Copyright (c) 1998 - Ingrid A. Rimland


May 22, 1998

Good Morning from the Zundelsite:

 

This is a somewhat belated Part IV of the five-part series I have titled "Gang-Rape of Truth in Toronto's Courtroom." I want to get it on-line because Monday the so-called "human rights" circus will start up again.

 

The media black-out through the entire week of May 11 - 15 was total except for a disjointed, after-the-fact article, replete with factual errors, written by Paul Lungen of the Canadian Jewish News - who inflated a mention of a $2 million cash bribe of President Truman by Zionist bag men to $20 million, which of course no one will believe! - while Dr. Schweitzer was on the stand.

The cross-examination of this plum for the advance of Holocaust Revisionism is going to continue this coming week. Here are some additional highlights on what Schweitzer was cross-examined on and where he was asked to comment for the record. Things have been said during this week due to the foolishness of Canada's Human Rights Commission Kommissars that will be gold in future global courts of public opinion. Man, have they ever opened the proverbial can of worms!

 

Take just this statement from Tom Segev's "The Seventh Million", writing how the Reparations Racket came about:

 

"It is uncertain who was the first to suggest that the Germans would have to pay reparations for the property they had expropriated from Jews and for the suffering they had caused. The idea seems to have been in the air from the time the war started, apparently sparked by the punitive reparations imposed on Germany at the end of World War I. Ben-Gurion received a memorandum on the subject as early as 1940. Berl Katznelson spoke of it publicly toward the end of that year. By December 1942, there was already a private organization in Tel Aviv that offered to help Nazi victims draft compensation demands." (page 104)

 

Or take this one, pertaining to the odious political monstrosity called "Wiedergutmachung" - meaning loosely "to make good again" or "to right a wrong." Germans have been "making good" for more than fifty years - most of the claims having to do with so-called "gassings" claimed to have started only in 1941 and supposedly having ended in 1944.

 

Yet take this Segev passage:

 

"Jewish organizations in the United States had begun examining, as early as 1941, the legal and political ramifications of claiming reparations and compensation from Germany. At the end of the war, the leaders of the Jewish Agency also began giving the subject attention. They reviewed proposals, memorandums, and position papers they had received over the years from jurists and economists, most of them of German origin; some had specialized in the 1930s in the haavara agreements. A few wrote in German, and one introduced, while the war was going on, the conciliatory and irksome legal term Wiedergutmachung - literally, 'to make good again', to right the wrong, to rectify. (p. 196)

 

Or this one, put to Dr. Schweitzer who felt that he could "understand" such a reaction ". . . after what happened in the Holocaust":

 

"Hatred of Germans and the call to ostrasize them echoed everywhere. 'The Germans cannot be redeemed except through total destruction or total sterilization,' citizen Yermiah Yafeh wrote to the prime minister. 'We must impress hatred of the Germans upon our young children and their descendants,' wrote a columnist for the popular independent paper Yediot Ahranot; she demanded that 'not even a hairpin or shoelace of German manufacture be allowed in the country' and proposed that 'if we meet a German in our travels, on a boat or on a train, we should spit in his face, or at his feet, so that he not forget.' The editor of Haaretz, Gershom Schocken, proposed a special law barring Israelis from any social contact with German citizens, including incidental contacts, such as between tourists in a hotel." (pp 190-191)

 

And farther down:

 

"The cabinet was split: Dov Yosef, minister of transportation, opposed all contact with the Germans, even if this meant receiving no money. (Not long before, Chancellor Adenauer had mentioned to a Jewish newspaper in Germany the sum of 10 million marks, about $2 million - a ridiculous sum by any account). Moshe Shapira, minister of the interior, health and immigration, said everything depended on how much money was at stake. It was pointless to soil oneself with the taint of German contact for a pittance, but if the sum was substantial, it might well be worthwhile." (p. 191)

 

And as to the meat of the issue:

 

". . . Adenauer noted in his memoirs that he knew better than to underestimate the ability of 'Jewish banking circles' to bring his country harm. Goldman, a tireless dissembler, exploited his image as one of 'the elders of Zion,' sometimes to the point of making threats bordering on extortion. A file in his archives contains information on the Nazi backgrounds of key members of Adenauer's government. Some in Bonn believed that Goldman had the power to destroy them unless they could ensure his silence about their past." (p 229-230)

 

In other words, then as now, "business as usual." Here is the admission of extortion. It was put to the then leadership of Germany quite unabiguously: if you do not come across and deliver billions as we demand, you and your government will be destroyed and your country will be ruined! As we all know, as a result of that extortion, Dr. Adenauer caved in - and sold his people's birthright for that mess of pottage the Bible speaks about.

