German election campaign livens up with frontrunner Merkel under pressure

Martin Schulz (left) failed to achieve the debate victory he needed to revive the SPD’s challenge to German Chancellor Angela Merkel (right)

German Chancellor Angela Merkel remains a strong favourite to secure re-election when her fellow countrymen go to the polls on 24th September.  In 2015 Merkel’s decision to admit well over a million asylum seekers seemed to be not only a catastrophe for Germans but a political disaster for Merkel herself. Her conservative CDU-CSU [the CDU operates in most of Germany but has a longstanding partnership with the Catholic CSU in Bavaria] was losing votes to a new anti-immigration party Alternative for Germany (AfD) throughout late 2015 and 2016.

Then at the start of this year the SPD (German equivalent of the Labour Party) started to take a lead in opinion polls after selecting former European Parliament president Martin Schulz as its candidate for Chancellor.

However once the campaign got under way many voters, especially in the more prosperous western areas of Germany, began to turn back to Merkel partly out of fear that the SPD would form a coalition government including the neo-Marxist Left Party (Die Linke) as well as the Greens.  The Left Party includes former leaders of the Communist Party that ruled the former East Germany until the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989.

A further complication is that former SPD Chancellor Gerhard Schröder has taken a position on the board of the Russian state oil company Rosneft, raising suspicions among journalists hostile to Putin.

The TV debate on September 3rd between Merkel and Schulz was seen as the socialist opposition’s last chance to revive their campaign.

However Schulz failed to make significant progress in the debate and seems headed for certain defeat.

Frauke Petry, co-leader of the anti-immigration Alternative for Germany, decided earlier this year not to be AfD’s candidate for Chancellor

Meanwhile AfD has suffered internal strains, with co-leader Frauke Petry deciding not to be the party’s candidate for Chancellor.

In recent days Merkel has tried to take her campaign to eastern areas that remain hostile to her immigration policy.  The Financial Times this weekend describes a disastrous Merkel campaign event in Bitterfeld, an industrial town in Lower Saxony where AfD remains strong.  Some predict that while AfD’s nationwide vote will be under 10%, it could poll closer to 20% in the East (outside the capital Berlin which remains a leftist stronghold).

AfD has not resolved internal debates over how to deal with present-day Germany’s tyrannical laws that dictate not only what can be said on racial matters, but how scientists, historians, lawyers and ordinary citizens can discuss issues of 20th century history.

Germany’s main nationalist party the NPD will be fielding candidates in most of the country both at constituency and list level. (The German election system is partly based on Westminster style constituencies but with a ‘top-up’ element based on party lists, to create a Parliament that represents the percentage votes achieved by each party, with a 5% threshold required to obtain any MPs.)

Ursula Haverbeck in discussion with her lawyer Wolfram Nahrath during court proceedings in November 2016

Recently the 88-year-old Ursula Haverbeck was given a two-year sentence for ‘Holocaust denial’ after questioning the increasingly discredited official version of history that dictates 6 million Jews were murdered, supposedly mainly in homicidal gas chambers during the Second World War.

German prosecutors and government representatives refuse to answer Frau Haverbeck’s questions as to how, where and on whose orders such supposed mass killings took place: instead of answering such questions they bring further criminal charges. However contrary to some reports Frau Haverbeck is not presently in a prison cell, as despite court verdicts and sentences there are still appeal processes going on.

Meanwhile the 81-year-old lawyer Horst Mahler remains imprisoned near Berlin on similar charges, having been handed back to German custody in June by the Hungarian government. Mahler had been released from a 12-year prison sentence on health grounds after becoming critically ill and having a leg amputated, but prosecutors ordered his return to prison earlier this year.

Berlin march calls for release of documents on Rudolf Hess murder

H&D‘s assistant editor Peter Rushton addressed a rally in Berlin on Saturday 19th August, calling for the release of official British documents reporting on the death of Rudolf Hess, thirty years ago this week.

