Theos-Talk Archives (January 2004 Message tt00097)

As you can see, the terrorists make the world flat.







-- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "arielaretziel" 
<arielaretziel@y...> wrote:
> 
> 
> "There is No Religion Higher Than Truth"
> 
> This was the arguement of Socrates, that 
> ther is a Truth that should be aspired for. Meanwhile, the Sophists 
did not=
> believe 
> that there was an "Objective Truth." They believed that if you can 
argue co=
> nvincingly 
> and enough people accept your arguement as sound, than this is what 
is acce=
> pted. Many 
> of Plato's Dialogues are between Sophists and Socrates. Socrates 
used aguem=
> ent to 
> getter closer to the Truth. And he argued that that was the true 
objective =
> of 
> arguement.
> 
> Now, I'm not sure, but maybe what we are dealing with here in 
today's 
> world and in the example below is the return of the Sophists. Now, 
if enoug=
> h people can 
> be convinced that the World is flat, will it make the world flat? 
If we can=
> get perhaps 
> 88% of the world population to believe the world is flat, maybe we 
can make=
> it True? What 
> do you think?
> 
> Ariel
> 
> 
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Reitemeyer" 
> <ringding@b...> wrote:
> > Several Blavatsky students and truth seekers may be 
> interested in the following information:
> > 
> > German lawyer Horst Mahler finds out: 
> The Holocaust - that 6 million Jews were gassed in Germany - never 
happene=
> d.
> > Several 
> German public prosecutors proofed the case and did not find any 
error.
> > 
> > From the 
> theosophic point of view this good news may be a also a good 
starting point=
> to have a 
> deeper look on Hitler and start research on him and his policy from 
the sta=
> ndpoint of 
> the Ancient Wisdom, but read for yourself the complete essay below:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/Dissenters/mahler4.htm
> > 
> > 
> > From: "Horst 
> Mahler" hm@d... 
> > 
> > To: "Adelaide Institute" info@a... 
> > 
> > Sent: Thursday, 
> October 09, 2003 12:47 AM 
> > 
> > 
> > Subject: You can't deny what never happened -  
> > 
> > 
> There is no denialism because the Holocaust never happened 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Please 
> forward!!
> > 
> > To whom it may concern.
> > 
> > The uprising of the German People for the 
> truth has begun. Its course so far
> > is described in attachment 01. It will be 
> continued. The next step of this
> > course is to be the establishing of a "Society for 
> the Rehabilitation of
> > Those persecuted for Denial of the Holocaust", for the 
> purpose of preparing,
> > in organised form, the resumption of the proceedings 
> against the victims of
> > punitive and disciplinary measures, and to support them, 
> especially
> > financially, in the execution of this.
> > 
> > The judicial foundation 
> for this course of action is simple: § 359 StPO
> > [code of criminal procedure] 
> provides the possibility for a resumption of
> > the proceedings in favour of a person 
> who was legally convicted, in case the
> > evidential facts have changed. Even though 
> the case that a previously
> > assumed obviousness of incriminating facts should no 
> longer apply is not
> > considered in law, I am certain, that this gap can be bridged 
> through
> > analogous deduction.
> > 
> > The reason for resumption is given through the 
> fact that, due to the article
> > of the main editor of the news magazine DER SPIEGEL, 
> Fritjof Meyer, the
> > obviousness of the Holocaust is obviously no longer 
> applicable. Please see
> > attachment 01 for details.
> > 
> > In the constitutional 
> complaint for Frank Rennicke, I explained how the role
> > of the judiciary is to be 
> assessed. An excerpt of this is given as
> > attachment 02.
> > 
> > Are you prepared to join 
> this society? The membership subscription for the
> > affected is Euros 3,--/month, for 
> the non-affected Euros 10,--/month.
> > [Donations of any amount are welcome]. 
> Registration of the society and
> > charitable benefit are not striven for. The 
> standing rules will meet the
> > legal minimum requirements.
> > 
> > Please direct your 
> statement of purpose with details of your complete name,
> > date of birth and address 
> (no PO boxes) to
> > 
> > RA Horst Mahler, Weidenbusch 13, 14532 Kleinmachnow, Germany
> > 
> 
> > Tel.: 0049 33203 20460 Fax: 0049 33203 21059
> > 
> > e-mail: hm@h...
> > 
> > website: 
> www.horst-mahler.de
> > 
> > 
> > Kleinmachnow, the 29th of September 2003
> > 
> > Horst 
> Mahler
> > 
> > If you would like to support our cause, please make your donation 
> payable
> > to:
> > Ursula Haverbeck-Wetzel, Sparkasse Herford, BLZ 494 501 20, 
account 
> no. 325
> > 015 262 0.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Attachment 01
> > 
> > The "Campaign against the 
> Obviousness of the Holocaust" has started
> > successfully.
> > 
> > We were forced to 
> learn that the German Reich had provoked both world wars,
> > and that the National 
> Socialists killed 6 million Jews - of which 4 million
> > alone were killed in Auschwitz 
> in gas chambers by Zyklon B. Whoever
> > contested the figure that is connected to the 
> latter form of death, is/was
> > imprisoned for "playing down the holocaust".
> > 
> > 
> Recently it is permitted to claim that not more than 356.000 people 
(Jews
> > and non-
> Jews) fell victim to Zyklon B in Auschwitz.
> > 
> > Four public prosecutor's offices - in 
> Berlin, Stuttgart, Bochum and
> > Bielefeld - have so far voiced their opinion along 
> this line.
> > 
> > The public prosecutor's office in Stuttgart has refused to 
charge, 
> for
> > violation of § 130 sects. 3 and 4 StGB [penal code], the main 
editor of t=
> he
> > 
> SPIEGEL, Fritjof Meyer, for writing, and the former president of the
> > Bundestag, 
> Prof. Dr. Rita Süßmuth, for publishing the article "Die Zahl der
> > Opfer von 
> Auschwitz - Neue Erkenntnisse durch neue Archivfunde" [The Number
> > of Victims of 
> Auschwitz - New Insights due to new Findings in the Archives]
> > (in the magazine 
> Osteuropa, 5/2002, p. 631 ff.). In this article Meyer put
> > forward and 
> substantiated the thesis that throughout the time of the German
> > occupation of the 
> concentration camp Auschwitz a total of 510.000 people
> > died, of which probably 
> 356.000 "im Gas" (Jews and non-Jews). The relevant
> > note of termination was added to 
> file reference 4 Js 75185/02 on 28.05.03.
> > 
> > How is it to be explained that the figure 
> of the number of victims is now
> > also "officially" clearly melting away like snow in 
> the vernal sun? Is this
> > due to the fact, communicated by Fritjof Meyer, that the 
> former commanding
> > officer of Auschwitz, Rudolf Höß, confessed imaginary figures 
> under torture
> > - presumably expecting that their lack of relation to reality 
would 
> soon be
> > recognised, and that by these means the awareness would be 
directed to th=
> e
> > 
> conditions under which these testimonies were made?
> > 
> > Within the framework of the 
> "Campaign against the Obviousness of the
> > Holocaust" citizens of the Reich copied 
> the article by Meyer, sent it to a
> > number of prominent figures of the political and 
> cultural scene of the FRG,
> > and finally reported themselves for violation of § 130 
> sect. 4 StGB, to the
> > district attorney Neumann in Berlin.
> > 
> > In explanation of 
> this step, the citizens of the Reich who reported
> > themselves stated:
> > 
> > The 
> murder of the soul of the German People, the genocide committed by
> > Israel and the 
> persecution of the Holocaust-disbelievers, has to stop. The
> > uprising against the 
> world domination of the Jews has begun in Palestine
> > with the second Intifada. The 
> struggle for liberation now continues in
> > Germany, with the attack against the 
> dogma of the 6 million gassed Jews.
> > 
> > It was Martin Walser who, in his speech in the 
> Paul's Church, was the first
> > to publicly identify the "Auschwitz-cudgel" as the 
> weapon of our enemies.
> > The main editor of the news magazine DER SPIEGEL, Fritjof 
> Meyer, has now
> > taken a swing at the Holocaust religion which will destroy it. In 
> his
> > article "Die Zahl der Opfer von Auschwitz - Neue Erkenntnisse 
durch neue
> > 
> Archivfunde", published in the scientific magazine Osteuropa, no. 5 
from Ma=
> y
> > 
> 2002, he rejects the figure of 6 million gassed Jews. In contrast to
> > numerous 
> historians, Fritjof Meyer does not deny the murders in the gas
> > chambers, but 
> maintains that only 356.000 were killed in this manner in
> > Auschwitz. That is not 
> more people than Jewish nuclear physicists burned in
> > the fire of "Little Boy" in 
> Hiroshima within a few minutes on the 6th of
> > August 1945, with the nuclear bomb they 
> had built. No fewer people found an
> > agonising death in Dresden, on the 13th of 
> February 1945, in the firestorm
> > that scientists of HRH the King of Great Britain had 
> planned. This figure
> > reaches nowhere near to the two million Germans who - after they 
> had
> > surrendered their weapons - were killed by General Dwight D. 
