|July 6th, 2005||#1|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Help revisionist Germar Rudolph resist deportation
circulated by Canada's Paul Fromm:
Dear Free Speech Supporter:
I forward with my endorsement the urgent appeal from German dissident Germar Rudolf for assistance to pay for legal fees to fight to avoid deportation to a prison sentence in Germany, a nation that clearly has no concept of free speech or free expression.
Please help this fighting scholar and publisher.
CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION
Call For Help!
P.O. Box 257768 ▪ Chicago, IL 60625 ▪ USA
Telefon: ++1-708-6562779 ▪ Fax: ++1-773-4075570
▪ email@example.com ▪ www.vho.org
June 22, 2005
As you have generously invested time and resources,
you deserve a report and update on my work as a
revisionist writer and publisher. And you should be
brought up to date on how my legal situation is
affecting your investment.
You really are more than just an investor ... I
consider you to be a key player in a worldwide
movement that is literally changing the course of
Thanks, then, for investing and inspiring.
The last 11 months have been particularly challenging
for me. In August 2004, German government authorities
confiscated all of my property in that country. Since
I had only a modest bank account, that was what they
took -- some $8,000 which I intended to spend on an
advertising campaign for revisionism.
Ironically, Berlin uses it to pay for their
persecution of revisionists (they play rough). The
result? I have lost some 20% of my German customers
(which is about 15% of my gross revenues), because
many Germans insist on paying into a German bank
account directly. They will not do business if they
have to use cash or credit cards (a very German
I'm working overtime to find creative ways to
supplement this loss and circumvent my dedicated
opponents -- with some initial success. More on that
in a minute.
In November 2004 the Board of Appeal of the U.S.
Immigration Services turned down my application for
political asylum, claiming without substantiation and
without prior accusation that my appeal was
"frivolous" (meaning fraudulent). In February 2005
they denied my motion to allow me to apply for
permanent residence although I am married to a U.S.
citizen and have a child with her. Since both
decisions violate the laws, I filed an appeal at a
Federal Court. I managed to get the support of a civil
rights organization for the second case (marriage).
(See www.GermarRudolf.com for more information.)
The outcome of that appeal is open. If it fails, I
will most likely end up joining Ernst Zündel in a
German jail for many years.
I don't want to stop my work and I'm fighting with
every resource at my disposal to stay on the front
lines of the revisionist movement.
Chances are good that my case will not fail, because
if the unlawful decisions of the Immigration Services
would be confirmed by a Federal Court, due process
would be destroyed in the U.S. The legal process is
not cheap. Last year alone, the legal bills amounted
to $15,000, but I'm proud to report these were paid in
As good as my chances are to succeed on the legal
front, I must be prepared for bad news. Planning on
the worst case scenario to occur as soon as Fall or
Winter 2005, I decided late last year to drastically
change priorities of my business. Even though
publishing revisionist periodicals is a vital service,
it actually is not much of a money-making business.
Because both my journals (The Revisionist and
Vierteljahreshefte für freie Geschichtsforschung) have
such a low print run, costs cannot be covered by
subscription rates. Book sales actually cover much of
the journals' expenses.
Revisionist books are of scholarly value, and
publishing new research is of lasting significance:
future generations will testify that someone was
publishing the truth about history -- even in the
worst of times. Despite mounting legal expenses, I
decided to focus most of my resources on getting
numerous revisionist books published. In the meantime,
the journals have fallen behind my usually strict
On balance, however, good news: I will have 16 books
(see below) published within less than a year. Of
course, this intense effort has severely burdened me
financially and it will get even worse once the bills
from the printers come in. However, with some extra
interest from my investors, book buyers, and
subscribers, the journals will be back on track soon
(we are producing a huge backlog of articles).
Frankly, I face a serious situation. I just received a
bill from my lawyer with a new balance of some
$31,000. I have also incurred about $20,000 in debts
with the British printer of my German books. And, due
to the delay in publishing the journals, most
customers have not yet renewed their subscriptions,
resulting in cash flow problems.
That's why I'm writing to you.
Now I have three choices: Either pay my lawyer and
have a good chance to win my case, but suspend
publishing ... or I publish the revisionist books in
preparation and have to tell my lawyer to stop
representing me, which is a safe ticket to a German
My third option is obvious, but a step I take with
I simply must ask for help from the people who have
invested in my work already -- through donations,
subscriptions, and via the revisionist books they buy.