More than 1,000 demonstrators marched in the Spandau district of Berlin, close to the site of the infamous prison where Hess was incarcerated until his death aged 93 in 1987. By then he had been in Allied prisons since 1941, when he flew to Scotland in an effort to negotiate peace between Britain and Germany.

The memorial stone at the spot where Rudolf Hess’s plane crash-landed in 1941. This stone was erected by British nationalists Tom Graham, Wallace Wears and Colin Jordan, but was later smashed by communists.

Officially this death was recorded as a suicide: despite Hess’s advanced age and physical infirmity, he was ruled to have hanged himself from a window latch with an electrical cord. His family commissioned independent medical advice which drew attention to evidence that Hess had been murdered. (British historian David Irving has since revealed a conversation with the Berlin prosecutor Detlev Mehis, who admitted that the murderer was U.S. serviceman Tony Jordan.)

Two Foreign Office files containing the official investigation of Hess’s death by the Royal Military Police Special Investigation Branch – FCO 161/69 and FCO 161/70 – remain secret, under a regulation normally used for sensitive intelligence material.

Marchers this weekend came from many parts of Germany and included representatives of numerous parties and groups.  The event was chaired by the NPD’s national organiser Sebastian Schmidtke and speakers included the NPD’s Dr Olaf Rose (a former member of the regional parliament of Saxony) as well as H&D‘s Peter Rushton and international guests from France and Finland.

German media admitted that this was the largest nationalist event in Berlin for many years. ‘Antifascists’ failed to prevent the march and failed to drown out the speakers.

Rudolf Hess (right) with Adolf Hitler and fellow National-Socialist leaders

‘Antifascist’ arson attacks damaged signalling equipment on railway lines near Berlin, which meant that hundreds of marchers were unable to reach the city. Around 250 comrades including NPD vice-president Thorsten Heise from Thuringia held a spontaneous demonstration in the Falkensee district, after the railway arson prevented them from reaching Spandau.

Due to the many oppressive laws in modern Germany, marchers and speakers at this weekend’s event were severely restricted in what they could say, or what symbols could be displayed.

However we were able to convey a clear message that murder can never be forgotten, and that justice demands the full disclosure of the true circumstances surrounding the incarceration and murder of Rudolf Hess.

This photograph of Hess was taken secretly in the grounds of Spandau Prison, where he died in August 1987

Click here for the full text of Peter Rushton’s speech in Spandau.

H&D assistant editor’s speech at Berlin demo

(This is the text of a speech delivered in Spandau, Berlin – with German translation – on Saturday 19th August 2017 by H&D‘s Peter Rushton.)

Spandau is the site of a shameful episode in my country’s history: the murder of Rudolf Hess, thirty years ago this week.

My country’s leaders ended Hess’s public life in 1941, beginning his 46 years of incarceration – first in Britain, then in Nuremberg, then here in Spandau.

Let us never forget that even at Nuremberg, Rudolf Hess was found not guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity.  He was convicted only of involvement in planning and preparing a so-called “war of aggression” – a retrospectively defined so-called “crime”.


I am not allowed to discuss the circumstances of Hess’s flight to Britain in 1941.  Although the achievements of the Federal Republic are so evident around us every day, it seems that this Republic feels threatened by any discussion of such historical matters!

The memorial stone at the spot where Rudolf Hess’s plane crash-landed in 1941. This stone was erected by British nationalists Tom Graham, Wallace Wears and Colin Jordan, but was later smashed by communists.



As late as 1987, the Federal Republic had to be protected against the 93-year-old Rudolf Hess, and even 30 years after his death, Rudolf Hess is seen as a threat to the post-1945 order, including the Federal Republic.


Last month the UK National Archives released thousands of pages of files about Hess and Spandau.  I visited the Archives in London and I have been reading those files.


In 1987 the Special Investigation Branch of the Royal Military Police stationed in Germany carried out an investigation of Hess’s death.  Yet both versions of their report (interim and final) remain secret.


They are officially listed as “retained” by the Foreign Office, under a regulation which normally applies to sensitive intelligence material.

