(9 Parts)
You have before you the most expensive little publication printed in the
English language in modern times.
Millions of words have been spoken and
written about this publication as a result of the two Zündel Trials.
Many
hours of television news reports were broadcast about the content of this
publication and the surrounding controversy and trial.
The Canadian
government, its various branches like the police, the Attorney General's office,
the Canadian Department of Immigration, the courts with staff, clerks,
stenographers, court reporters and security personnel spent millions of dollars
for research, staff and courtroom space.
Ernst Zündel, the man at the
centre of this controversy, did not write this booklet. He merely supplied the
four words on the original cover, stating "Truth at last exposed." He supplied
the photos and news clippings on the inside cover of the publication, plus one
sentence under his youthful photo on page two. He wrote and supplied the text on
page three headed: "To all Canadian Lawyers and Media representatives" and
signed it himself. That was his foreword to the publication.
Nothing
whatsoever has been changed - not a single word of the text which was written by
an Englishman called Richard Harwood who, Zündel thought until his trial, was
teaching at the University of London. During the trial, the witness Mark Weber
revealed the real name of the author as the former honours student of the
University of London, Richard Verrall - alias Richard Harwood. Ernst Zündel did
not know this at the time of publication.
The original English publishers
did not permit Ernst Zündel to change a single line or sentence in the Canadian
"publication," which is what you now have in your hands. The Court records
reveal that Ernst Zündel reluctantly agreed to this, adding only an order coupon
on page 30, and two pages of an afterword (or some closing remarks). This came
as a response to the article reproduced on the top right of page 31, which, at
the time, appeared in many Canadian newspapers from coast to coast. Ernst Zündel
merely reprinted Did Six Million Really Die? by a photo-offset method - an exact
duplicate, plus the already mentioned additions. In Court, he said he felt safe
doing that because the publication had already been translated into 12
languages, and was being sold without any legal problems in 18 countries. The
only exception was South Africa, where the publication was forbidden at the
instigation of the Jewish lobby. A booklet entitled Six Million Did Die was also
published in South Africa; this booklet figured prominently in the Zündel trial
in 1988.
Ernst Zündel became a household word in Canada, beginning with
his 1985 trial, which lasted seven weeks, and his marathon 1988 trial which
lasted for almost four months. The booklet made Ernst Zündel and his revisionist
viewpoint famous across the globe.
The Zündel case is now, for the second
time in 10 years, before the Supreme Court of Canada, because the defence feels
that the False News section of the Criminal Code in Canada, under which Ernst
Zündel was charged and convicted twice, is unconstitutional, in that it offends
against Canada's "Charter of Rights and Freedoms" (a watered-down version of the
American Bill of Rights).
Ernst Zündel now awaits the verdict of the
highest court in the land - will it be freedom, exoneration or jail?
You
can be Judge and Jury! Read the booklet, and then ask yourself: should a man be
beaten, spat upon, terrorized, beset upon by frenzied mobs, bombed and charged
with a criminal offence, dragged through lengthy court cases and terribly
expensive legal costs, because of the few errors, made by a writer ten years
previous? What do you think? Was this persecution of Ernst Zündel, through
prosecution by the state, just to punish him for his beliefs? "Persons who would
spread hate in this community in order to foster right-wing beliefs which attack
the delicate balance of racial and social harmony in our community must be
punished" (Judge Thomas' very own words on the day he sentenced Ernst Zündel,
Transcript 10575)
What do you think?
Did this German resident of
Canada not do the natural thing by attempting to answer all of the nasty
accusations and smears about his own people (in the media, on television, in
school books etc.) by using an Englishman's writings to rebut these often
outrageous claims and charges?
If somebody said similar things about your
own ethnic group, would you not want to respond?
You be the judge. Read
this and pass it on.
This booklet is the type of material that the Attorney General of British
Columbia considers 'racist'. The Attorney General of Ontario, at the behest of
his B.C. colleague, is purportedly conducting an investigation of Samisdat
Publishers preparatory to the laying of a criminal charge of "promoting hatred
against an identifiable group."