Will you please consider a generous gift to my legal
I want to continue publishing the journals and books
that are so important to the worldwide revisionist
movement, but I can no longer be of service without
Please be generous. Your gift of $1,000 or $500 or
even $100 or $50 will go far in this fight. I have
dedicated all of my time and resources to publishing
revisionist works while battling to stay a free man --
and provide for my family as well. To be blunt, I just
can't do it anymore without a vote of confidence from
I need your help -- as soon as possible -- to win my
legal fight and to get the business on sound financial
footing. I hope you will re-invest my work by
supporting me in my fight to stay a free man.
If you chose to help, and I understand not everybody
can, please make payments out for "Germar Rudolf." If
you want to support me otherwise, please contact me
directly at the address given on page one of this
May I hear from you soon?
Castle Hill Publishers
|July 6th, 2005||#2|
Join Date: Apr 2004
|July 6th, 2005||#3|
Dodging vacuous stares
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Currently visiting Bellevue
Where's Jürgen Graf? Isn't he in Iran or something? After the Zundel affair, these chaps have to know their cases are predetermined from the get-go. Sad, but true. Russia or the Arab world are probably the only relatively safe spots for these revisionists from continental Europe - not here.
At VNNF, liberty ain't marketing. Join us!
|July 7th, 2005||#4|
Join Date: Dec 2003
They would have better luck, getting carta verdes off the black market which caters to Mexicans, in some Spanish name, and then publishing under their true names as nom de plumes. This would probably allow them to flourish here unmolested.
I find it amazing that Chicago probably has at least 100,000 illegal aliens living and walking around freely (go see any restaurant all the busboys are Mexicans and most of the cooks) and yet one German guy gets all the attention from the Running dogs of Zion at the INS.
To be fair there's thousands of illegal Slavic immigrants in Chicago too, but again, they dont get any attention it's the Germar Rudolphs!
|March 17th, 2006||#5|
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: JUDEAware, originally MassaJEWsetts
Censorship of the Internet
Censorship of the Internet
By Germar Rudolf
In early 1996, the revisionist Web site www.zundelsite.org caused a storm in the then still relatively tiny internet-pot, since its content was hated by several Jewish lobby groups and in particular by the German authorities, who all together tried with several legal and less than legal techniques to shut down this controversial site. These attempts on censorship resulted in a massive movement of solidarity in the then still quite idealistic internet community. At the end of many months of struggle, all measures to stifle the zundelsite had failed, also because many idealists around the world posted copies of the zundelsite, not because they agreed with the content of the zundelsite, but because they wanted to defend the highly regarded freedom of speech against all attempts of censorship.
Of course, governmental as well as non-governmental institutions kept trying to find more effective ways to censor the internet. The censorship case, with perhaps the most damaging impact on freedom of speech, was probably that against Dr. Fredrick Töben, who has been arrested and sentenced to a prison term in Germany for having posted revisionist contents on his Australian website.
In October 2002, an academic paper about censorship of internet search engines has caused quite a stir on an international level, but has unfortunately not led to a similar reaction by the internet free speech community as it did in 1996.
In September 1997, I established the website www.vho.org, initially under the legal cover of the Belgian non-profit foundation Vrij Historisch Onderzoek (Free Historical Research), thus the name vho.org. Initially, this site had only some five visitors per day, and maybe most of these visits were by the webmaster, that is me. Today, this site has several thousand visitors every day, which means that within five years www.vho.org has grown to be the biggest revisionist website worldwide.
One of the first steps after creating the site was to have it listed with the major search engines, which could still be done manually and for free at that time. Today, considering the vast amount of new websites flooding the internet every day, one has to pay a fee to get registered by the noble club of the big engines.
In 1998 I learned that Germany has its own search engines concentrating only on German language material. Since at that time the content of www.vho.org was almost completely in German language, it was only logical to have the site registered with those search engines as well. To my surprise, one of the search engine companies told me that they had decided not to list my site, because after reviewing my content they had come to the conclusion that it was illegal under German law. This is so because dissenting views on the Holocaust are punishable with up to five years in Germany. Strictly formally seen, of course, this is wrong, since it is not the content of my website that is illegal but the German censorship laws. But the German bureaucrats were never really impressed by arguments about human rights and epistemological considerations. Thus, I had to accept that www.vho.org was not listed with this search engine.
On an international level, Yahoo.com was the first big search engine who got in trouble primarily due to massive critique from Jewish lobby groups. Yahoo is one of the biggest internet service providers worldwide, whose search engine is currently powered by a company named Google. Google itself is a search engine which has succeeded only recently to beat all its competitors in that field, like Altavista.com, Lycos.com, and Excite.com, thanks to a very user friendly service. End of October 2002, this service had 2.5 Billion websites indexed.
