IT ON THEM
by James Reed
literature laureate, Harold Pinter, in a lecture broadcast to the Swedish Academy
in Stockholm, said that US President George Bush and British Prime Minister Tony
Blair should be frog marched before the International Criminal Court and tried
for State terrorism for the invasion of Iraq. In his lecture Pinter said:
have brought torture, cluster bombs, depleted uranium, innumerable acts of random
murder, misery, degradation and death to the Iraqi people." It's all in a day's
work in "bringing freedom and democracy to the Middle East."
Pinter, if he was truly deserving of Nobel Prize status should have continued
his critique and also attacked the regime of deposed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein
- with arbitrary arrests and torture, organized rapes of prisoners, arbitrary
executions and the burial of victims of the regime in mass graves. Some authorities
estimate that up to one million people are missing in Iraq, presumed dead. Saddam
Hussein's genocidal Anfal campaign aimed to exterminate the Kurds in an
act of ethnic cleansing. Chemical weapons were used against them and up to 180,000
Kurds died or disappeared between February and September 1988 alone.
Iraqi situation is not a black-and-white one as the pro-American and con-American
camps in this debate portray. It is a black-and-black situation consisting of
various degrees of evil. It is not a choice between good and evil, but evil and
evil. That is why there can be no real solution to the Iraqi situation. And I
haven't even mentioned until now, the forbidden word, "Zionism".
"RACISTS" REVOLTING: ON THE BATTLE FOR
by Tom Barnes
the late TV news on that day 11 December 2005, about the "racists" rioting at
Cronulla Beach, it was not too difficult to predict what the newspapers would
say the next day. I had written an article on 11 December 2005 which now follows,
in the section "Before".
I return to the present in the following section
called "After". I can't resist the human-all-too-human temptation of "I told you
1. BEFORE: 10 December 2005
Violent clashes have apparently occurred between "Aussies" (Anglo-Australians)
and what one girl (cited in The Australian 10-11 December 2005 p.10) called
"wogs" (i.e. Lebanese) on the Southern Sydney beach of North Cronulla. The
Australian in its wisdom, featured a full colour photograph of five men of
Middle Eastern extraction" who "were enjoying the beach" - whilst fully clothed.
These youths were poker faced and extremely well built.
lad had an "Everlast" boxing gym singlet on and had huge arms and muscles where,
as a lad I didn't even have places! Said one of these musclemen: "Everyone gives
us crap because of the way we look." I doubt it - unless they had a small army
behind them. One Cronulla resident was cited as saying that the fully clothed
powerhouses were "not here to swim."
The main thrust of The Australian
article was that someone, presumably an "Aussie" had sent out text messages urging
"Aussies to attack Lebs and wogs."
youth leader was cited as calling for the new sedition laws to be used against
the author of the message. A spokeswoman for Attorney-General
Ruddock said that these laws have not yet been enacted but were "designed to target
people who incited one group to violence against another."
However the article
also said that police are set to charge the author of the call-to-brawl text under
existing laws, indicating that the use of the sedition laws is unnecessary. But
as with race vilification laws, these laws will be used to keep the "Aussies"
in their place in the multicultural fascist republic of "Australaisa".
course I don't support the call-to-brawl texter who deserves punishment, but I
know that the situation at Cronulla is more complex than the portrayal given in
The Australian of the disadvantaged and discriminated-against ethnic who
needs multicultural laws to be protected from "Aryan-Nazi Anglos".
the myth of multiculturalism that the ethnic is a type of angel sent to us by
god, to "enrich" us with their divine "diversity".
But such a myth is not
a human reality. If our system were not founded upon anti-Anglo Saxon racism,
it would be interesting to discover what "text" messages were being sent by the
"prosecuted" ethnics. Such interception techniques were used in Sydney back in
2001 when ethnics were racially targeting Anglo-Australian girls for gang raping.
And while we are on this topic, have you ever wondered why tax audits by the
ATO relentlessly target Anglos - yet it is an open secret that many ethnics established
themselves in Australia en masse from the largesse of Arthur Calwell, and have
operated a "cash-in-hand" economy that has made them rich? This includes a plethora
of ethnics from tradesmen and fruit and vegetable folk through to white collar
professions. Anglo-Australians since the end of World War II have become renters
to ethnic landowners. Many, in only average paying jobs (up front) often have
a number of houses while many Anglo-Australian couples struggle to own one home
in a life-time.