Samisdat intends to use this opportunity,
however, unwelcome, to test the definition and hence, the validity of the
so-called 'Hate Law' section of the Canadian Criminal Code. What is now becoming
clear to all of us, even to those who enacted the so-called 'Hate Law', is that
we enacted not so much an instrument against hate as an instrument against
truth.
Canada was a civilised country before the passage of the 'Hate
Law'. We already had laws against the incitement to riot, to murder, to arson,
to the commission of assault and bodily harm. Our laws protected and still
protect every citizen from libel, slander and defamation. But the outlawing of
'hate' does not thereby abolish feelings of hate, as we all know. To prohibit
expressions of hatred may even cause such feelings to go unvented until they
become explosive and take the form of violence. Prior to the 'Hate Law', we
Canadians behaved with mature composure when encountering hateful expressions.
We simply shunned the haters and left them to spew out their ire, unsupported
and alone. In most cases, a cold dose of healthy public ridicule would quench
the more volcanic vituperators and reason would be restored. But something
happened to us, for as we have grown older as a country, we have become less
mature and less secure. Our passage of the 'Hate Law' was a grave reflection
upon ourselves. It revealed a sudden lose of confidence in our own wisdom and
judgement and in the wisdom and judgement of the great majority of Canadian
voters and citizens. Suddenly, we had to be protected from ourselves and just as
suddenly, we became refugees from freedom. No democracy that so distrusts the
majority can long remain a democracy; it becomes a police state in the worst
tradition of police states.
Unfortunately, only a few clearsighted and
courageous individuals protested the enactment of the 'Hate Law'. So thick were
the clouds of hysteria and half-truth over the matter that only these few
perceived the dangers inherent in a statute which could be used at the
discretion of a public official to suppress the freedom of enquiry and
discussion in regard to relevant public issues. Among these few protesters, I
proudly number myself, for I spoke out then and I speak out now, on behalf of
our basic freedom to act as thinking human beings.
As we stumble along
the road to the 1984 of George Orwell, we sometimes receive a taste of his
dismal future-fantasy well ahead of schedule. Pernicious 'thought-crime'
legislation like the 'Hate Law' has brought us 1984 already. It has not outlawed
hate, but it has outlawed truth on behalf of those predatory vested interests
whose archenemy is truth!
This booklet has been sent to you free of
charge as a public service. After reading it, you are perfectly free to agree or
to disagree with its content. You may even ignore it and leave it unread. Truth
has no need of coercion. Those who choose to ignore the truth are not punished
by law--they punish themselves. We of Samisdat Publishers do not believe that
you should be forced to read something, any more than we believe that you should
be forced to read something, any more than we believe that you should be forced
not to read something. Obviously, we have much more faith in your soundness of
mind and good judgement than do the enactors and enforcers of the 'Hate Law'!
Whether you agree or disagree with the facts presented in this booklet, we
invite you to assist us in reclaiming and safeguarding the freedoms we have all
so long enjoyed, until now, in Canada.
Help us remove this shameful stain
of tyranny from our otherwise bright and shining land. Help us strike the
terrible sword of censorship from the hands of those who would slay truth in
pursuit of their dubious aims. Without freedom of enquiry and freedom of access
to information we cannot have freedom of thought and without freedom of thought,
we cannot be a free people. The matter is urgent. Can you help us restore and
protect the freedom of all Canadians?
You can help decisively by sending
your contribution to the Samisdat Defense Fund. Legal fees are costly in the
extreme. We anticipate daily expenditures of $1,000.00 in attorneys' fees and in
the reimbursement of witnesses who must be flown in from Australia, Israel,
Europe and from both American continents. Whatever help you can provide will
make 1984 a much better year for your children and grandchildren-a year in which
freedom of thought will not be a memory, but a beautiful
reality!
(Signature)
Ernst Zundel, Publisher
SAMISDAT PUBLISHERS
LTD.