In 2000, the attacks against Yahoo escalated in that the company was sued, and on November 20, 2000, sentenced in France for having offered National Socialist memorabilia on its internet auction site and for offering access to sites with Holocaust-revisionist content. Since then, Yahoo has cleaned its French search engine from almost all links to such sites. Later, due to pressure from the usual Jewish pressure groups like the Simon-Wiesenthal-Center, Yahoo announced that it would be prepared to even clean its U.S. main search engine from links to any content which is hated by those Jewish associations. It seems, however, that this did not happen so far.
As a result of Yahoo's conviction in France, the Central Council of Jews in Germany felt encouraged to announce that it will file similar suit cases against German search engine companies as well. It does therefore come as no surprise that German search engines or the German sections of internationally operating search engines started to clean undesired content from their engines as well.
On October 22, 2002, Jonathan Zittrain and Benjamin Edelman from the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at the Harvard Law School published a study, in which they reported which internet sites are censored by the German and French sections of the search engine Google, in contrast to the company's international, US-based main search site Google.com.
The result of this study is that the French and German search engines of Google exclude 91 internet sites completely or partly. Even though such an exclusion doesn't prevent anybody from accessing these sites, this must nevertheless be considered to be a massive impediment to find these sites, because a considerable part of the population residing in Germany and France finds content on the internet by using these search engines. The exclusion of search results from websites which are involved in controversial debates leads to nothing less than that a majority of the population will no longer be able to take notice of the arguments of the other side of that debate.
Of course, censorship by search engines is not solely an effect of governmental pressure. Even private companies and individuals can pursue such censorship and might even prevail. For example, The Church of Scientology allegedly succeeded to convince Google not to list certain websites, which express critical views about Scientology. In other cases, organizations or individuals have the option to apply to have certain websites unlisted, if these sites commit copyright violations. Only a few of these censorship cases are ever published; most of them happen in secrecy. No search engine likes to admit publicly that they manipulated their search results. According to Edelman, Google should at least indicate that its search results are not complete:
Web Sites completely or partly censored by Google.de and/or Google.fr
Revisionist web sites are rendered in bold, web sites with partial revisionist content are rendered in italics
"If Google is prohibited from linking to [the right-wing Website] Stormfront, they could include a listing but no link. And if they can't even include a listing for Stormfront, they could at least report the fact that they've hidden results from the user. The core idea here is that there's no need to be secretive."
According to the authors of the study quoted, they have analyzed several thousand websites until the end of October in order to find out, if the search results delivered by the three Google sections google.com (USA), google.de (Germany) and google.fr (France) differ. The censorship victims discovered by this method are divided in basically three categories. The largest group consists of right-wing websites, which are usually summarized under the term "White Supremacy." The second biggest group consists of revisionist websites-with one surprising exception: The most embattled website, carrying the name and the mission of the German-Canadian Ernst Zündel, www.zundelsite.org, is not included! The last category consists of radical, anti-Jewish, mostly Arab groups. In the list printed in this article, I have emphasized revisionist websites in bold face, and those consisting only partly of revisionist content in italics.
A more detailed analysis of the censored websites shows that some Christian and conservative-fundamentalist websites are victims of this censorship as well, and in one case even an anti-revisionist website (www.williscarto.com). Left-wing extremist, communist, or other politically or religiously fanatic/fundamentalist sites have either not even been considered worth an investigation by the authors, or they are simply not censored by Google.
It is also worth noting that all of the German sites censored by Google are equally censored by its French site (65), whereas 45 websites, which are accessible through the German search engine, are inaccessible through the French search engine. This means that censorship is currently tougher in France than it is in Germany.
Google does not only serve as the search engine for Yahoo, but also for AOL, the worldwide largest internet service provider. As a consequence, all German and French AOL-customers not intentionally using a different search engine, are censored just as badly as are all users of google.de/.fr and yahoo.de/.fr. Three major other search engines with separate German and French sections-altavista, lycos and excite, censor their search result as well, though apparently not quite as strict as google. For instance, webpages from the once leading revisionist websites codoh.com and codoh.org can be found when searching with these engines. All of these search engines have in common, however, that the worldwide largest revisionist website www.vho.org is not listed under any circumstances.
Before getting upset about Google, Altavista, and all other censoring search engines, one should keep in mind that these companies do not censor voluntarily. They were forced to do this by court orders and several legal threats. The true perpetrators are sitting in Paris and Berlin and to a disproportionate degree also in synagogues.