Eisenhower o=
> n
> > the 
> meadows of the Rhine with the hunger-weapon. This figure is also far
> > smaller than the 
> number of Germans worked to death as work-slaves in the
> > Soviet camps. And it is only a 
> tenth of the two to three million dead of the
> > genocide of expulsion, that was 
> perpetrated against the Germans of the
> > eastern territories of the German Reich.
> > 
> 
> > If the number of victims that was established by Fritjof Meyer is 
correct=
> ,
> > then 
> "the Holocaust", in the sense of a "unique and incomparable crime of
> > mankind", did 
> not take place. We reject Jewish moral, according to which
> > only murder of a Jew is a 
> crime, whereas the brutal death of a non-Jew is
> > rather a welcome event, as a 
> contemptuous conviction.
> > 
> > So far three notifications of termination have been 
> issued by the relevant
> > public prosecutor's offices, in accordance with § 170 sect. 
> 2 StPO
> > (insufficient grounds for suspicion): in the case of Edgar 
Forster, StA
> > 
> [public prosecutor's office] Bochum from 06.05.03, file reference 
33 Js
> > 145/03, 
> in the case of Ursula Haverbeck, StA Bielefeld from 27.05.06, file
> > reference 46 Js 
> 171/03, and in the case of Imke Barnstedt, StA Berlin from
> > 10.06.03, file reference 
> 81 Js 1564/03. The result of this campaign draws
> > the attention to the proclamation 
> to the Jews of the whole world, as it was
> > formulated by citizens of the Reich in the 
> Verden Manifesto from the 5th of
> > February 2003, in the following words:
> > 
> > In the 
> brave deed of the editor of the SPIEGEL, Fritjof Meyer, we see the
> > signal for the 
> begin of the uprising against the oppressors of the German
> > People. We do not throw 
> stones at the occupiers, but in the spirit of
> > Mahatma Gandhi we will copy Meyer's 
> article and distribute it, in order to
> > testify for the German Reich, out of free 
> choice, in front of the courts of
> > the regime which serves the obliteration of the 
> Reich, and which calls
> > itself "Federal Republic of Germany". We accuse the Judeo-
> American empire of
> > not only having instigated World War II, in order to obtain, 
> secure and
> > expand the domination of the world, but also, of having, after 
the end 
> of
> > the war, globally caused the violent deaths of 12 to 16 million 
people.
> > 
> > The 
> dead are now lifting up their voices through us, to call to the 
Jews:
> > 
> > "That's 
> enough! Many Peoples bled in the 20th century. Let the world finally
> > settle down and 
> allow peace to reign! Do not desire the land of an innocent
> > People just because it was 
> promised to you by a bloodthirsty god 3500 years
> > ago. End the world war that you are 
> currently trying to instigate. Go into
> > yourselves and renounce Yahweh, for he 
> takes pleasure in genocide! Submit
> > yourselves to the Peoples who will receive you 
> as brothers, if you too will
> > honour them as brothers. Realise that your chosenness 
> is a curse and that
> > you will perish in the flames of hate that leap to meet you from 
> those who
> > you despise as animals."
> > 
> > The Holy German Reich lives, to summon the 
> Jews to the world court!
> > 
> > * * *
> > 
> > Account of the action on the 30th of July 2003 at 
> the Wartburg:
> > 
> > The Uprising for the Truth began at the Wartburg.
> > 
> > 
> > Where 
> Martin Luther - having been excommunicated by the Pope and declared 
an
> > outlaw of the 
> Reich by the German Kaiser - once translated the New Testament
> > under the protection 
> of the Teutonic Knights, where on the 18th of October
> > 1817 on the occasion of the 
> fourth anniversary of the People's Battle of
> > Leipzig against Napoleonic foreign 
> rule 500 students gathered for the
> > Wartburg celebration - the first civilian-
> democratic gathering in Germany -
> > under the motto "Honour - Freedom - Fatherland" in 
> order to fight for a
> > unified national state, citizens of the German Reich lifted up 
> their voice
> > on the 30th of July 2003 for the truth:
> > 
> > "There was no Holocaust."
> > 
> 
> > "Truth conquers."
> > 
> > "The lie destroys itself."
> > 
> > "The German Reich regains 
> consciousness in the uprising of the German
> > People."
> > 
> > echoed their calls from 
> the walls of this proud castle.
> > 
> > Originally, this proclamation was to have taken 
> place on the 30th of July
> > 2003 in Auschwitz, in order to mark this place of Jewish 
> ritual worship as
> > the scene of the crime of the spiritual murder of the German 
> People.
> > 
> > Thanks to the friendly support of Brandenburg's Minister of the 
> Interior,
> > Schönboom, who forbade Horst Mahler - the initiator of this 
action - the
> > 
> departure from the country into Poland, this purpose was achieved, 
due to
> > the echo 
> of the media, without the physical presence of the heralds of truth
> > in Auschwitz.
> > 
> 
> > Due to conspicuous movements of the supporters of the Verden 
Manifesto fr=
> om
> > the 
> 5th of February 2003 in the German lands, and corresponding 
telephone
> > calls - which 
> were meant to be bugged, and were indeed listened into (which
> > became noticeable 
> through unmotivated inquiries by the CID after Horst
> > Mahler at possible meeting 
> places in Thuringia) - the occupying power had
> > been led to believe that a substitute 
> event would take place at the location
> > of the former concentration camp Buchenwald 
> (near Weimar). An armada of
> > motorised observation troops of the official spying 
> service was sent into
> > this area, who - unsuccessfully - attempted, in a cat-and-mouse 
> game on
> > motorways and country roads lasting several hours, to unsettle 
the 
> citizens
> > of the Reich who were determined to execute the liberating deed. 
(The 
> driver
> > of the vehicle IK-G 135 distinguished himself especially; but the 
driver =
> 
> of
> > IK-VT xxx was also not bad.) At Buchenwald, uniformed police 
forces lay i=
> n
> > wait 
> in order to hinder the public appearance of the citizens of the 
Reich.
> > 
> > In fact 
> however, the Wartburg had been chosen for the decisive event, due to
> > its charisma as 
> a location of German history. The citizens of the Reich who
> > were prepared for the 
> communal deed gathered like lightning on the best
> > situated lookout platform under 
> the castle, in order to put an end to the
> > obsequious grovelling towards the 
> Holocaust religion by means of a solemn
> > ceremony. Here they were left alone by the 
> surprised occupying power. Only a
> > camera team of the official spying service - the 
> only one it seems, that was
> > not shaken off through driving manoeuvres - was present 
> and filmed the
> > scene.
> > 
> > The solemn celebration was opened by Horst Mahler with an 
> invocation of the
> > German folk-spirit:
> > 
> >  
> > Sieghafter Geist 
> > Durchflamme die 
> Ohnmacht 
> > Zaghafter Seelen. 
> > Verbrenne die Ichsucht, 
> > Entzünde das Mitleid, 
> > 
> Daß Selbstlosigkeit, 
> > Der Lebensstrom der Menschheit, 
> > Wallt als Quelle, 
> > Der 
> geistigen Wiedergeburt. 
> > Victorious Spirit 
> > Blaze through the unconsciousness 
> 
> > Of timid souls. 
> > Consume egotism, 
> > Ignite compassion, 
> > That selflessness, 
> > 
> The life-stream of humanity, 
> > May flow as the source 
> > Of spiritual rebirth.
> > 
> > 
> Rudolf Steiner, on the 20th of September 1919
> > 
> > 
> > After a quiet reflection he then 
> uttered the four sentences which contain
> > everything, which were each repeated by 
> two speakers from the circle of the
> > Reich citizens that were present:
> > 
> > Truth 
> conquers!
> > 
> > The lie destroys itself!
> > 
> > There was no Holocaust!
> > 
> > The German 
> Reich regains consciousness in the uprising of the German People.
> > 
> > Throughout 
> the ceremony fluttered the black-white-red flag of the
> > Kaiser-Reich that had been 
> restored in 1871, and the flag of the Deutsches
> > Kolleg - a lying black cross in a golden 
> bed on a red field - which is
> > recommended as the state symbol of the German Reich that is 
> regaining its
> > consciousness. Between the flags fluttered a metre-long scroll 
> containing
> > over a hundred names of people who were persecuted, and in part 
are 
> still
> > being persecuted, by the Jewish occupying power as "revisionists" 
and
> > 
> "Holocaust deniers". They were remembered in gratitude.
> > 
> > The ceremonial event 
> was ended with the hymn:
> > 
> >  
> > Nichts kann uns rauben 
> > Liebe und Glauben 
> > Zu 
> unserem Land. 
> > Es zu erhalten
> > Nothing can rob us 
> > Of love and faith 
> > To our 
> country. 
> > To maintain it 
> > Und zu gestalten 
> > Sind wir gesandt. 
> > Mögen wir 
> sterben, 
> > Unseren Erben 
> > Gilt dann die Pflicht 
> > Es zu erhalten 
> > Und zu 
> gestalten: 
> > Deutschland stirbt nicht.
> > 
> > And to organise it 
> > We have been sent. 
> 
> > Should we die, 
> > Our heirs 
> > Are then obliged 
> > To maintain it 
> > And to organise it: 
> 
> > Germany will not die.