INTRODUCTION
Of course, atrocity propaganda
is nothing new. It has accompanied every conflict of the 20th century and
doubtless will continue to do so. During the First World War, the Germans were
actually accused of eating Belgian babies, as well as delighting to throw them
in the air and transfix them on bayonets. The British also alleged that the
German forces were operating a "Corpse Factory", in which they boiled down the
bodies of their own dead in order to obtain glycerine and other commodities, a
calculated insult to the honour of an Imperial army. After the war, however,
came the retractions; indeed, a public statement was made by the Foreign
Secretary in the House of Commons apologising for the insults to German honour,
which were admitted to be war-time propaganda.
No such statements have
been made after the Second World War. In fact, rather than diminish with the
passage of years, the atrocity propaganda concerning the German occupation, and
in particular their treatment of the Jews, has done nothing but increase its
virulence, and elaborate its catalogue of horrors. Gruesome paperback books with
lurid covers continue to roll from the presses, adding continuously to a growing
mythology of the concentration camps and especially to the story that no less
than Six Million Jews were exterminated in them. The ensuing pages will reveal
this claim to be the most colossal piece of fiction and the most successful of
deceptions; but here an attempt may be made to answer an important question:
What has rendered the atrocity stories of the Second World War so uniquely
different from those of the First? Why were the latter retracted while the
former are reiterated louder than ever? Is it possible that the story of the Six
Million Jews is serving a political purpose, even that it is a form of political
blackmail?
So far as the Jewish people themselves are concerned, the
deception has been an incalculable benefit. Every conceivable race and
nationality had its share of suffering in the Second World War, but none has so
successfully elaborated it and turned it to such great advantage. The alleged
extent of their persecution quickly aroused sympathy for the Jewish national
homeland they had sought for so long; after the War the British Government did
little to prevent Jewish emigration to Palestine which they had declared
illegal, and it was not long afterwards that the Zionists wrested ftom the
Government the land of Palestine and created their haven from persecution, the
State of Israel. Indeed, it is a remarkable fact that the Jewish people emerged
from the Second World War as nothing less than a triumphant minority. Dr. Max
Nussbaum, the former chief rabbi of the Jewish community in Berlin, stated on
April 11, 1953: "The position the Jewish people occupy today in the world -
despite the enormous losses - is ten times stronger than what it was twenty
years ago." It should be added, if one is to be honest, that this strength has
been much consolidated financially by the supposed massacre of the Six Million,
undoubtedly the most profitable atrocity allegation of all time. To date, the
staggering figure of six thousand million pounds has been paid out in
compensation by the Federal Government of West Germany, mostly to the State of
Israel (which did not even exist during the Second World War), as well as to
individual Jewish claimants.
DISCOURAGEMENT OF
NATIONALISM
In terms of political blackmail, however, the
allegation that Six Million Jews died during the Second World War has much more
far-reaching implications for the people of Britain and Europe than simply the
advantages it has gained for the Jewish nation. And here one comes to the crux
of the question: Why the Big Lie? What is its purpose? In the first place, it
has been used quite unscrupulously to discourage any form of nationalism. Should
the people of Britain or any other European country attempt to assert their
patriotism and preserve their national integrity in an age when the very
existence of nation-states is threatened, they are immediately branded as
"neo-Nazis". Because, of course, Nazism was nationalism, and we all know what
happened then - Six Million Jews were exterminated! So long as the myth is
perpetuated, peoples everywhere will remain in bondage to it; the need for
international tolerance and understanding will be hammered home by the United
Nations until nationhood itself, the very guarantee of freedom, is
abolished.
A classic example of the use of the 'Six Million' as an
anti-national weapon appears in Manvell and Frankl's book, The Incomparable
Crime (London, 1967), which deals with 'Genocide in the Twentieth Century'.