It would be easy for the ATO to systematically show that the
assets of such people couldn't be accounted for from their salary. The ATO could
start the ball rolling by targeting one Australian settlement first - such as
Griffith, New South Wales. But don't hold your breath while waiting for this to
2. AFTER: 12 DECEMBER 2005
When the Muslim race riots occurred recently in France, the media generally cried
"French racism". When Blacks riot in America the media generally cries "White
American racism". Rioters are "victims" driven to extremes by the 'racism" of
the system. When White Europeans riot - and it is an extremely rare event - the
cry is different.
The attacks upon people of a Middle Eastern background were
described by NSW Police Assistant Commissioner Mark Goodwin as "disgusting". The
Herald Sun 12 December 2005 had the headline "Race Hate: A Shameful Day for
Our Nation". The paper detailed attacks, brawls and slogans used by various Anglos
in the mob, as did The Age: "it's time for a f----ing war, so join the
army of the hard core".
The slogans - including "No more Lebs/Wogs" etc.,
etc., are indeed racist slogans. The anger of the largely Anglo crowd was simply
frightening to see. But why were these people angry and violent? I want to play
the "apologist" for the real oppressed. It has been said that a conflict such
as this one has been brewing in Sydney for a number of years - at least since
the 2001 racially motivated Lebanese gang rapes of about 50 women.
detective, Tim Priest, in Quadrant of January-February 2004 pointed out
that Lebanese gangs who control a substantial portion of Sydney' drug trade often
bash Anglo males "for no other reason that that they are "Skips", as they call
And, he said: "There is a clear and definite link between
attacks on our young men and women being racial as well as criminal."
In the name of political correctness the Sydney police have and still do, ignore
the situation. Is it "racist" to hypothesise that these events were the straws
that broke the "Skips'" backs? The violence is not justified but it is understandable.
SPECIAL THREE-IN-ONE New Times Survey PACK -- $3.00 POSTED:
need to understand the elitists' goal of diluting the racial mix of the Australian
people in order to fit us into their New World Order. Three issues of the New
Times Survey are being offered for the price of one:
Treason: From White Australia Policy to Yellow Australia Policy":
Yellow Peril Revisited":
"It's Time: For a New Anti-Immigration Movement
NTS Special Pack available only from Box 1052 G.P.O.
Melbourne, 3001. Price: $3.00 posted.
TITLE? NOT CROWN TITLE? SURELY NOT!
Have we really been caught not
just 'napping,' but in a deep slumber as David Barton's letter to Malcolm Turnbull
MHR suggests? Mr. Barton has posed an especially relevant question.
would be the foundational Land Title under their proposed, God forbid, New World
Order republic? What type of Land Title have they in mind to replace the present
To: Malcolm Bligh Turnbull, MHR, Federal Member for Wentworth,
Parliament House, Canberra. ACT 2600. 12th January 2006.
Dear Mr. Turnbull,
· I enclose herewith copy of my correspondence to Mr. Mark Latham MHR, then
Leader of the Opposition letter dated 9th August, 2004.
· I also enclose copy
of my letter to you, dated 10th October, 2005 with which I enclosed a copy of
the above mentioned letter to Mr. Mark Latham.
As my letter to you has been
dishonoured through lack of reply within a reasonable passage of time, I take
it that the two questions raised in my letter namely:
1. Would you require
the people of Australia be fully informed as to how Native Title will replace
the Crown Title as the basic foundational title of all land titles in Australia,
BEFORE the question of Australia becoming a Republic is placed before the Australian
people at a referendum?
2. As basic constitutional changes have been made
of late without recourse of referenda can I be assured that no change to a Republic
will be made without the matter FIRST being placed before the Australian people
by way of referendum, would be answered by you in the negative.
That is, you
would NOT require the Australian people to be fully informed how Native Title
would replace the Crown Title as the basic foundational title of all land titles
in Australia, in the event of Australia becoming a Republic.
would NOT be in favour of the matter of Australia becoming a Republic being placed
before the Australian people by way of referendum before a change to a Republic
If I do not hear from you to the contrary
within twenty-one days of the date of this is letter, I will feel free to publicly
proclaim your intention to deceive the people of Australia by withholding this
vital information regarding their title to land, from the Australian people.
faithfully, John David Barton, Collarenebri, NSW.