> > 
> >  
> > After the group returned to the parking area to their 
> cars, following a
> > two-hour sojourn at the Wartburg, CID officers of the FRG - the
> > 
> "organisational form of a modality of foreign rule" (Carlo Schmid) -
> > approached 
> Horst Mahler and informed him that an investigation had been
> > initiated against him 
> due to suspicion of incitement of the People. The
> > reason given for this step was that 
> "a banner with inciting contents" was
> > exhibited during the proclamation at the 
> Wartburg. The leader of the CID
> > commando was unable to recite the wording of this 
> banner. "There was
> > something about 'Holocaust' to be read." The officers made a 
> listless
> > impression.
> > 
> > Circa 10km away from the Wartburg, the vehicle driven by 
> Ursula Haverbeck
> > was stopped on the return journey to Vlotho by four cars of the 
> official
> > spying service. The front-seat passenger - a GP from Bochum - was 
command=
> ed
> > 
> to leave the vehicle by uniformed police officials with a drawn 
pistol. The=
> 
> > vehicle 
> was then thoroughly searched - including the luggage. As a result of
> > this search the 
> banners which had been exhibited at the Wartburg, as well as
> > the scroll with the 
> names of the Holocaust-persecuted, fell into the hands
> > of the police.
> > 
> > At the 
> same time that the ceremony at the Wartburg was taking place, the CD
> > "Aufstand für 
> die Wahrheit - Auschwitz am 30. Juli 2003" [Uprising for the
> > Truth - Auschwitz on the 
> 30th of July 2003] which had been produced and
> > published by Horst Mahler on occasion 
> of the planned visit to the scene of
> > the crime, was sent to roughly 300 of the most 
> important media, diplomatic
> > deputies, as well as opinion forming personalities 
> at home and abroad.
> > 
> > This CD contains the following text and picture files 
> (English files are
> > underlined):
> > 
> > 1. Horst Mahler: Das Deutsche Reich steht auf 
> für die Wahrheit (7/03)
> > 2. Horst Mahler: The German Reich arises for the Truth 
> (translation of
> > no. 1)
> > 3. Verdener Manifest (2/03)
> > 4. Appell der 100
> > 5. Horst 
> Mahler: Offener Brief an Bundeskanzler Gerhard Schröder
> > (11/99)
> > 6. Horst 
> Mahler: Offener Brief an die Abgeordneten des 15. Deutschen
> > Bundestages (5/03)
> > 
> 7. Dokumentation: Fritjof Meyer über Opferzahlen von Auschwitz
> > 8. Tabelle mit 
> Opferzahlen
> > 9. Horst Mahler: Erfolge im Feldzug gegen die Offenkundigkeit des
> > 
> Holocaust
> > 10. To be passed on - Success in the campaign against the 
Holocaust
> > 
> religion (translation of no. 9)
> > 11. Horst Mahler: Revisionsbegründung im 
> Verfahren gegen Frank Rennicke
> > (1/03)
> > 12. Horst Mahler: Judaismus und 
> Christentum - Unverträgliche
> > Menschenbilder (8/02)
> > 13. Karl Marx: Zur 
> Judenfrage
> > 14. Deutsches Kolleg: Endlösung der Judenfrage (3/01)
> > 15. 
> Deutsches Kolleg: Final Solution of the Jewish Question (translation
> > of no. 14)
> > 
> 16. Horst Mahler: Offener Brief an Daniel Goldhagen
> > 17. Deutsches Kolleg: 
> Ausrufung des Aufstandes der Anständigen
> > 18. Deutsches Kolleg: Zur 
> Heilsgeschichtlichen Lage des Deutschen
> > Reiches
> > 19. Deutsches Kolleg: The 
> Redeeming Historical Role of the German Reich
> > (I) (translation of no. 18)
> > 20. 
> Deutsches Kolleg: The Redeeming Historical Role of the German Reich
> > (II) 
> (translation of no. 18 contd. and of no. 21)
> > 21. Deutsches Kolleg: An den Ewigen Bund 
> der Deutschen Fürsten (mit
> > Aufstandsplan)
> > 22. Protokolle der Weisen von Zion
> > 
> 23. Horst Mahler: "Antisemiten" aller Länder vereinigt Euch!
> > 24. Carlo Schmid: 
> Rede vor dem Parlamentarischen Rat vom 8. September
> > 1948
> > 25. Horst Mahler: 
> Skizze für eine neue Reichsordnung (11/99)
> > 26. Horst Mahler: Heil Juda, wir kommen 
> (4/02)
> > 27. Horst Mahler: Den Juden ist die Darstellung des satanischen 
Prinzips
> > 
> zugeschickt (6/03)
> > 28. Eine Korrespondenz: Die Völker im Stande der Notwehr gegen 
> Jahwe
> > (12/02)
> > 29. Horst Mahler: Guten Tag und Shalom! - Eine Kriegserklärung an 
> die
> > Judenheit (6/03)
> > 30. Deutsches Kolleg: Independence Day - live (9/01)
> > 31. 
> Deutsches Kolleg: Independence Day - live (translation of no. 30)
> > 32. Deutsches 
> Kolleg: Der Untergang des Judäo-Amerikanischen Emperiums
> > (11/01)
> > 33. 
> Deutsches Kolleg: The Fall of the Judeo-American Empire (translation
> > of no. 32)
> > 
> 34. Horst Mahler: Thesen über die Moderne
> > 35. Horst Mahler: Thesen über Juden und 
> Deutschland als geistige Notwehr
> > (7/99)
> > 36. Horst Mahler: Die Macht der Lüge - 
> Worum geht es? (1/03)
> > 37. Horst Mahler: Auf dem Wege zur Reichsordnung (11/99)
> > 
> 38. Horst Mahler: Sinn der Shoa (3/99)
> > 39. Giselher Wirsing: Erziehung zum Krieg 
> (excerpt from "Der Maßlose
> > Kontinent")
> > 40. Hamilton Fish: Pearl Harbor 
> (excerpt from "Der zerbrochene Mythos")
> > 41. Dirk Bavendamm: Roosevelts Krieg 
> (excerpt)
> > 42. Die Septemberlüge (Bilderschau und Revisionsschrift mit
> > 
> Beweisanträgen)
> > 43. Flugblatt: Das Deutsche Volk erzwingt die Untersuchung 
> der
> > Ereignisse vom 11.09.01
> > 44. Horst Mahler: Der Globalismus als höchstes 
> Stadium des Imperialismus
> > 45. Die Deutschen proben den aufrechten Gang
> > 
> > The 
> enemies of the German Reich should know that henceforth, every trial
> > because of 
> "incitement of the People" due to criticism of Jewry and the
> > public profession of 
> the historical truth will become a boomerang. The way
> > was paved by the main editor of 
> the news magazine DER SPIEGEL, Fritjof Meyer
> > (Die Zahl der Opfer von Auschwitz in 
> the magazine Osteuropa no. 5/2002, p.
> > 631 ff.). Due to new findings in the archives 
> he gives the number of people
> > who died from gas in Auschwitz as 356.000 (Jews and non-
> Jews). Even though
> > he is, in contrast to the ever increasing number of 
> "revisionist"
> > historians, still sticking to the gas chamber version, his essay 
> is
> > groundbreaking because the public prosecutors of the occupying 
power
> > 
> capitulated before the power of the SPIEGEL and declared Meyer's 
theory to
> > be 
> "irrelevant concerning criminal law".
> > 
> > Between the "official" figure of first 4 
> million then 1.5 million dead due
> > to gassing in Auschwitz, and the figure claimed by 
> Meyer, is a difference
> > that can only be explained by the fact that the "official" 
> version is based
> > on lies and fabrications. One can now, based on the findings of 
> Meyer, argue
> > against the Auschwitz Lie with the prospect of success in the 
centre 
> of
> > society, and not only at its "right-wing fringe".
> > 
> > The knowledge of the truth 
> is increasing dramatically, the lie is
> > collapsing. The Jewish power will 
> disappear with it. The Judeo-American
> > empire will soon tumble and crash to the 
> ground.
> > What a celebration that will be!
> > 
> > 
> > Verden an der Aller, on the 31st of 
> July 2003
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Attachment 02
> > 
> > Excerpt from the constitutional complaint for 
> Frank Rennicke
> > 
> > Preface
> > 
> > For the purpose of defending the freedom of the 
> citizen of the Reich, Frank
> > Rennicke, the signatory, with the following statement 
> of reasons, is
> > claiming the catalogue of basic rights of the Basic Law (GG) for 
the 
> Federal
> > Republic of Germany - in limits - as the right of the German 
Reich, and t=
> he
> > 
> Federal Constitutional Court as a German court.
> > 
> > Based on the speech of the expert 
> for national and international right,
> > Prof. Dr. Carlo Schmid, before the 
> Parliamentary Council on the 8th of
> > September 1948, this is done in the awareness 
> that the Basic Law is not a
> > constitution (cf. art. 146 GG) but a modality of the 
> occupiers' statute of
> > the Western victorious powers; that the Federal republic of 
> Germany is not a
> > state but the "organisational form of a modality of foreign rule" 
> and that
> > consequently, the Federal Constitutional Court is neither a 
> constitutional
> > court nor a court of the German national state: the German Reich.
> > 
> 
> > All who argue against this view of things, with the time that has 
lapsed =
> and
> > the 
> many elections that have taken place in the mean time, have to bear 
in
> > mind:
> > 
> > 1. At 
> no point in time has there been a free expression of thoughts or a
> > free election in the 
> Federal Republic: The NSDAP as well as all its organs
> > and successor organisations 
> were banned in May 1945 by the victorious powers
> > under breach of art. 43 of the Hague 
> Rules on Land Warfare from 1907.