Anyone with a pride in being British will be somewhat surprised by the vicious
attack made on the British Empire in this book. The authors quote Pandit Nehru,
who wrote the following while in a British prison in India: "Since Hitler
emerged from obscurity and became the Führer of Germany, we have heard a great
deal about racialism and the Nazi theory of the "Herrenvolk" . . . But we in
India have known racialism in all its forms ever since the commencement of
British rule. The whole ideology of this rule was that of the "Herrenvolk" and
the master race . . . India as a nation and Indians as individuals were
subjected to insult, humiliation and contemptuous treatment. The English were an
imperial race, we were told, with the God-given right to govern us and keep us
in subjection; if we protested we were reminded of the 'tiger qualities of an
imperial race'." The authors Manvell and Frankl then go on to make the point
perfectly clear for us: "The white races of Europe and America," they write,
"have become used during centuries to regarding themselves as a "Herrenvolk".
The twentieth century, the century of Auschwitz, has also achieved the first
stage in the recognition of multi-racial partnership" (ibid., p
.14).
THE RACE PROBLEM SUPPRESSED
One could
scarcely miss the object of this diatribe, with its insiduous hint about
"multi-racial partnership". Thus the accusation of the Six Million is not only
used to undermine the principle of nationhood and national pride, but it
threatens the survival of the Race itself. It is wielded over the heads of the
populace, rather as the threat of hellfire and damnation was in the Middle Ages.
Many countries of the Anglo-Saxon world, notably Britain and America, are today
facing the gravest danger in their history, the danger posed by the alien races
in their midst. Unless something is done in Britain to halt the immigration and
assimilation of Africans and Asians into our country, we are faced in the near
future, quite apart from the bloodshed of racial conflict, with the biological
alteration and destruction of the British people as they have existed here since
the coming of the Saxons. In short, we are threatened with the irrecoverable
loss of our European culture and racial heritage. But what happens if a man
dares to speak of the race problem, of its biological and political
implications? He is branded as that most heinous of creatures, a "racialist".
And what is racialism:,of course, but the very hallmark of the Nazi! They (so
everyone is told, anyway) murdered Six Million Jews because of racialism, so it
must be a very evil thing indeed. When Enoch Powell drew attention to the
dangers posed by coloured immigration into Britain in one of his early speeches,
a certain prominent Socialist raised the spectre of Dachau and Auschwitz to
silence his presumption.
Thus any rational discussion of the problems of
Race and the effort to preserve racial integrity is effectively discouraged. No
one could have anything but admiration for the way in which the Jews have sought
to preserve their race through so many centuries, and continue to do so today.
In this effort they have frankly been assisted by the story of the Six .Million,
which, almost like a religious myth, has stressed the need for greater Jewish
racial solidarity. Unfortunately, it has worked in quite the opposite way for
all other peoples, rendering them impotent in the struggle for
self-preservation.
The aim in the following pages is quite simply to tell
the Truth. The distinguished American historian Harry Elmer Barnes once wrote
that "An attempt to make a competent, objective and truthful investigation of
the extermination question . . . is surely the most precarious venture that an
historian or demographer could undertake today." In attempting this precarious
task, it is hoped to make some contribution, not only to historical truth, but
towards lifting the burden of a lie from our own shoulders, so that we may
freely confront the dangers which threaten us all.
Richard E.
Harwood
1. GERMAN POLICY TOWARDS THE JEWS PRIOR TO THE
WAR
Rightly or wrongly, the Germany of Adolf Hitler considered
the Jews to be a disloyal and avaricious element within the national community,
as well as a force of decadence in Germany's cultural life. This was held to be
particularly unhealthy since, during the Weimar period, the Jews had risen to a
position of remarkable strength and influence in the nation, particularly in
law, finance and the mass media, even though they constituted only 5 per cent of
the population. The fact that Karl Marx was a Jew and that Jews such as Rosa
Luxembourg and Karl Liebknecht were disproportionately prominent in the
leadership of revolutionary movements in Germany, also tended to convince the
Nazis of the powerful internationalist and Communist tendencies of the Jewish
people themselves.
It is no part of the discussion here to argue whether
the German attitude to the Jews was right or not, or to judge whether its
legislative measures against them were just or unjust. Our concern is simply
with the fact that, believing of the Jews as they did, the Nazis' solution to
the problem was to deprive them of their influence within the nation by various
legislative acts, and most important of all, to encounge their emigration from
the country altogether. By 1939, the great majority of German Jews had
emigrated, all of them with a sizeable proportion of their assets. Never at any
time had the Nazi leadership even contemplated a policy of genocide towards
them.