Wolf Rüdiger Hess with the coffin of his father Rudolf Hess


This follows the advice of a telegram from Bonn to the Foreign Office soon after Hess’s death, in which a British diplomat writes:
“We agree that the autopsy report is not suitable for publication and that it would be preferable to avoid giving it to Wolf Rüdiger Hess.  …We also agree that it is desirable to act quickly.  This should help cut short speculation and allow media attention to move on to other things.”


There is no explanation of why aspects of the autopsy report and investigation were to be kept secret.

While the autopsy report is now public, the full reports investigating Hess’s death remain secret.

This photograph of Hess was taken secretly in the grounds of Spandau Prison, where he died in August 1987


Among the latest releases we can now see Foreign Office papers from the summer of 1989, drafting an official letter in reply to the late Ernst Zündel, who had asked Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher for the release of these secret files, but we are still waiting for the whole truth.


Ernst Zündel himself was jailed for asking inconvenient questions; we are still waiting for the answers.


If the guardians of World Order truly wish to silence speculation about the murder of Rudolf Hess, these documents must be released – there can be no legitimate reason for their retention.


Those two vital reports are still secret: but what do we know from other files that are now public?


We know that in 1941 there was a plot to assassinate Hess, very soon after his arrival in Britain.  Brief details are revealed in the diary of a senior MI5 officer (Guy Liddell) and in correspondence between the Foreign Office and MI6.

Alfgar Hesketh-Prichard, a central figure in an earlier murder plot against Hess, is seen here (second right) with members of an SOE team that targeted Reinhard Heydrich a year later.

We know that this assassination plot involved Poles based in Scotland; and an officer of the Special Operations Executive, Alfgar Hesketh-Prichard, who was an expert sniper.

This same officer Hesketh-Prichard (a year later) commanded the assassins of Reinhard Heydrich.


That operation is well known, yet most details of the 1941 plot to murder Rudolf Hess remain secret.  What sort of ‘Poles’ planned this attempted murder; how and why did MI5 prevent it? What disputes took place within the British establishment?


It is illegal in the Federal Republic for me to speculate as to who might have been desperate to terminate Hess’s mission in 1941.  We cannot suggest what these assassins might have feared about Hess’s mission.

The recently published documents show that the authorities’ fear of Rudolf Hess even extended to censoring Yuletide cards.  A card sent from England by the political activist Colin Jordan was intercepted by the Spandau authorities at Yuletide 1983 and sent back to England to be investigated by our own ‘Verfassungsschutz’, the Special Branch.

Colin Jordan addresses a Trafalgar Square rally in 1962: a Yuletide card sent by Jordan to Hess in 1983 was censored by prison authorities

Many new documents in the archives are letters from Hess’s lawyer Dr Alfred Seidl, who fought a long and courageous campaign to oppose the entire basis of the Nuremberg charges against his client.

The recently released British documents give many details of Hess’s medical records, indicating for example that while he remained mentally alert even after suffering a stroke and partial blindness in 1978, he had many serious physical ailments, making the official account of his so-called suicide highly implausible.


Officially a succession of British politicians claimed that they wanted Hess to be released, and that his continued detention was due only to Soviet intransigence.


Then at the very moment when Soviet policy began to change, Hess conveniently (we are told) committed suicide.  It was very easy to blame the Soviets: but London had a problem when this excuse was no longer valid.

Independent medical experts agree that the horizontal mark across Hess’s neck indicates that he did not commit suicide (as this would have left oblique rather than horizontal scarring).



Given that the British authorities themselves accept the existence of a previous murder plot against Hess; given the extraordinary circumstances of his so-called suicide; and given its suspiciously convenient timing – all authorities concerned must admit that these suspicions can only be dispelled by the full release of all relevant documents.


Yet they refuse to do so.


Of course my country bears the main responsibility in this matter, but the Federal Republic in 2011 behaved even worse than the occupying powers in 1987, who had allowed Hess’s body to be released to his family for burial at Wunsiedel.