> > In its issue no. 20/2003 the news magazine DER 
> SPIEGEL reported on page 47
> > of an opinion poll in the year 1948. According to this 
> poll, 57% of the
> > Germans were at that time still of the opinion that National 
> Socialism had
> > been a good idea. It is only the "re-education" of the Germans - 
which is=
>  
> in
> > breach of international right - that has been continuing for half 
a centu=
> ry
> > now, 
> that may have brought about a change in this. The decisive factor 
would
> > here be the 
> lie of the 6 million Jews that were exterminated through gas.
> > [The development of 
> the Soviet Union that has demised, may serve as a
> > contrast here: The Communist Party 
> of the Soviet Union which was responsible
> > for the physical extermination of 30 
> million self-employed Russian farmers,
> > which was actually planned and executed by 
> Stalin's son-in-law, the Jew
> > Kaganowitsch, was not banned after the collapse of the 
> Bolshevik system. Its
> > successor organisation is represented in the Duma and 
> currently plays an
> > important part in Russia.]
> > The political convictions of the 
> majority of the Germans were therefore
> > permanently excluded, from the very 
> beginning, from any form of "democratic"
> > will formation. Still in the covering 
> letter of the "German" governments -
> > the FRG and GDR - to the 2+4 Treaty, the obligation 
> of the federal
> > government to suppress parties which contain National Socialist 
> thoughts is
> > emphasised.
> > 2. It is clearly expressed with the new version of 
> article 146 GG , which
> > was passed with the Treaty of Unification, that even in the 
> opinion of the
> > vassal regime the Basic Law is not enhanced to be a constitution 
of 
> the
> > German People through the right that can be deduced from habit.
> > 
> > This 
> clarification, which was unheard of until then, is indispensable at
> > this juncture 
> because the subject of examination is the Holocaust
> > legislation of this foreign 
> rule and the activity of the courts which is
> > based upon it, which - as is to be shown - 
> cannot under any viewpoint
> > whatsoever be recognised as either a part of the German 
> system of laws or as
> > the confirmation of German jurisdiction.
> > 
> > It could appear 
> to be a contradiction that, in order to defend himself
> > against the arbitrariness of 
> the victors over the German Reich, a citizen of
> > the Reich calls to an organ of the 
> foreign rule with the desire to declare
> > their Holocaust legislation - which at heart 
> is the core of the Talmudic
> > foreign rule over the German People - null and void.
> > 
> > 
> This contradiction solves itself in the recognition that the 
persons who ac=
> t
> > as 
> "Judges of the Federal Constitution" do not themselves belong to the
> > foreign rule, 
> but are merely their vassals. They are at once citizens of the
> > German Reich and are 
> obliged in loyalty to it.
> > 
> > In itself, vassalage is not a crime. Under the 
> circumstances of military
> > defeat this can even be the "lesser evil" in contrast to a 
> public military
> > dictatorship of the victorious forces. Since the purpose of 
> history is
> > freedom, the condition of vassalage can only ever be accepted for 
a
> > 
> restricted period of time. In particular, it turns into treason, 
i.e. a
> > crime 
> worthy of death, when it becomes recognisable that the foreign power
> > misuses the 
> peace of the land, which is being upheld by the vassal
> > government, in order to murder 
> the soul of the German People, using the
> > weapons of psychological warfare, with the 
> declared purpose - however
> > forgotten by the victim - to destroy the German Reich and 
> its German
> > state-folk for all eternity.
> > 
> > With his refusal to let the German army 
> participate in the USA's illegal
> > raid against Iraq, Gerhard Schröder has, as 
> chancellor of Germany, publicly
> > marked the beginning of the end of the vassalage. 
> An in-depth study - as
> > document study so to speak - of the book of the German-Austrian 
> analyst and
> > governmental advisor Gerhoch Reisegger, "Wir werden schamlos 
> irregeführt",
> > Hohenrain Verlag 2003, informs about how the Judeo-American 
empire 
> is
> > inwardly already in a process of demise, and that its external 
universal
> > 
> violence is an expression of this fact. The avalanche that will 
bury the
> > "New World 
> Order", which was unilaterally proclaimed by the USA, within a
> > period of time of 10 
> years at the most, has been set off with the feigned
> > "Attack on America" on the 11th of 
> September 2001. No power of the world can
> > now hinder it. The junta which disposes 
> over the USA has instigated the
> > Third World War. Only a successful coup d'état of the 
> US military against
> > the Jewish rule over the USA, and the physical liquidation of 
> the
> > September-crooks, could avert the catastrophe. The face of the 
world is n=
> ow
> > 
> rapidly changing. Millions upon millions - if not indeed billions - 
of
> > people will 
> lose their lives in this war. Under these circumstances every
> > citizen of the German 
> Reich who has entered into the service of the foreign
> > rule, is called to remember his 
> Germanness and to act in the spirit of
> > Tauroggen , in order to paralyse the foreign 
> rule and to support the
> > struggle for freedom of the German Reich according to his 
> possibilities.
> > 
> > The world-wide Talmudic despotism - in its current stadium - is 
on 
> the whole
> > based on four lies of the century:
> > 
> > 1. On the War Guilt Lie: that the 
> German Reich wilfully brought about
> > the First and the Second World War.
> > 2. On the 
> Pearl Harbour Lie: that the USA were attacked by Japan.
> > 3. On the Auschwitz Lie: that 
> the German Reich systematically murdered
> > 4 million Jews in the concentration camp 
> Auschwitz through poison gas, in
> > accordance with a general decision of 
> extermination.
> > 4. On the September Lie: that the USA were attacked on the 11th of
> > 
> September 2001 by "Osama bin Laden's network of terror".
> > 
> > The words that Jesus 
> directed at the leader of the Jews, and that are passed
> > down in the gospel according 
> to St. John (8:44), are valid to this day:
> > 
> > Ye are of your father the devil, and the 
> lusts of your father ye will do. He
> > was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in 
> the truth, because there
> > is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his 
> own: for he
> > is a liar and the father of it.
> > 
> > Frank Rennicke's struggle against the 
> courts of the foreign rule is not a
> > legal masterstroke. It is a battle in the struggle 
> for freedom of the German
> > People. If the signatory was to restrict himself to a 
> traditional legal
> > argumentation in this struggle, then that would be the 
> equivalent to party
> > treason, for he would participate in covering up the nature of 
> this
> > confrontation and would submit himself to the conceptuality of 
the enemie=
> s
> > 
> of the Reich.
> > 
> > 
> > I.
> > 
> > The course of the proceedings and the extent of the 
> complaint
> > 
> > On the 22nd of November 2000 the magistrates' court of Böblingen 
> sentenced
> > the affected to a prison sentence of ten months, the execution of 
which 
> was
> > suspended, due to incitement of the People in eight cases, six of 
which i=
> n
> > 
> union of deed with an offence against § 21 of the GjSM [act 
concerning the
> > 
> dissemination of writings and media contents which endanger the 
youth].
> > 
> > Both 
> the affected, with the aim of being cleared of the charges, and the
> > public 
> prosecutor's office, with the aim of obtaining a higher sentence,
> > appealed 
> against this sentence in accordance with formality and within the
> > stipulated 
> period.
> > 
> > The appeal of the affected was unsuccessful. The appeal of the 
public
> > 
> prosecutor's office was partially successful. After hearing the 
appeal, the=
> 
> > 
> district court of Stuttgart sentenced the affected to a prison 
sentence of =
> 1
> > year 
> and 5 months. The sentence was suspended. The following regulations
> > were 
> implemented: §§ 130 sects. 1 - 4 StGB; 21 sect. 1 nos. 1, 2, 3a; 4
> > sect. 1 nos. 1 and 2; 3 
> sect. 1 no. 4; 6 GjSM, 52, 53, 56 StGB. The sentence
> > was formally delivered to the 
> signatory on the 11th of December 2002.
> > 
> > Contained in the complete sentence, is a 
> sentence which is to be implemented
> > due to the conviction according to § 130 sect. 4 
> StGB, because of the
> > distribution of the brochure "Dokumente der Verteidigung. 
> Unterdrückte
> > Tatsachen über Auschwitz und den Holocaust" [Documents of 
> defence.
> > Suppressed facts about Auschwitz and the Holocaust]. The court of 
> appeal
> > concluded at singles:
> > 
> > "With this he (the accused, Frank Rennicke) 
> followed the purpose of bringing
> > this brochure to the attention of a further, 
> undefined but larger circle of
> > people, especially of like-minded persons, but also 
> to other disseminators,
> > beyond the first recipient Marco Rieger. The accused, 
> Frank Rennicke, was
> > aware of the fact that this brochure denies the genocide 
> against the Jews
> > and gypsies in the concentration camps, especially in Auschwitz, 
> during the
> > National Socialist tyranny (so-called Auschwitz Lie). In the form 
of a
> > 
> pseudo scientific presentation (Leuchter Report/Rudolf Report) it is
> > expounded 
> over 30 pages that the murder of the Jews and gypsies by the Nazi
> > regime was not 
> possible due to technical and factual reasons, and that it
> > also did not take place, 
> at least not on the scale reckoned by recognised
> > historians.