... And Attempts to Circumvent it
One can of course try to use non-censoring search engines instead. For example, one could visit the uncensored.com search domains instead of going to the.de and.fr domains (aol.com, yahoo.com, google.com, altavista.com. excite.com, lycos.com). But Google has put a stop to this as well for all visitors, whose internet service providers have an IP address which can be identified as being located in Germany or France respectively. In such cases, Google redirects any attempt to access google.com automatically to google.de/.fr. Thus, all internet users in Germany and France are now sitting in the dark regarding the possibility of thoroughly searching the internet with the help of the largest and best search engine that there is: google.com.
It would be desirable if all users who are upset about such totalitarian censorship would demonstrate their solidarity by no longer using the search domains.de and.fr of these search engines, and in particular by not using those search engines which refuse access to its uncensored international domain, like Google. After all, this is not a matter of whether or not one agrees with the content of those sites which are censored. Tomorrow, when other powers rule or their interests change, other websites may be the victims of this censorship, and a totally different group of users might then face the situation that exactly the content he is looking for is being withheld from him, or even worse, that the content he is offering is being withheld from his potential clientele.
During a session of the European Council in Strasbourg on November 6th and 7th, 2002, the foreign ministers of 44 European countries represented in the European Council agreed to a protocol, which demands from those 44 nations to outlaw the following activities:
- Computer assisted distribution of racist and xenophobic material;
- Threats and insults with racist or xenophobic motivations;
- Denial, rude minimization, approval, or justification of genocide or crimes against humanity, in particular in context with the events of the era between 1940 and 1945 (in other words: revisionism).
All offenses mentioned in this protocol need to be committed deliberately in order to be a crime, which means that an internet service provider would not commit a crime if helping to distribute such material unknowingly. During the negotiations for this protocol, representatives of the USA, of Canada, Japan, Mexico and South Africa were present as well.
Fortunately, the European Council has no legislative powers. But it may only be a matter of time until this program is accepted and cast into law in many countries around the world.
Only as an aside, it should be mentioned that the prohibition of the distribution of pedophilic material was apparently not even discussed during this Conference.
 Cf. Willibald Gründer, "Der Prozeß gegen Dr. Fredrick Toben" (The trial against Dr. Fredirck Toben), Vierteljahreshefte für freie Geschichtsforschung, 4(1) (2000), pp. 97-100.
 I do not mention any name here because now www.vho.org is listed.
 http://news.excite.com/news/r/000616...nce-usa-yahoo; www.oneworld.org/ips2/june00/00_41_003.html; http://www.guardian.co.uk/freespeech...00491,00.html; www.tomwbell.com/NetLaw/Ch03/YahooComplaint.html
 New York Times, Jan. 3, 2001.
 German weekly news magazine Spiegel, Feb. 20, 2001.
 http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/filtering/google/; cf. AP news release of Oct. 24, 2002; www.sltrib.com/10252002/business/10409.htm
 http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/filteri...results1.html; the authors mention 113 sites, but they have listed some sites several times, in one case with and in the other without www, in other cases they have counted subdomains as well, and some sites no longer exist, like, e.g., www.spotlight.com, www.revisionism.com.
 Cf. http://www.archive.org/about/terms.php
Source: The Revisionist 1(2) (2003), pp. 220-222.
|March 18th, 2006||#6|
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: JUDEAware, originally MassaJEWsetts
A Letter from Thought Crime Victim Germar Rudolf
A Letter from Thought Crime Victim Germar Rudolf
Posted by admin on: 2006-03-18 00:06:22
Asperger Str. 60
Stgt., Feb. 25, 2006
Dear Mr. F!
Thank you very much for your letter of Feb. 6, which arrived here only recently due to court-imposed censorship. I appreciate very much that you show your compassion for me in this awful situation of mine.
As to the reason for my incarceration, I am sure you are vaguely informed about them, since my publishing activi*ties of the past 15 years will not have evaded you. Since the conclusions of many of my publications are illegal in Germany, and because it is illegal here to defend oneself in the matter itself, the verdict "guilty as charged" is already spoken before any trial has begun.
As nice as your wishes are that I will be acquitted, they are also very naive. I will most likely received the maximum penalty of 5 five years in addition to the 14 months I have to spend right now for the expert report on Auschwitz which I wrote back in 1991/92. So I will get out of here most likely not before January 2012.
In case you are interested to learn more about me and my case, you are invited to visit my website, provided you have internet access, at www.GermarRudolf.com. If not familiar with the Internet, I am certain that one of your children or grandchildren will be able to help you out with that. On that website you can also find out how you can help me in my ongoing struggle in various ways, in case you are interested in that.
In hoping that I will read from you again I remain with my best wishes and regards.
[Signed] Germar Rudolf
News Source: Mark Farrell