In 2011 this decision was reversed and a much earlier barbaric policy was reinstated, going back to a 1947 agreement in the Stalin-era to cremate Rudolf Hess, scatter the ashes and destroy even the box in which the ashes had been stored.


In fact in 2011 the entire family grave was destroyed.

The graveyard at Wunsiedel, before and after the official destruction of the Hess family grave in 2011



Such is the Federal Republic in the 21st century: their fear of National-Socialism and their barbaric counter-measures have taken us back to the Stalin-era – and in some respects worse than the Stalin-era.


We will only escape the shadow of Stalinism when German and British governments dare to confront the full truth of our history.


Only then will we have a free Germany, a free England, a free Europe.

German patriots advance again in Saarland regional election

Saarland election 2017

A party which has existed for less than three years now has representatives in 12 of the 16 German regional parliaments.

Racial nationalists are closely watching politics in Germany, where incumbent – supposedly ‘conservative’ – Chancellor Angela Merkel shamefully betrayed her people in 2015 by welcoming hordes of immigrants, with horrific consequences.

A general election is due in September this year, which polls and most observers predict Merkel will lose. She has been in power with the support of the socialist SPD, but increasing numbers of German voters have been flocking to the anti-immigration party Alternative for Germany (AfD), which has only existed since 2013 and has become increasingly radical on immigration and related questions since 2015.

Today there was an election for the Landtag (regional parliament) of Saarland, a region with a population around one million, centred on the city of Saarbrücken, near the German-French border.

A campaign poster for the anti-immigration party AfD, advertising a Saarbrücken event addressed by two AfD leaders

A campaign poster for the anti-immigration party AfD, advertising a Saarbrücken event addressed by two AfD leaders

Slightly surprisingly, early results show that Merkel’s party has polled quite well in Saarland, perhaps because conservative voters were alarmed at the possibility of a socialist alliance with the ex-communist Left Party (Die Linke).

Some weak-willed middle class voters of this sort have thus been prepared to ignore or forgive Merkel’s shocking betrayal of German interests.  Nevertheless, it was a positive sign that AfD won Saarland Landtag seats for the first time today, polling somewhere over 6%.

The next German regional election is in North Rhine-Westphalia – the largest of Germany’s states with a population of 18 million, including four big cities: Cologne, Düsseldorf, Dortmund and Essen. This NRW region has taken a vast number of the immigrants admitted by Merkel. Seen as a socialist stronghold, NRW votes on May 14th. A week earlier French voters will have the decisive second round in their presidential election. Marine Le Pen is expected to contest that second round against a centrist, pro-immigration candidate.

Anti-immigration party’s new gains in German capital

afd-berlin

The anti-immigration party Alternative for Germany (AfD) – which has only existed since 2013 – has won seats for the first time in the regional parliament of the German capital Berlin, polling 14.2%.

This continues a remarkable run of gains for AfD, most notably earlier this month when it pushed Chancellor Angela Merkel’s CDU into third place in the north-eastern region of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern.

Berlin was always going to be much tougher territory for AfD, so 14.2% here is a very great achievement, even though the party is in fifth place behind the socialist SPD, the CDU, Greens and far-left Die Linke (Left Party). Western Europe’s capital cities are all more left-wing than the rest of their countries, with higher ethnic minority populations: Berlin in particular has a strong left-wing element dating back to the early 20th century.

In the long term perhaps the most significant aspect is that the so-called “grand coalition” – a deal between SPD and CDU (similar to a Labour-Tory pact) – lost so many votes that it will no longer be able to govern the Berlin region.

The SPD (who remained in first place with a reduced vote of 21.6%) will probably now seek a new alliance in Berlin’s regional parliament with the Greens and the Left Party.  In the long term this is very good news for AfD, as it heralds a more honest politics that could undermine Merkel’s coalition with the SPD at national level.

For the first time, a window of opportunity is visible for AfD to achieve some share of power next year: for many conservatives within Merkel’s party will begin asking – if the SPD can form coalitions with the neo-communists in Die Linke, why shouldn’t conservatives look for a coalition with the anti-immigration AfD?