> > 
> > Amongst other 
> things, it states:
> > "After reviewing all of the material and inspecting all of the 
> sites at
> > Auschwitz, Birkenau and Majdanek, your author finds the evidence
> > 
> overwhelming. There were no execution gas chambers at any of these
> > locations. It is 
> the best engineering opinion of this author that the
> > alleged gas chambers at the 
> inspected sites could nor have then been, or
> > now, be utilized or seriously 
> considered to function as execution gas
> > chambers."
> > This is signed by Fred 
> Leuchter.
> > 
> > Simultaneously there is a call to disseminate these supposedly
> > 
> scientifically proven claims, in the appendix of this brochure."
> > 
> > The appeal of 
> the affected against this was aimed at demonstrating, by means
> > of fundamental 
> expositions, the contradiction that exists between the legal
> > opinion which 
> formed the basis of the decision of the court of appeal on the
> > one hand, and the 
> interpretation of the Basic Law (which was passed under
> > the supreme authority of 
> the Western victorious powers) in the interest of
> > the German People on the other 
> hand.
> > 
> > This procedure is problematic. Contradictory patterns of thought, 
i.e. 
> ones
> > which exclude each other, hit upon each other. The viewpoint that 
is to b=
> e
> > 
> suspected amongst the judges could be based on power. That of the 
defence o=
> f
> > the 
> affected, has been exposed to demonisation for decades and is wholly
> > powerless. 
> Since the thinking of both poles refers to the same subject, the
> > differing ways of 
> thinking are in relation to one another. This is laden
> > with complexes of feelings 
> which hinder the free flow of the thoughts.
> > 
> > It seems useful to bring this to 
> attention. It could happen that the court
> > remembers that thoughts - this includes 
> the realm of legal arguments - are
> > not to be assessed according to whether they are 
> "politically correct" or
> > not, but according to whether they are correct or 
> incorrect, true or false.
> > It may well happen that the odd thought will strike one 
> like a punch in the
> > stomach and wind the person. Then it helps to take a deep breath 
and 
> ask
> > oneself: "Hmm, why not?" With this simple question one frees 
oneself from=
> 
> > the 
> thought taboos which make us the slaves of foreign powers. This 
advice
> > could here be 
> especially helpful because the Jewish Question will, in the
> > following, be 
> examined in an unheard of manner. The taboo of all taboos will
> > be shamelessly 
> violated, for the search for truth does not tolerate any
> > taboos.
> > 
> > The 
> circumstances favour this attempt. The power that tries to dictate 
our
> > thoughts 
> has exposed itself as a criminal power through the feigned "Attack
> > on America" from 
> the 11th of September 2001. What this power is moved by at
> > heart and what it aims at, 
> has been expertly revealed in unsurpassed quality
> > by Gerhoch Reisegger in his book 
> "Wir werden schamlos irregeführt - Vom 11.
> > September bis zum Irak-Krieg", Hohenrain 
> Verlag, Tübingen 2003.
> > 
> > By court order, in accordance with § 349 sect. 2 StPO from 
> the 17th of July
> > 2003, the court of appeal has rejected the appeal of the affected 
> as
> > unfounded "because the re-examination of the sentence ... did not 
come
> > across a 
> legal incorrectness that disadvantages the accused."
> > 
> > The Federal 
> Constitutional Court can also - as it has the power to do so -
> > ignore the proof that the 
> sentence of the affected is founded on
> > arbitrariness. The refusal to take note of 
> the facts and their connection
> > would, however, result in the reproach of treason 
> and perversion of the
> > course of justice, due to the principle of actio libera in 
> causa. The time
> > of the "organisational form of a modality of foreign rule" (Carlo 
> Schmid) -
> > (OMF), which has given itself the name "Federal Republic of 
Germany", 
> has
> > run out. Under the pressure of the catastrophe that is hurtling 
towards u=
> s
> > 
> (cf. Gerhoch Reisegger) the German People will regain its ability 
to act in=
> 
> > the 
> uprising for the organification of the German Reich (cf. art. 146 
GG).
> > 
> > The 
> grounds for appeal which were presented to the regional court of 
appeal
> > were 
> nothing other than the anticipated reasoning for the constitutional
> > complaint. 
> The part which deals with the Auschwitz complex is here newly
> > presented:
> > 
> > 
> ......
> > 
> > ......
> > 
> > IV.
> > 
> > Reprimands concerning complex B: "Documents of the 
> defence"
> > 
> > ......
> > [Retrievable under
> > http://www.deutsches-
> kolleg.org/hm/aktuelles/Revisionsbegruendung_Rennicke.h
> > tm]
> > 
> > That was 
> the excerpt from the grounds for appeal.
> > 
> > 
> > The violations of the basic rights at 
> singles:
> > 
> > Through the implementation of § 130 sects. 3 and 4 StGB, art. 1 
sect. 1 
> GG
> > has been violated. The sovereign power unduly claims for itself 
to fuse t=
> he
> > 
> convictions of the people who live in its sphere of influence with 
a decree=
> d
> > truth. 
> That is the negation of the spiritualness of the average addressee.
> > The normative 
> statement of the objective constitutional right, that the
> > dignity of man is 
> sacrosanct, contains a value statement which in itself
> > however, is based on a 
> statement of a condition of being. This condition of
> > being - the "dignity of man" - 
> which "is" independent of space and time and
> > which "is to be" legally realised, is 
> constituted of the following: Every
> > human is a human due to his spirit which lifts 
> him above impersonal nature,
> > and which enables him, through his own decision, to 
> become conscious of
> > himself, determine himself and to shape his environment 
> (similarly Wintrich,
> > Grundrechte p. 6, 15; Festschrift für Apelt p. 1 ff.; BayVBl. 
> 58, 100; cf.
> > also Marcic, Vom Gesetzesstaat zum Richterstaat, 1957, p. 313 
ff.). 
> [Dürig
> > in Dürig-Maunz, Kommentar zum Grundgesetz, art. 1 margin no. 17]
> > 
> > Apart 
> from the fact that no person is able to become conscious of himself
> > "through his own 
> decision" - just as nobody is born into this world "through
> > his own decision" - this 
> commentary is the rock in the surf of opinions
> > which argue amongst themselves for 
> the most diverse pictures of man (cf. to
> > this point the former constitutional judge 
> Prof. Dr. Ernst-Wolfgang
> > Böckenförde, Vom Wandel des Menschenbildes im Recht, 
> Rhema-Verlag, 2001).
> > 
> > The spiritualness of a person is a condition of being, i.e. 
> something which
> > can normatively neither be questioned nor formed. Rather, this is 
> the reason
> > of the inner sense of all statements whose logic is determined by 
a "You
> > 
> shall".
> > 
> > Whichever contents the spirit may receive through examples, 
teaching 
> of
> > faith, tradition, education and upbringing in associating with 
his own ki=
> n:
> > 
> these are all, without exception, merely the malleable material at 
which th=
> e
> > 
> subjective spirit forms itself through its own spiritual work and 
carves
> > itself 
> out toward conviction. It is only the conviction which has been
> > worked out by 
> oneself, which is this inner steadfastness, without which
> > human existence is a 
> miserable there-being. This innermost being of the
> > spirit is only made true through 
> its expression. Conviction is the light
> > which is shed upon everything in which the 
> person is interested. It
> > determines all possible decisions of the person and is in 
> itself actuality
> > (the emphasis being on the verb 'to act'). The suppression of the 
> expression
> > of a conviction is forced hindrance of a dignified existence, for 
only 
> in
> > the expression of his core being does man have dignity. A core 
being whic=
> h
> > does 
> not express itself is not actual. An expression which is not the
> > expression of an 
> innermost being is undignified. The arrogance of being able
> > to determine that a 
> certain conviction is not at all possible due to the
> > "obviousness of the contrary" - 
> e.g. the conviction that the mass
> > extermination of Jews is a false claim - is the 
> eternally futile attempt to
> > destroy the spirit. This attempt does not destroy the 
> spirit, but those who
> > try to kill it. Any further comment is superfluous.
> > 
> > 
> Article 1 sect. 3 GG is violated insofar as the expert courts have 
declared=
> 
> > the 
> affected to be an outlaw, without basing their decision on valid 
law by
> > means of a 
> legal argumentation. His case is a further example for the
> > general decision of the 
> "organisational form of a modality of foreign rule"
> > (OMF) to declare people as 
> outlaws who do not bow down to the foreign
> > power's dictates of conviction 
> ("political correctness").
> > 
> > Article 2 sect. 1 GG is violated insofar as the 
> refusal to allow the
> > affected to be part of the peace of right, robs him of the 
> possibility to
> > communicate his convictions to other people in the normal way 
> without
> > exposing himself to the danger of criminal persecution and social 
> ostracism.
> > In this case, the fanning out of the general right of freedom 
into 
> specific
> > basic rights (freedom of opinion, freedom of worship, freedom of 
> assembly)
> > covers only sections. The unspecific effect of discrimination 
which 
> "deniers
> > of the Holocaust" (as sinners against "political correctness" - 
pc - ) ar=
> e
> > 
> exposed to, extends further than the protective realm of these 
specific
> > rights of 
> freedom.