Section 51 of the
Commonwealth Constitution Act now reads: 51. The Parliament shall, subject
to this Constitution, have the power to make laws for the peace, order, and good
government of the Commonwealth with respect to: (XXVi) the people of any race
for whom it is deemed necessary to make special laws. (emphasis added
TREATING DISSIDENTS AS 'PARIAHS': Editor
of The Australian, 11th February 2006:
Waleed Aly is right
to object ('Selective outrage', 11-12/2) to the way in which legal action forbidding
the 'denial' of genocide and, in particular, the Holocaust prevents people 'from
mounting certain arguments'. However, his assertion that 'such arguments are uncivilised
nonsense' is quite baseless.
The dissident theses of many Holocaust revisionists
are genuinely academic in both contents and style. They are not claiming that
there was no Nazi persecution of the Jews, but only that in some respects this
has been very seriously exaggerated. There is nothing inherently unethical or
absurd in taking up such a position. As such, they deserve to be fairly and properly
debated in public forums.
This is especially so when several of their leaders
have accepted imprisonment rather than retract their beliefs. Continuation of
the present policy, widespread throughout the Western world, of treating them
as pariahs and refusing their views intellectual respect is an academic outrage;
and, whatever his faults, the president of Iran was correct to draw attention
to this and condemn it.
Nigel Jackson, Belgrave, Vic
AN OPEN LETTER FROM INGRID RIMLAND
TO ZUNDEL'S TRIAL JUDGE:
To Judge, Dr. Ulrich
Meinerzhagen. JVA Mannheim, Herzogenriedstraße 111, D-68169 Mannheim Germany:
Dear Dr. Meinerzhagen:
With the trial against my husband, of which
you are in charge, about to start again, I take this opportunity to lay before
you a few facts and some of my reflections as the wife of a man who is, by all
accounts, about to be silenced for good for his politically incorrect thoughts.
On the eve of these fateful days, I feel an obligation to write this letter to
you in the hope that I will find the right words worthy of serious reflection.
Before I do so, however, I want to tell you in all honesty that I, for one,
never really was offended by your censorship and that you, as the judge in this
historical trial, read all our letters and came to know our innermost thoughts.
I saw this unpleasant constraint, imposed by what I always thought was surely
a country of civilized conduct, namely the homeland of my ancestry, less as an
infringement on our rights but rather as a golden opportunity to give you a few
glimpses of who we really are, what motivates us deeply, how we conduct ourselves,
and how this heresy trial - for that is what it is - is viewed by the rest of
I would also like to say that I agree with Ernst that nothing could
be gained by heaping scorn, derision and disdain upon your head - as seems to
have happened from the pens of a handful of livid Zundel supporters, which must
have shocked, distressed, and greatly angered you.
In courtesy to you, I will
try to be brief, concise - and polite. Nonetheless, it is important that I speak
clearly. I am not sure you are aware of the importance of your role, of the great
privilege of this rare opportunity to serve your country by serving historical
truth - not just for Ernst, not just for Germany, but for the remnant of the Western
world, and maybe for humanity. A train called "Aufstand für die Wahrheit"*
is roaring your way, full speed, full weight, full force - and you are tasked
by fate to set the direction. And here you are, already hearing the rumble, sensing
the tremble, feeling the dread. There's no one else to act for you - you must
decide. What is it going to be? A resolute choice for Truth in History - or the
proverbial boot upon the human face that Orwell spoke about?
Of course, as
Ernst's wife, I shall hope for that gesture of courage from you - knowing all
the odds against it. I hope for it, but I don't count on it. I see a sad, humiliated
country parading in sack cloth and ashes, willingly wearing its blinders, mired
in self-blame and guilt - obediently demonizing those who, confronted with facts
and with logic, abandoned both sack cloth and blinders. How that should be so
- in a country as accomplished and proud as Germany was - is a case for the Freudian
couch, not for a German courtroom.