 

Merkel defeated on home turf: Europe’s nationalist surge continues

Afd - MV poster 2016

Europe’s most powerful ‘conservative’ leader – German Chancellor Angela Merkel – was humiliated a fortnight ago by a new nationalist party in elections for the regional parliament of her home area Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. This weekend she faces further problems in Berlin, Germany’s capital.

Mecklenburg-Vorpommern is on the north-east border of today’s Germany (though many traditional ethnic German areas are further east, presently within the borders of Poland or Russia).  It includes Rostock and several other Hanseatic ports whose trading agreements were the origins of the modern German state: the regional parliament (or Landtag) is in the medieval city of Schwerin.

As elsewhere in Merkel’s Germany, economic crisis has been exacerbated by the flood of immigrants – encouraged by a supposedly ‘conservative’ chancellor and her government.  Both in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and nationwide, government is a coalition of Merkel’s CDU-CSU and the social democratic SPD.

In other words Germans have the equivalent of a Tory-Labour coalition, eagerly promoting immigration and ‘one-worldism’!

Understandably German voters have increasingly turned against this wicked betrayal.  Just over three years ago a new party was created called ‘Alternative for Germany’ (Alternative für Deutschland – AfD).  At first this was a milder version of our UKIP, focused on calls for reform of the EU rather than withdrawal, and careful not to say anything too ‘extreme’ about immigration.

AfD leader Frauke Petry with her partner and MEP Marcus Pretzell: they have sought an alliance between AfD and Marine Le Pen's French National Front

AfD leader Frauke Petry with her partner and MEP Marcus Pretzell: they have sought an alliance between AfD and Marine Le Pen’s French National Front

However, as detailed in several recent issues of Heritage and Destiny, the AfD has moved in a significantly more radical direction over the past year or so under its new leader Frauke Petry.  Ignoring the usual smears, the party has continued to pick up support.

The elections on September 4th were the first time that AfD had contested the Mecklenburg-Vorpommern landtag – and for the first time nationwide the party finished ahead of Merkel’s CDU!

The SPD was in first place (as at the previous election in 2011) but its vote fell from 35.6% to 30.6%.  AfD was in second place with 20.8% in the party’s first campaign for this landtag.  The CDU vote dropped from 23% to 19%, while the neo-Marxist ‘Left Party’ (Die Linke) was down from 18.4% to 13.2%.

Two parties dropped out of the landtag after their vote fell below the 5% threshold.  The Greens are down from 8.7% to 4.8%, while the nationalist NPD (many of whose votes went to AfD) lost half its support: down from 6% to 3%.  Germany’s once powerful liberal party the FDP once again failed to gain seats after polling 3%, as in 2011.

In terms of landtag seats the SPD-CDU coalition will be able to continue, though with a much smaller majority.  Theoretically the two left of centre parties – SPD and Left – would also have (just) sufficient MPs for a coalition, but fear of association with communism still prevents the SPD from admitting its ideological kinship with Die Linke.

Despite its success in this election, the AfD would not have the numbers to form a governing coalition in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern with the CDU.  But this result will add to the pressure on Chancellor Merkel from within her own party, especially from the CDU’s Bavarian sister party CSU, in advance of next year’s federal elections.

A week after this shock advance, AfD achieved more modest results in local council elections across Lower Saxony, and this weekend sees elections to the Berlin landtag, again governed by a “grand coalition” between SPD and CDU.  Here nationalists have traditionally been much weaker – the NPD polled only 2.5% in 2011.  Again the CDU could be pushed into third place, though probably by the Greens, with the AfD not far behind.

 

AfD's Mecklenburg-Vorpommern leader Leif-Erik Holm (right) celebrates with fellow campaigners including Brandenburg AfD chairman Alexander Gauland (left).

AfD’s Mecklenburg-Vorpommern leader Leif-Erik Holm (right) celebrates with fellow campaigners including Brandenburg AfD chairman Alexander Gauland (left).