> > 
> > As is shown by the sentences of the expert courts in the case of 
the
> > 
> affected, this ostracism at once causes pigeonholing into patterns 
of bias,=
> 
> > which 
> are resistant against criticism, and which cannot be broken by means
> > of legal 
> redress.
> > 
> > After the abandonment of the theory that the valid relationship 
> between the
> > state and the citizen influences the relationship of private 
people
> > 
> (Drittwirkungstheorie), the affected remains wholly unprotected in 
the
> > private 
> realm (cf. Dürig in Dürig-Maunz, Kommentar zum Grundgesetz, art. 3
> > sect. 1 margin 
> no. 505 ff.).
> > 
> > The "Uprising of the Decent" which Chancellor Schröder longed 
for, 
> against
> > the "Nazis", "neo-nazis", "right-wing extremists" and "right-wing 
> radicals"
> > has led to proper campaigns of extermination in the realm of 
private 
> right:
> > bank accounts, jobs and tenancy agreements of the affected are 
> terminated.
> > Pressure of expulsion is created through the mobilisation of 
> animosities in
> > their area of living (distribution of "wanted" posters with 
> picture and the
> > slogan "Nazis, get out!", gathering into mobs in front of their 
> homes,
> > waylaying and attacking, break-ins with serious destruction of 
fixtures 
> and
> > fittings, ignition of cars parked in front of the house, etc.) by 
the OMF=
> 's
> > 
> gangs of thugs (known as "Antifa"). Ultimately, there will probably 
soon be=
> 
> > 
> protective (custody) camps into which the affected can flee to save 
their
> > health 
> and their lives. For, the protective guarding of the targets - to
> > which the signatory 
> belongs since the 31st of July 2003 -, from the armed
> > mobs is far too costly for it to be 
> generally implemented for a longer
> > period of time. In connection with the criminal 
> proceedings due to
> > "incitement of the People", which are the subject of the 
> complaint, the
> > affected and his family are acutely exposed to this pressure of 
> expulsion
> > and are forced to find a place to live in an area which is less 
hateful.
> > 
> > 
> Article 3 sect. 1 GG is violated insofar as the loss of rights 
negates the
> > equality 
> before the law of the affected (Ipsen, VVDStRL 10 - 1952 - 80 ff.).
> > The reason for his 
> unequal treatment is his viewpoint, which is
> > discriminated from above. Not 
> permitted to be expressed is the opinion that,
> > under consideration of the supposed 
> circumstances of the deeds, the
> > assertion that 6 million Jews were systematically 
> killed with the poison gas
> > "Zyklon B" in the territory of the German Reich's 
> sovereignty, is
> > incompatible with the laws of nature. This opinion is considered 
> to be
> > political because it aims - so it is claimed - at the restoration 
of the
> > Germans' 
> sense of self-esteem, and because it burdens - so it is said - the
> > relation to the Jewish 
> minority in the FRG as a result of this. By these
> > means, the guarantee of the equal 
> treatment of political opinions as it is
> > concretised in art. 3 sect. 3 GG is 
> disregarded.
> > 
> > Article 4 sect. 1 GG is violated because § 130 sects. 3 and 4 
StGB has 
> as
> > its object the discrimination of National Socialist ideology and 
its
> > 
> philosophical relatives. It follows from the legal texts that with 
this
> > punitive 
> form "a political signal against right-wing extremist and neo-nazi
> > developments" 
> is to be set (v. Bubnoff in Leipziger Kommentar, 11th edition,
> > 1996, margin no. 42 to 
> § 130). The punishable denying, or rather playing
> > down, of the Holocaust is meant to 
> be proof of "anti-constitutional
> > right-wing extremism". With the sanction one 
> wants to strike at this and
> > nothing else. In the sense of this clarification of the 
> normative aim,
> > "anti-constitutional right-wing extremism" is first and foremost 
> the
> > philosophy which determined National Socialism. This philosophy 
however, =
> 
> is
> > protected by article 4 sect. 1 GG just like all other ideological 
and
> > religious 
> confessions.
> > 
> > The attempt to exclude the National Socialist ideology from this 
> protective
> > realm, due to its supposed racist and anti-humanitarian contents, 
by
> > 
> constructing an immanent boundary of the basic rights out of art. 
139 GG, i=
> s
> > doomed 
> to failure. "There is no room in the system of the GG for a type of
> > 'special regulation 
> for the right'." (Herzog in Maunz/Dürig/Herzog/Scholz,
> > Kommentar zum 
> Grundgesetz, art. 139 margin no. 4).
> > 
> > It must not be overlooked that first and 
> foremost, Judaism would be affected
> > by such an immanent boundary. As has been 
> demonstrated ... the Jewish
> > religion and ideology is to this day characterised by 
> racism and misanthropy
> > to a degree that is without equal in European history.
> > 
> > 
> In order to show that this assessment of the Jews is not due to 
Teutonic
> > wrath, the 
> thoughts of the former British foreign secretary, Ernest Bevin,
> > are here 
> presented (he was the successor of Anthony Eden when the Labour
> > Party formed the 
> first post-war government in Britain). His parliamentary
> > permanent secretary, 
> Christopher Mayhew, noted in his diary (May 1948):
> > "There is no doubt in my mind that 
> Ernest detests Jews. He makes the odd
> > wisecrack about the 'Chosen People'; 
> declares the Old Testament the most
> > immoral book ever written and says the Jews 
> taught Hitler the technique of
> > terror. 'What could you expect when people are 
> brought up from the cradle on
> > the Old Testament' he said to me." [Source: Avi Davis in 
> Jewsweek Magazine
> > from the 21st of January 2003
> > 
> http://www.jewsweek.com/bin/en.jsp?
enPage=BlankPage&enDisplay=view&enDispWh=
> a
> > 
> t=object&enDispWho=Article%5El17&enZone=Stories&enVersion=0&]
> > 
> > The 
> incompatibility of § 130 sects. 3 and 4 StGB with article 5 sect. 1 
GG
> > has been 
> convincingly explained by Huster ...
> > 
> > Since this criminal law aims at 
> discriminating against "right-wing
> > extremism" - this being admitted by the 
> "lawmaker" - it also violates the
> > ban of article 5 sect. 3 GG.
> > 
> > Article 103 sect. 3 
> is violated by the dogma of obviousness.
> > 
> > The principle, that the accused is to be 
> granted a legal hearing, excludes
> > treating the characteristics of the legal 
> elements of the offence and other
> > facts, directly relevant as evidence, as being 
> obvious
> > (Kleinknecht/Meyer-Goßner, StPO, 45th edition, § 244 margin no. 
51 with
> > 
> reference to Alsberg/Nüse/Meyer: Der Beweisantrag im Strafprozeß, 
5th
> > edition, 
> p. 541; LR-Gollwitzer 232 für Schriften mit strafbarem Inhalt).
> > 
> > The 
> distinguishing feature of the legal element of offence of § 130 
sect. 3
> > StGB is a deed 
> which connects to "an action committed under the rule of the
> > National Socialists, 
> of the type described in § 220a sect. 1 StGB
> > (genocide)".
> > 
> > The Federal German 
> supreme court (BGH) has dismissed this in continual
> > "dispensation of justice" and 
> has, for the application of § 130 sect. 3
> > StGB, drawn up the statement that "the 
> millionfold murder of the Jews in the
> > gas chambers of the concentration camps of the 
> Second World War" is an
> > obvious fact in the sense of § 244 sect. 3 sentence 2 StPO 
> (BGHSt 40, 97, 99
> > containing further proofs).
> > 
> > Whilst the determination that 
> has been consulted for this is a norm of
> > authorisation (... in these cases the court 
> may neglect taking evidence), a
> > norm of prohibition, whose sanctions are 
> reliable, has practically been made
> > out of this with regard to the so-called 
> Holocaust. Neither is the court
> > permitted to hear evidence on the "Holocaust" nor 
> is the accused, or rather
> > his defence, allowed to put forward a motion to hear the 
> relevant evidence.
> > A defence attorney who disregards this - as in the case of the 
> attorneys
> > Bock and Rieger - is himself persecuted and punished due 
to "incitement 
> of
> > the People" in accordance with § 130 sect. 3 StGB. It was 
demonstrated ab=
> ove
> > 
> (...) that this practice has nothing to do with dispensing justice.
> > 
> > Thanks to the 
> research of the historians that are vilified as
> > "revisionists", the claim of the 
> enemies of the German Reich, that millions
> > of Jews were killed in the gas chambers of 
> the concentration camps during
> > the National Socialist rule, has long been exposed 
> as a propaganda lie. This
> > has now led to timid corrective attempts from out of the 
> centre of society,
> > obviously, because one fears the fit of rage that could be 
> directed against
> > the Jews - without differentiating between the guilty and 
> innocent - if the
> > truth becomes known to the Germans in particular and the other 
> Peoples in
> > general.
> > 
> > The article that was recently published by the main editor 
> of DER SPIEGEL,
> > Fritjof Meyer, under the patronage of the former president of the 
> Bundestag,
> > Prof. Dr. Rita Süßmuth, in the magazine Osteuropa no. 5/2002 p. 