Here are the facts in a nutshell,
for you as well as history:
The Holocaust is Fraud writ large. It's an
extortion racket. It has been proven to be so from documents, from decades' worth
of research by conscientious men and women from all walks of life all over the
world, and from forensic science - and millions upon millions know that. My husband
led that effort by digging deep and bringing forth that first forensic kernel
of truth. That is the action of a man of principle. An honest country would reward
such a man - not punish and imprison.
Ernst was the first one ever who, in
response to four decades of Germany's demonization by its enemies, sent a team
to Auschwitz looking for the so-called "murder weapon" - the dreaded "gas chambers"
of Hitler's concentration camps. That first forensic expedition documented what
they found, and what they did not find. Has Germany ever done that? Why not? Please
show me an insurance company that doggedly refuses to investigate a murder claim
for which it must pay through the nose! What Ernst initiated was long overdue
- and it was not a crime. If he is wrong, as many are led to believe for self-serving
reasons - why not re-check his findings? Or why not use the testimony sworn under
oath in his two trials in Canada and spare you the expense and effort? It's all
there, for the asking, in the records of Canada's two Great Holocaust Trials of
1985 and 1988.
* Ernst Zundel has a fine mind,
a will of steel, and an impeccably unblemished record. He dug in his heels and
refused to budge, but he has always respected the law. Never once, in almost half
a century of almost incessant insults, murderous violence and non-stop demonization
did he raise a hand against his tormentors. Should such a man endure years of
detention in inhuman, abusive surroundings - with not a chance of that proverbial
snowball in hell to be allowed to offer a defence?
Specifically, it has been
claimed Ernst owned and ran the Zundelsite, an American-based website, famous
around the world. I call that an affront against my dignity as a professional
and as a citizen of the United States of America, a country with a Bill of Rights
as part of its Constitution. In the United States, to speak one's mind is guaranteed
by law, no matter how embarrassing and inconvenient to vested political interests.
I happen to have a mind of my own. The Zundelsite is my own property. Ernst did
not found the Zundelsite. I did. Ernst does not run the Zundelsite. I do. I have
done that for close to 12 years!
Out of respect for him, I crafted and refined
the Zundelsite so that it accurately, and to the best of my ability, reflected
and reflects what Ernst is all about - an honest, questing man who cannot help
but speak the truth as he knows it. I have been told that Germany has issued an
arrest warrant for me as well. I, too, have an impeccable record, having always
lived within the law, in deference to my chosen country.
I was a respected,
accomplished writer long before I ever met Ernst Zundel. For many years, I used
to make a living as a convention speaker, keynoting about the history I knew to
audiences as large as 6,000, being booked alongside accomplished entertainment
stars, state governors, and senators. No one objected - ever! Whatever made me
suddenly a "criminal"?
*I understand the prosecution
is going to present three "witnesses" to make its threadbare case. Who are these
witnesses? Ernst's second wife - a fractured personality whose fevered mind hallucinates
concocted stories. Two government spooks who nested in the entrails of German
embassies and consulates to do their dirty work for alien interests - instead
of shielding and defending a tortured German national, as would have been their
duty. That's it! That's all the shabby "evidence" the prosecution conjured up
after three decades' worth of spying, harassing and subverting - and millions'
of taxpayers' money! I measure these three traitors to the truth against the thousands
of testimonials collected over decades from supporters all over the world who
know Ernst and vouch for his conduct.
You have been tasked to finish off this
man. I need to point out that you are in a position to do precisely what is right,
as opposed to what might be politically useful. I must assume you did not choose
this role and do not cherish it. You did not make the laws. You must obey the
laws - or must you? You know by now that what the so-called "Holocaust" connotes
is far from "offenkundig".
This obscene trial is a political circus,
meant to solicit applause from New York, Washington, London, and Tel Aviv. The
Holocaust Lobby is holding the hoop. You are expected to overrule your German
conscience and jump through that hoop like a poodle. Ernst Zundel is a man who
never has jumped through the hoop for the sake of applause. Future generations
will have no difficulty according this rare individual great honour for his determined
stand against corruption and deceit in his homeland.
How they will judge his
judge, whom fate has chosen to preside over literally life and death at such a
crucial juncture in Western people's history, is as of this late date still written
in the stars.
Sincerely, Ingrid Rimland Zundel, Ed.D.