 

The battle for fundamental freedoms: German nationalist party splits

The German nationalist party AfD is facing a civil war between its two national leaders: Frauke Petry (left) and Jörg Meuthen.

The German nationalist party AfD is facing a civil war between its two national leaders: Frauke Petry (left) and Jörg Meuthen.

During the past year Alternative für Deutschland (Alternative for Germany – AfD) has been the most successful and rapidly growing nationalist party in Europe.

In 2015 control of AfD passed from its founders – who were essentially a liberal version of UKIP, focused on reform of (not withdrawal from) the EU – to a more radical faction who spoke openly about the need to protect German identity from mass immigration.

Though ‘moderate’ factions (including most of the party’s MEPs) had argued that this ‘extremism’ would be electorally disastrous, AfD has in fact become stronger, consistently winning seats in Germany’s regional/state parliaments, or länder.

Now the party’s most liberal elements are attempting a coup against the new leadership: at stake is whether AfD’s de facto leader Frauke Petry will be its figurehead and candidate for Chancellor against Angela Merkel in next year’s federal elections (scheduled for August-September 2017).  The liberal faction would prefer Jörg Meuthen, who acts as co-spokesman with Frau Petry at national level, and was head of the AfD group in the state parliament of Baden-Württemberg.

A few weeks ago Herr Meuthen demanded the expulsion of one of his AfD colleagues in Baden-Württemberg, Wolfgang Gedeon, after it was found that Herr Gedeon had written a book four years ago (entitled Green Communism and the Dictatorship of Minorities) comparing the German state’s treatment of historians such as David Irving (and German writers such as the former leftist Horst Mahler) to the persecution of ‘dissidents’ by communist and other totalitarian regimes.

Showdown in the Baden-Württemberg state parliament between AfD regional leader Jörg Meuthen (left) and one of his own MPs, Wolfgang Gedeon (right).

Showdown in the Baden-Württemberg state parliament between AfD regional leader Jörg Meuthen (left) and one of his own MPs, Wolfgang Gedeon (right).

The book was denounced as ‘anti-semitic’, but when AfD’s group of Baden-Württemberg MPs met last week, the liberal faction was unable to secure the necessary two-thirds majority to expel Herr Gedeon.  Although Herr Gedeon resolved the matter a day later by resigning voluntarily, Herr Meuthen and his supporters used the dispute as a pretext to break away and form their own parliamentary group, registering themselves as Alternative für Baden-Württemberg.

They have now taken the matter to AfD’s national ruling executive, demanding that this new group be recognised as the official party affiliate.  In statements to the German press, the liberal faction have insisted: “I don’t know how you can be in two minds about this. Anyone who reads this can see it is clearly antisemitic.  … We are Alternative for Germany, the others are antisemites for Germany.”

Herr Meuthen is now using the issue to force a showdown with Frau Petry, demanding that she should be locked out of the party’s national headquarters, even though she is seen as effectively the AfD leader.

Unless the dispute is resolved decisively and quickly, the only winner will be Germany’s pro-immigration Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Election success for German anti-immigration party

Frauke Petry, leader of Alternative for Germany, which achieved tremendous gains in German elections yesterday.

Frauke Petry, leader of Alternative for Germany, which achieved tremendous gains in German elections yesterday.

The anti-immigration party “Alternative for Germany” (Alternative für Deutschland – AfD) has made worldwide headlines this week after yesterday’s elections to three German state parliaments (Landtag) in which AfD finished in second or third place.

AfD was only formed in 2013 and until last summer was mainly focused on reform of the European Union and the single currency: effectively a milder version of our UKIP. In the European Parliament its members were in the same transnational group as David Cameron’s Conservatives and the Polish governing party Law & Justice. They have now been expelled from this group and will probably ally with the Austrian Freedom Party and Marine Le Pen’s French National Front.

AfD was transformed into a more radical anti-immigration force less than a year ago under a new leader – Frauke Petry – and is now seen as the main voice for Germans disgusted by the liberal immigration policy of their Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Mrs Merkel’s Conservative CDU and its traditional opposition the SPD (similar to our Labour Party) were the big losers in yesterday’s elections, and the anti-immigration AfD were the big winners, fighting all three states for the first time.

