationship between Australia and Israel.”[108]

http://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DRIT=3&DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=253&PID=0&IID=1927&TTL=A_Distant_Affinity:_The_History_of_Australian-Israeli_Relations

A Comparison of White Zionists/Kosher Konservatives

Anders Behring Breivik: Zionist.
John Howard (Former Australian Prime Minister): Zionist.
George W. Bush (Former US President): Zionist.
Joe Biden (US Vice President): Zionist.

World Leaders with their Jewish Bosses http://www.thenewsturmer.com/On%20Jews/Jewsunited.htm

What is it that singles Anders Behring Breivik out from the other three is that even though he has killed the fewest, Breivik is only the canon fodder of the Zionist cause. Like Geert Wilders, being a White man, he was supported by the Zionist cause up to the commission of a belligerent act against the state. And because he is not a “democratically” elected statesman – a peer of the Zionist cause – the Zionist clique immediately dropped him like the bad smell he is. Breivik is a warning from the Zionists that when Muslims are allowed to gain the upper hand over Jews, White people will suffer. Keep an eye out for it and you will undoubtedly find Jewish commentators – not so-called Jewish extremist bloggers, but official commentators at that – stating more or less as I have: that White people need to suffer in order to promote the Zionist cause.

But why should we peaceful White folk be forced to suffer because Jews and Muslims – who are an alien presence in our lands – are in a never-ending war with one-another? There is only one solution to this problem: Remove the war from our soil. Ship all of the Jews and Muslims back to the Middle East and seal off the borders for the next hundred years. Let them fight it out amongst themselves, and with any luck, they will annihilate themselves and eradicate the twin pestilence of Islam and Judaism from the face of the Earth. If Kosher Konservatives like Howard and Bush don’t like that, then out they can go too; otherwise it’s the traditional punishment of traitors for them – Death!

Cailen.

Related
http://sacreator.com/blog/winston-churchill-zionist-jew-vs-boshevik-jew

Web Search
http://www.google.com/search?q=norway+murder+breivik+zionist&um=1&newwindow=1&safe=off&rls=en&channel=suggest

Print Friendly Page

I then went to their website where I read the following diatribe of hate levelled at White people, culture, society and history:

Our People
The Institute draws members from many walks of life. Its commitment to creative interdisciplinary scholarship and research brings academics and students from a wide range of disciplines and universities both within and outside Australia. The Institute’s efforts to broaden…

About IPCS

The spectre of colonialism still haunts the world, despite assertions about the end of formal colonial control and the rise of democracy and universal human rights. The aim of the Institute of Postcolonial Studies is to understand and undo the continuing legacies of colonialism today: dispossession, displacement, racism, and intercultural violence. In particular, this entails understanding social and economic pressures and cultural prejudices faced by indigenous peoples and impoverished communities, supporting those facing the consequences of political upheaval and violence, and generating dialogue across worlds of continuing and often…

Following is my own response to this Marxist, Black Supremacist/Victim ideology:

To the Institute of Postcolonial Studies
Tel: + 61 3 9329 6381
Fax: + 61 3 9328 3131
Email: postcol@netspace.net.au
Website: http://ipcs.org.au

78-80 Curzon Street
North Melbourne, 3051
Victoria, AUSTRALIA

To Mr Dylan Bird,

Your institute is an institute of hatred with contempt for reality. On the one hand you treat the biological separation of humanity into different races as a myth, and even go as far as to preach that it is society and culture that decide whether a person is indigenous to this country. And yet, you still choose to treat colonialism and White people with disrespect on every turn. Your form of Aboriginality is nothing less than Indigenous Nationalism. i.e. Black Supremacism in an attempt to exterminate White people through their assimilation into indigenous Australian culture and society. That is by definition, genocide.

I, and millions of others, view your behaviour with contempt. We as White Australians will not be joining your Aboriginal Nation of Indigenous Overlords that you seem to propose. Instead, we will steadfastly maintain our White Australian identity, culture, race and society in the face of your postcolonial racism.

Furthermore, there are many Indigenous Australians who feel the same. They are proud of their Aboriginality and dismiss the idea of marrying outside their race. Nevermind accepting a White man or woman as an Indigenous Australian, simply because he or she self identifies as indigenous to this nation. And I for one respect them for their stance. You Sir, deserve no such respect. If you are a White man, then you are a traitor to your race – and the same can be said if you do indeed have any Aboriginal heritage. Your views are an insult to both Aboriginal and White Australians, and the day that your Institute of Postcolonial Studies is closed down, the better for all Australians.

Yours Sincerely,

Reverend Cailen Cambeul,
Church of Creativity.
PM@creativityalliance.com
http://CreativityAlliance.com

Print Friendly Page

Peter Veness: Adelaide Advertiser | April 27, 2010

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/breaking-news/no-free-speech-for-racists-says-robert-mcclelland/story-e6frea73-1225858945012?

“FREEDOM of speech only goes so far and it does not stretch to racism,” Attorney-General Robert McClelland says.

“It may well be appropriate to set some limitation to public expression of hateful material,” Mr McClelland said.

He said cyber-racism was a growing area of concern for the Human Rights Commission. Eighteen per cent of racism complaints handed to the Commission in 2008-09 were about racist internet material, up from nine per cent in the previous year. [more ...]

Just what is determined as “hate speech” or “racism?”

• Anything to do with White people alone.
• Anything to do with pride for White people.
• Any demands by Whites for truly equal rights.
• Racially stereotyped humour aimed at non-Whites.
• Anything a Jew, Black or other non-White “feels” is racist.
• Anything the government or government appointed officials think non-Whites feel is racist.
• et cetera ….