631ff., 
> Die
> > Zahl der Opfer von Auschwitz - Neue Erkenntisse durch neue 
Archivfunde [T=
> he
> > 
> Number of Victims of Auschwitz - New Insights due to new Findings 
in the
> > Archives] has 
> now paved the way for a potential breakthrough and change of
> > tactics.
> > 
> > Because 
> of the conviction of the affected due to "incitement of the People"
> > and in order to 
> hinder Meyer's article being covered by silence, citizens of
> > the German Reich 
> began a "Campaign against the Obviousness of the Holocaust"
> > and passed the Verden 
> Manifesto on the 5th of February. This is documented
> > in the appendix (...).
> > 
> > 
> ......
> > 
> > After this report had been written, a notification of termination 
from 
> the
> > public prosecutor's office in Lüneburg from the 1st of August 
2003 - file=
> 
> > 
> reference 503 Js 14447/03 -, was issued to a citizen of the Reich 
who had
> > reported 
> himself for playing down the Holocaust, this termination being
> > remarkable in a 
> number of ways, the most important parts of which are
> > therefore quoted here:
> > 
> > 
> "Concerning your self-report at the public prosecutor's office in 
Berlin on=
> 
> > 
> 07.04.2003
> > Dear Herr Marloh,
> > due to lack of sufficient suspicion, I have 
> terminated the preliminary
> > proceedings specified above, the competence of which 
> I have assumed from the
> > prosecutor's office in Berlin, in accordance with § 170 
> sect. 2 StPO.
> > 
> > Your self-report due to incitement of the People is based on the 
> assumption
> > that you fulfilled the offence of incitement of the People in 
> accordance
> > with § 130 sect. 3 and sect. 4 in connection with sect. 2 no. 1a 
StGB, by=
> 
> > 
> simultaneously sending the article published by Fritjof Meyer in the
> > magazine 
> Osteuropa, 52nd year, issue 5, May 2002, with the title: Die Zahl
> > der Opfer von 
> Auschwitz - Neue Erkenntnisse durch neue Archivfunde to the
> > members of the German 
> Bundestag Monika Griefahn, Michael Großer-Brömer and
> > Peter Rauen.
> > 
> > A deed 
> committed in the manner described in § 6 of the International Law
> > Penal Code 
> (Völkergesetzbuch) under the rule of the National Socialists is
> > neither denied in 
> Fritjof Meyer's article nor is it played down. In his
> > essay, Meyer reaches the 
> conclusion that a total of 510.000 people were
> > murdered in the National Socialist 
> labour and extermination camp
> > Auschwitz-Birkenau, of which 356.000 were murdered 
> in the gas chambers
> > between early 1942 and the beginning of November 1944. Meyer has 
> therefore
> > not denied the National Socialist mass killings in the 
extermination 
> camp
> > Auschwitz-Birkenau as such. Neither is the genocide committed by 
the
> > 
> National Socialists refuted in this article on the whole, nor is it 
claimed=
> 
> > that 
> mass killings had not been perpetrated, or that these are not 
proven.
> > 
> > In as far as 
> that it is conceivable, that actually committed deeds of
> > genocide in the sense of § 
> 130 sect. 3 StGB are played down in this article,
> > an expressly quantitative or 
> qualitative trivialising of the manner, extent,
> > results or immorality of 
> particular or all of the National Socialist acts of
> > violence is necessary, for 
> affirmation of this feature of the offence in
> > respect of the law. With the number of 
> victims he has calculated, Fritjof
> > Meyer may be under the figure which is given in 
> other studies, however, the
> > mere assumption of a lesser number of victims does not 
> suffice to assume an
> > offensive trivialising.
> > 
> > The offence of approval, 
> denial, or trivialising of the genocide committed
> > against the Jewish population 
> under National Socialist rule, was introduced
> > into the punitive offence of § 130 
> StGB with the Law to Fight Crime from
> > 28.10.94. With this, the lawmaker wanted to 
> contribute to the hindrance of
> > right-wing extremist propaganda. Therefore the 
> criterion of trivialising is
> > only fulfilled if the person who makes the assertion, 
> plays down the
> > Holocaust, whitewashes it or disguises its true magnitude. 
> Simultaneously,
> > all facets of agitating incitement as well as embellished 
> discriminating
> > disrespect are to be grasped (thus: BGHSt 46, pp. 36, 40). This 
> purpose of
> > the law already clarifies that the mere fiddling with the number 
of 
> victims
> > does not suffice to be counted as trivialising.
> > 
> > If a relativising 
> manner of expression is to be considered, then the
> > significance of the contents of 
> the complete statement of the expression
> > that are grasped through intelligent 
> reading, are to be ascertained through
> > a textual analysis under consideration of 
> all attendant circumstances.
> > 
> > A revisionist-agitating general message is not to 
> be inferred from Fritjof
> > Meyer's text.
> > 
> > Rather, Meyer clearly distances 
> himself in his essay from every attempt at
> > trivialising the Holocaust and its 
> horrors. Meyer explicitly states in the
> > last sentence of his essay - and thus in a 
> textually particularly prominent
> > place:
> > 
> > 'This conclusion does not 
> relativise the barbarity, but verifies it - a
> > confirmed warning of a new break with 
> civilisation.' In the light of his
> > calculations, Meyer explicitly describes the 
> acts of violence committed
> > under National Socialist rule as 'verified barbarity' 
> and a 'break with
> > civilisation'. This conclusion of Fritjof Meyer from the figures 
> he has
> > calculated leaves no space, within the frame of the general view 
of the
> > 
> contents that are given, for the opinion that Meyer wished to 
express with
> > his 
> figures that 'things weren't so bad after all'. This interpretation 
of
> > the article 
> of Fritjof Meyer - which you have obviously adopted - perverts
> > the message that the 
> author wanted to bring across, and indeed brought
> > across. The article of Fritjof 
> Meyer which you sent to numerous members of
> > the Bundestag does not fulfil the 
> offence of incitement of the People, alone
> > due to legal reasons, which is why no 
> punitive deed of dissemination can be
> > assumed, according to § 130 arts. 3, 4 and 2, 
> no. 1a StGB, in the multiple
> > sending of this article."
> > 
> > But what is then 
> "obvious"? One is permitted to fiddle the figures - on
> > condition of the correct inner 
> attitude. But what does this mean?
> > 
> > "Obviousness" is an institute of the right of 
> evidence. Where evidence is
> > concerned, it is a matter of facts - equally inner and 
> outer facts.
> > 
> > The Federal German supreme court considers the millionfold murder 
> of the
> > Jews through poison gas to be an "obvious" fact. But if only 
356.000 died=
> in
> > 
> the gas, how do things look for the obviousness of the "genocide"?
> > 
> > The path 
> suggested by the prosecutor's office in Lüneburg is not passable.
> > It votes for the 
> condition, that he who - politically correct -
> > simultaneously defends himself 
> against that his insights be "abused" for a
> > propaganda that rehabilitates the 
> German People - which is therefore branded
> > as right-wing extremist -, is permitted to 
> fiddle with the figure of the
> > victims. To bow down pro forma to political 
> correctness is to suffice.
> > Whoever thinks so harebrained is permitted to deny or 
> play down the
> > Holocaust.
> > 
> > For the others it counts as an "obvious fact" as 
> before.
> > 
> > The fact that it is - on top of things - also overseen that 
the "Holocaus=
> t"
> > 
> is a value judgement and not a fact, is here mentioned in passing.
> > 
> > Who has ever 
> shaken hands with the Holocaust? Who has smelt it, weighed it,
> > or even seen it? Has 
> anybody ever touched it?
> > 
> > A historical fact is not a fact in the sense of the code of 
> criminal
> > procedure. Facts in the sense of the latter are perceptible 
changes of 
> the
> > internal and external environment.
> > 
> > If Chinese and Soviet soldiers engage 
> in battles at the Ussuri and many die
> > through violence, then with the ascertainment 
> of this fact, which is
> > tangible from the viewpoint of criminal procedure, the 
> question remains
> > whether this was just a border incident or the begin of a war 
> between Red
> > China and the Soviet Union.
> > 
> > If, at the same time as the events at the 
> Ussuri, skirmishes had taken place
> > at other locations of the Soviet-Chinese 
> border, then this would also not be
> > the equivalent of the ascertainment that a war 
> had taken place between the
> > SU and Red China. Rather, these events could still be 
> categorised under the
> > concept of "armed reconnaissance" (cf. Carl von 
> Clausewitz). The parties
> > involved may just have followed the purpose of testing 
> the willingness and
> > fitness for war of the other side, without intending to start a 
> war.
> > 
> > Only if divisions equipped for war had been put on standby in the 
relevan=
> t
> > 
> area, and some of these had been led into a general conflict in 
accordance
> > with a 
> military plan and under participation of all arms of the services,
> > only then would 
> the historians be justified to infer, from the observable
> > facts, that a war had 
> taken place between the SU and Red China.
> > 
> > If 4 million Jews had indeed been gassed, 
> then one would be permitted to
> > conclude that this was based on a plan of 
> extermination by the Reich
> > government.