The most dramatic result was in the former East German state of Saxony-Anhalt, where AfD finished second with 24.2% and will now be the main opposition to an unprincipled coalition of conservatives, socialists and greens who will attempt to govern the region. The nationalist NPD (which is fighting a court case against an attempted ban by German authorities) polled 1.9% (down from 4.6% last time) and a new nationalist party called Die Rechte (The Right) polled 0.2%.

AfD finished third in the traditionally prosperous and conservative western German state of Baden-Württemberg, polling 15.1%. The NPD (for whom this was never a stronghold) slipped from 1.0% to 0.4% and another nationalist party, the Republikaner (who held seats in Baden-Württemberg from 1992 to 2001) similarly fell from 1.1% to 0.3%.

In another western German state – Rhineland Palatinate – the AfD again finished third with 12.6%, while the NPD and Republikaner polled 0.5% (down from 1.1%) and 0.2% (down from 0.8%).

The immigration crisis and the rise of AfD inspired large numbers of Germans to take part in these elections: turnout was 61.1% in Saxony Anhalt and 70.4% in Baden-Württemberg and Rhineland Palatinate.

We can now expect AfD (despite the levels of support achieved in these elections) to be intensively targeted by Germany’s heavily politicised security agencies, who will support efforts by establishment politicians to intimidate anti-immigration campaigners.

Thought-crime in today’s Europe

DeckertStolzRenouf-672pxWide

German lawyer Sylvia Stolz (centre) after her release from an earlier presence sentence, seen here with human rights activists Günter Deckert (left) and Lady Michèle Renouf.

 

German lawyer Sylvia Stolz has been given a 20 month prison sentence for comments she made during a speech at a conference in Switzerland.  She has already served more than three years in prison from 2008 to 2011 for her defence of client Ernst Zündel.

Several European countries have laws that ban any questioning of the history of the ‘Holocaust’, turning the alleged murder of six million Jews in homicidal gas chambers during the Second World War into a form of religious ‘truth’ that cannot be challenged.

Normal historical analysis and debate is thus condemned as a form of blasphemy, and punished by long prison sentences.  For example Horst Mahler, another German lawyer who dared to challenge established historical legends, has been imprisoned since 2009.

Sylvia Stolz’s latest ‘crime’ was committed at the Anti-Censorship Coalition Conference in Switzerland in November 2012.  A video of this ‘criminal’ speech, with English subtitles, can be viewed below:

While sentencing Frau Stolz to prison, the judge in her latest case indicated that he fully expects her to appeal, and she will not begin her sentence until the appeal process has ended.

In fact it is likely that the German authorities have created a serious embarrassment for themselves, by prosecuting Frau Stolz for pointing out facts that were actually accepted by German courts themselves when sentencing former Auschwitz guards at trials during the 1960s.  During those cases the German courts themselves admitted the absence of evidence regarding the locations of the alleged crimes of the ‘Holocaust’; the lack of any judicial findings regarding corpses or traces of the murders concerned; the lack of judicial assessment of witness statements, or of the documents or other evidence; and the lack of any documentary proof establishing the National Socialists’ intention to destroy the Jewish people in part or in whole (i.e. to commit genocide).

Yet to make these very same observations – even in the very same terms as used by the German courts themselves during the 1960s – is now a criminal act in 21st century Germany.

Though here in the UK we have not yet descended into such a Kafkaesque nightmare of bizarre criminal trials, there are attempts to extend our own notorious ‘race laws’ to encompass the criminalisation of ‘Holocaust denial’.  Moreover the British authorities have signed up to the Stockholm International Conference on the teaching of the ‘Holocaust’, which instructed schools as follows:

“Care must be taken not to give a platform for deniers – do not treat the denial of the Holocaust as a legitimate historical argument, or seek to disprove the deniers’ position through normal historical debate and rational argument.”

  • Find By Category

  • Latest News

  • Follow us on Twitter