And just what is not determined as “hate speech” or “racism?”

• Jewish pride, Black Pride, Black Power, Asian Pride, et al …, Gay Pride and anything remotely politically correct.
• Jewish Supremacist groups for a Greater Israel.
• Jewish lies and propaganda: Whether it’s from the Christinsane Bible or modern day politicians making up stories of atrocities by other people against the Jews.
• Racially stereotyped humour aimed at Whites.
• Blacks kicking the hell out of Whites for fun.
• Blacks demanding the extermination of Whites.
• Non-Whites participating in and glorifying in the pack rape and murder of White girls.
• Asians refusing White customers in their shops and restaurants.
• And the list goes on ….

The most typical and yet oddest case of “racist” or “hate speech” is when a White person attempts to make a complaint about any of the above and the person making the complaint is often accused of “racism” themselves for merely voicing a grievance, because non-Whites carrying out discriminatory practices against Whites are protected by the accepted customs of political correctness. Society laughs this off as a form of deserved “reverse racism” and does absolutely nothing about it. Hate speech laws are nothing more than the government protecting the hate speech of non-Whites while destroying the morale of Whites who do believe in actual equal rights or those who rightly wish to separate themselves such as we Creators do and pursue their lives with the same self determination guaranteed to ALL non-Whites. Hate speech laws as practiced in Australia are an attempt by the federal and state governments of Australia to prevent any further resistance to the cultural extermination and eventual genocide of White Australians! Doubt me? Take a look at modern South Africa; that is the future of Australia.

The intention of the government is to crush all disagreement with policies such as “Sorry Day” and changes to National Holidays such as ANZAC Day and Australia Day to make them completely multicultural/multiracial, with any emphasis on White Australian culture denounced as “racist” in origin and practice. If this policy comes to fruition, all political dissidents not towing the politically correct line will be silenced.

It has already been stated by local governments and the media that White Australians carrying or bearing the Australian flag on a National Holiday should be picked up by the police and forced to move on or be charged with whatever offences possible.

In the United States, orders that originated with Jewish Supremacist group, the Anti-Defamation League (known as the Anti-Defamation Commission in Australia) were passed out to law enforcement agencies around the country ordering them to harass any White person who looks like they may be an American Patriot. i.e. Flag carrying, bumper sticker wearing White Americans, former soldiers – anyone that may be construed as in opposition to the latest, freedom hating governmental bureaucracy in control today. And if you believe that can not happen in Australia, then I am informing you now that it is already happening. I recently put a Southern Cross on the back window of my car and I’ve already had police following me around without reason. It has nothing to do with my driving, the condition of my car or how it looks, as my car is in good condition and is a generic, run of the mill locally made vehicle in a sea of race-ready from the factory and hotted-up cars – but it does have that Southern Cross on the back window and that’s what makes it different to the others. And according to the media, Aboriginal supremacist groups, the media, your average left-wing liberal, ad nauseum …, just that symbol alone shows that I am a White patriot and that makes me a “Nazi,” which means I am fare game for any form of abuse by the modern political police and petty government bureaucrats.

So if you are unsure, pay attention: Today, if you are White, you have already lost the right to call attention to anti-White government policies. Today you are not allowed to call self-hating White race-traitors to account for their actions. Today, if you are White, you are not permitted to call attention to the racist behaviour of non-Whites. Yet today, even though every avenue of complaint for White people is blocked by bureaucracy, it is still not illegal to be a White dissident. Tomorrow will not be so easy. Tomorrow, even the thought of standing up for yourself will be a criminal offence. So stand up for yourself and your children’s future now, because when tomorrow comes, it will be too late. For tomorrow, we go to war.

When you wake up, come and join us at Creator Forum http://CreativityAlliance.com/forum, where the fightback has already begun.

Cailen.

Print Friendly Page

Gamers threaten me: Atkinson

Danielle Forsyth: Independent Weekly | February 16, 2010

http://www.independentweekly.com.au/news/local/news/general/gamers-threaten-me-atkinson/1752321.aspx

Attorney General Michael Atkinson has launched an attack at the Gamers4Croydon party, saying he believes gamers in general are pose a higher personal danger than the outlaw motorcycle gangs he has worked so hard to legislate against.

“I feel my family and I are more at risk from gamers than we are from outlaw motorcycle gangs who also hate me and are running a candidate against me,” Mr Atkinson told ABC TV’s Good Game program last night. [more ...]

The following comment was passed by the censors at the Independent Weekly and rejected by those at the Adelaide Advertiser http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/technology/attorney-general-michael-atkinson-says-gamers-pose-a-greater-risk-to-his-safety-than-bikies/story-e6freaal-1225830811427.

Atkinson has a trick he performs at each election. Find an enemy that is relatively harmless, but easily vilifiable, target them with quasi legal methodology and play the hapless victim while he denounces the real victim in the press as everything from loony to violent.

I would also speculate that Atkinson’s idea of spam is probably one or two emails that disagree with his petulant policy making. And threats under the door at 2am? If it’s not entirely made up, it was probably a note from his milk man.

For those that are unsure of what I am referring to; at the last election Atkinson targeted Creativity in exactly the same way he’s now targeting video gamers. http://sacreator.com/blog/2008/03/02/sa-government-raid-2006

Way to go Atkinson. You’re nothing more than a gutless turd always looking for someone smaller to pretend to battle it out with. A good kick up the arse is what you need, and I hope I’m around to see it delivered.

Cailen.

Print Friendly Page