> > 
> > If however, only 100 or 1.000 or 10.000 
> Jews had been killed in this manner,
> > then one could not seriously speak of a planned 
> extermination of the Jewish
> > people. If 100.000 or 350.000 murders through gas are 
> up for debate, and if
> > circumstances are mentioned - as Meyer does (loc. cit. p. 633) - 
> which
> > suggest a different motive for the killings than the "destruction 
of the
> > 
> European Jews", namely considerations on checking the spread of 
diseases,
> > then 
> the Holocaust theory is very questionable indeed. In November 1942
> > Himmler 
> ordered, under strictest secrecy, - according to Meyer - to "gas"
> > "all Jewish 
> prisoners that are frail, ill or unfit for work" "in order to
> > prevent the spread of 
> epidemics".
> > 
> > If the reference, that Himmler himself withdrew this order "with 
a 
> bill"
> > around the 27th of April 1943 - i.e. after 6 months - and decided 
that in=
> 
> > future 
> only "mentally ill convicts" were to be killed, and that all other -
> > including the 
> bedridden - convicts that are unfit to work are to be excluded
> > from the killings, and 
> are to be given work "that they can also do in bed",
> > and that this order was "to be 
> followed to the letter" (Meyer loc. cit. p.
> > 633, footnote 9 with reference to 
> documents of the International Military
> > Tribunal - IMT - in Nuremberg), then the 
> supposition of a planned
> > "industrial" murder of the Jews with the aim of "the 
> liberation of Europe
> > from the Jews" becomes unlikely.
> > 
> > Furthermore: If the 
> "millions" of victims have to be decreased by millions,
> > and only less than half a 
> million remain for debate, then how do things look
> > for the evidence on which the 
> thesis of the obviousness of the "millionfold
> > murder of the Jews" is based? They 
> must have lied and falsified the facts
> > beyond belief.
> > 
> > How has Fritjof Meyer 
> "fiddled" the figure?
> > 
> > He deletes the supposed main location of the murders 
> through gas in
> > Auschwitz, the mortuaries I and II: the attempts that had taken 
place 
> there
> > had been failures "because the ventilators were counter-
productive and
> > 
> because in the following eleven months, the expected mass of 
victims did no=
> t
> > 
> arrive." Immediately, the mass murders are relocated to two farm 
houses
> > which are 
> situated outside the camp - of which nobody ever spoke about
> > before the mortuaries 
> were found to have been unsuited. There is nothing
> > left to be seen of the farm houses. 
> Their foundations have only "recently"
> > been discovered. The location and 
> procedure of the crime must have been
> > wholly different than has always been claimed 
> to be "obvious".
> > 
> > After all, there are thousands of eyewitness statements which 
> declare with
> > certainty, to have seen the crime in the mortuaries of the 
crematoria I 
> and
> > II. The mass-killings were grotesquely recorded according to their
> > 
> statements: labour convicts who pulled the corpses of those who had 
been
> > killed in 
> the gas out of the mortuaries of the crematoria I and II, with
> > their bare hands, 
> topless, covered in sweat, without gas masks, whilst
> > smoking.
> > 
> > Like almost all 
> of the so-called revisionists, Meyer takes the laws of
> > physics and technical 
> experiences into his considerations, in order to show
> > that the horrendous figures 
> of numerous millions of dead through gassings
> > belong into the realm of fiction.
> > 
> 
> > The Dokumente der Verteidigung, due to which the affected was 
sentenced,
> > 
> contain nothing other than this.
> > 
> > What is now - after the power of the news magazine 
> DER SPIEGEL, which is to
> > be assumed behind Meyer, has entered the arena with its 
> extensive archives -
> > still "obvious" in the opinion of the High Jurists? What 
> should, what may, a
> > timid person take to be the truth when the subject is the 
> "Holocaust"? How
> > can Emily Yokel be helped, who reveals her naive mind to a judge 
and 
> thus
> > possibly makes herself liable to prosecution:
> > 
> > 
> > The Trial of Emily 
> Yokel
> > A tragic comedy by Ursula Haverbeck
> > 
> > 
> > Emily Yokel reported herself, in 
> connection with a criminal charge which was
> > brought against Rita Süßmuth and 
> Fritjof Meyer by Horst Mahler for
> > trivialising the Holocaust in an article which 
> was published in the magazine
> > Osteuropa in May 2002, because of distribution of 
> this article. Here, now,
> > are excerpts from the protocols of the four days of the 
> trial.
> > 
> > The first day of the trial
> > 
> > Judge Core: Why did you report yourself?
> > 
> Accused: In order to make it possible for German judges to publicly 
examine=
> 
> > this 
> question, which is a nightmare for the German People.
> > Judge Core: We are not dealing 
> with a question here, but with a generally
> > known, obvious fact.
> > Accused: What 
> does obvious mean in this case?
> > Judge Core: That the matter no longer needs proof, 
> since it is true and
> > unique.
> > Accused: To which fact does this apply?
> > Judge Core: 
> In the National Socialist state, the German People committed the
> > greatest - i.e. 
> unique - crime by gassing millions of Jews.
> > Accused: You mean gassed with Zyklon B?
> > 
> Judge Core: Yes.
> > Accused: What determines the uniqueness? This is just an 
> indefinite term.
> > Judge Core: It is not at all indefinite. It means: mass murder by 
> use of the
> > most modern technology.
> > Accused: But was the guillotine not also the 
> most modern technical means for
> > the mass killing of humans of its time? And what 
> about the nuclear bomb on
> > Hiroshima? It too was the most modern development of 
> weapons technology and
> > killed hundreds of thousands within seconds.
> > Judge 
> Core: Yes, but not six million.
> > Accused: So it's the number of victims which is 
> decisive? But precisely this
> > figure has been drastically reduced, especially in 
> the last ten years. It is
> > no longer obvious. Please read the most recent publication 
> of Fritjof Meyer.
> > Judge Core: I've read it. Meyer only ascertains a reduction of 
the 
> figure
> > for Auschwitz. This does not mean that millions were not murdered 
> elsewhere.
> > Accused: Oh, now I see what is meant. Could you please tell me 
where 
> these
> > other locations are and what their names are? Up until now it was 
always
> > 
> claimed that Auschwitz was the main scene of the crime - thus the 
term
> > "Auschwitz Lie" 
> which is relevant to the courts. But this would incorrect if
> > you say that it was not 
> Auschwitz. Where then?
> > Judge Core: Today's hearing is finished.
> > 
> > The second 
> day of the trial
> > 
> > Judge Core: Are you aware of the fact that, according to § 130 
> section 4
> > StGB, denial of the Holocaust is punishable with up to three 
years 
> prison?
> > Accused: Is it possible to deny something which did not take 
place?
> > Judge 
> Core: No, of course not. But the fact that its denial is punishable,
> > proves that the 
> Holocaust must have taken place.
> > Accused: Oh, I see. But this paragraph was passed 
> only after Auschwitz had
> > also been thoroughly examined by chemists, and the story 
> of the 4.5 million
> > Jews gassed in these buildings was no longer credible. Fritjof 
> Meyer has
> > just confirmed precisely this to be the truth. As such the 
location is
> > 
> unknown.
> > Judge Core: But this is not a matter of the location, but of the 
facts.
> > 
> Accused: But a fact of such a gigantic extent, with 6 million dead, 
needs a=
> 
> > location 
> in order to be provable as a fact, as an event.
> > Judge Core: How can you deny this 
> dreadful crime, for which there are
> > hundreds of witnesses? This is outrageous.
> > 
> Accused: I'm not denying anything. I just don't know where it took 
place,
> > after 
> Fritjof Meyer - with the approval of Prof. Dr. Rita Süßmuth, we may
> > assume - proved that 
> it was not Auschwitz. Currently, the scene of the crime
> > is unknown, and as such, 
> obviousness is not given.
> > Judge Core: You're neglecting the fact that there were 
> many other places:
> > Majdanek, Treblinka, etc.
> > Accused: But I know hardly 
> anything about these. In public and in the media,
> > only the connection between 
> Auschwitz and the Holocaust was always
> > presented. Auschwitz was the place where 
> the millions were gassed. And
> > that's now been proven to be wrong, to be a lie - the 
> Auschwitz Lie.
> > Judge Core: It is punishable to say this. And anyway, already 
> tomorrow new
> > insights which refute Meyer could be available. Scientific 
> statements are
> > seldom definite.
> > Accused: This means that there is no 
> obviousness, but at the most
> > provisional insights? Is that what you mean?
> > Judge 
> Core: I don't mean anything, and hereby end the hearing.
> > 
> > The third day of the 
> trial
> > 
> > Judge Core: Do you admit your guilt according to § 130 section 4 
of the
> > 
> Penal Code?
> > Accused: I thought that I'd made myself guilty, by distributing 
this
> > 
> article, but following the previous two hearings, this seems 
questionable t=
> o
> > 
> me.
> > Judge Core: Why?
> > Accused: Because it can hardly be considered guilt to serve 
> the finding of
> > truth. And because it has become obvious that not only I, but 
> obviously you
> > too, know very little about the scene of this enormous crime.
> > Judge 
> Core: I have, on numerous occasions, pointed out that it is not a
> > matter of the scene 
> of the crime but of the fact of the Holocaust.
> > Accused: That is correct, but you have 
> not said how a Holocaust can take
> > place on this earth without a location. And in case a 
> new location is found,
> > it will now also have to be carefully and extensively 
> examined so that a new
> > mishap doesn't happen, and that it isn't again said: four 
> million Jews were
> > here gassed, and a few years later it's only a couple of hundred 
> thousand.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]