 

This is a mere sprinkling of things that were said that historical week in Toronto. At first, a dozen lawyers sat there, faces buried in their books, scribbling away stony-faced. But soon, the agitation grew. It went on for almost three days, while the panic in the Holocaust Promotion aficionados grew ever more strongly.

 

Ernst made some observations in his notes at one point:

 

"I actually saw Freiman's legs tremble while I, the artist and peasant, just sat there thinking '...the inmates are running the asylum!'

 

"What got the opposition so utterly worked up was the ***evidence***! This evidence came flowing out of the mouths, out of the pens of Jewish writers, chroniclers, eye witnesses, reporters and perpetrators who spoke and wrote of crookedness and callousness, of ruthless exploitation of Jews by other Jews, of Israelis by Israelis, by Israelis of Germans past and present - and on and on and on!

 

And as the bombardment of one historical event and fact after another was revealed and read aloud like a series of thunderclaps -- we, who were there, experienced what Doug Christie had prophesied to me before the proceedings began: that it would be 'prosecution by obstruction.'

 

And that is exactly what happened. And since there are so many intervenors allowed into these proceedings by Mr. Pensa, himself a lawyer of note, and his two other panel members - it amounted to prosecution by relay- or tag team. More vulgarly put in the terminology of the street so popular in today's media - it was tantamount to 'gang rape of the truth!'

 

Like hyenas, they would gang up on Doug Christie, who stood tall and did not give an inch, even though the intellectual sewer was lapping at his feet.

 

I felt terribly inadequate, just sitting there next to him and our associate, Barbara Kulaszka. All I could do was to pass him occasional little yellow post-it notes with some ideas on it - which I am sure was more of a hindrance than a help and possibly even a nuisance because it broke his train of thought. We knew when we had scored another point - when the opposition jumped to their feet like excited jackrabbits, a whole gang of them at times! and like parrots gave aid and comfort to whoever of their lawyers they thought had scored a point or, they figured, taken a broadside hit. This prosecution by obstruction worked to some degree, for much valuable evidence did not make it into the public record, at least not in Canada. But there are going to be other trials. We now have the research compiled. World-wide, there are these trials now happening - each trial revealing yet more Truth.

 

Repeatedly, poor Dr. Schweitzer was asked to leave not only the witness box but the room altogether, over and over again. Eventually he cautioned wryly: 'Don't worry! I already know the way!'

 

And so it went, hour after hour, day after day, until Doug Christie stepped up to the lectern and pulled out a book by rabbi and ethicist David Goldberg titled "Should Jews survive?" and that was when the doodoo really started hitting the fan!"

 

Dr. Schweitzer and his CHRC handlers paled by what was coming down the pike! I have been told that at one point, Mr. Freiman, the prosecutor, sprang to his feet and practically shouted:

 

"IF TRUTH WERE ALLOWED AS A DEFENSE, IT WOULD BE A DESECRATION OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT!"

 

====

 

Tomorrow: Part V

 

Thought for the Day:

 

Fiscal Year 1995: Appropriations for the Kennedy Center: $19,306,000

Appropriations for the Holocaust Museum: $26,609,000

 

Fiscal Year 1996: Appropriations for the Kennedy Center: $19,306,000

Appropriations for the Holocaust Museum: $28,707,000

 

Fiscal Year 1997: Appropriations for the Kennedy Center: $19,875,000

Appropriations for the Holocaust Museum: $31,272,000

 

(Source: Tax Payers' Holocaust Museum, Letters to the Editor, WRMEA, May-June 1998, p. 3)

Back to Table of Contents of the May 1998 ZGrams