JEWS CALLED EMIGRATION 'EXTERMINATION'
It
is very significant, however, that certain Jews were quick to interpret these
policies of internal discrimination as equivalent to extermination itself. A
1936 anti-German propaganda book by Leon Feuchtwanger and others entitled Der
Gelbe Fleck: Die Austrotung von 500,000 deutschen Juden (The Yellow Spot: The
Extermination of 500,000 German Jews, Paris, 1936), presents a typical example.
Despite its baselessness in fact, the annihilation of the Jews is discussed from
the first pages - straightforward emigration being regarded as the physical
"extermination" of German Jewry. The Nazi concentration camps for political
prisoners are also seen as potential instruments of genocide, and special
reference is made to the 100 Jews still detained in Dachau in 1936, of whom 60
had been there since 1933. A further example was the sensational book by the
German-Jewish Communist, Hans Beimler, called Four Weeks in the Hands of
Hitler's Hell-Hounds: The Nazi Murder Camp of Dachau, which was published in New
York as eady as 1933. Detained for his Marxist affiliations, he claimed that
Dachau was a death camp, though by his own admission he was released after only
a month there. The present regime in East Germany now issues a Hans Beimler
Award for services to Communism.
The fact that anti-Nazi genocide
propaganda was being disseminated at this impossibly early date, therefore, by
people biased on racial or political grounds, should suggest extreme caution to
the independent-minded observer when approaching similar stories of the war
period.
The encouragement of Jewish emigration should not be confused
with the purpose of concentration camps in pre-war Germany. These were used for
the detention of political opponents and subversives - principally liberals,
Social Democrats and Communists of all kinds, of whom a proportion were Jews
such as Hans Beimler. Unlike the millions enslaved in the Soviet Union, the
German concentration camp population was always small; Reitinger admits that
between 1934 and 1938 it seldom exceeded 20,000 throughout the whole of Germany,
and the number of Jews was never more than 3,000. (The S.S.: Alibi of a Nation,
London, 1956, p. 253).
ZIONIST POLICY STUDIED
The
Nazi view of Jewish emigration was not Iimited to a negative policy of simple
expulsion, but was formulated along the lines of modern Zionism. The founder of
political Zionism in the 19th century, Theodore Herzl, in his work The Jewish
State, had originally conceived of Madagascar as a national homeland for the
Jews, and this possibility was seriously studied by the Nazis. It had been a
main plank of the National Socialist party platform before 1933 and was
published by the party in pamphlet form. This stated that the revival of Israel
as a Jewish state was much less acceptable since it would result in perpetual
war and disruption in the Arab world, which has indeed been the case. The
Germans were not original in proposing Jewish emigration to Madagascar; the
Polish Government had already considered the scheme in respect of their own
Jewish population, and in 1937 they sent the Michael Lepecki expedition to
Madagascar, accompanied by Jewish representatives, to investigate the problems
involved.
The first Nazi proposals for a Madagascar solution were made in
association with the Schacht Plan of 1938. On the advice of Goering, Hitler
agreed to send the President of the Reichsbank, Dr. Hjaimar Schacht, to London
for discussions with Jewish representatives Lord Bearsted and Mr. Rublee of New
York (cf. Reitlinger, The Final Solution, London, 1953, p. 20). The plan was
that German Jewish assets would be frozen as security for an international loan
to finance Jewish emigration to Palestine, and Schacht reported on these
negotiations to Hitler at Berchtesgaden on January 2, 1939. The plan, which
failed due to British refusal to accept the financial terms, was first put
forward on November 12, 1938 at a conference convened by Goering, who revealed
that Hitler was already considering the emigration of Jews to a settlement in
Madagascar (ibid., p. 21). Later, in December, Ribbentrop was told by M. Georges
Bonnet, the French Foreign Secretary, that the French Government itself was
planning the evacuation of 10,000 Jews to Madagascar.
Prior to the
Schacht Palestine proposals of 1938, which were essentially a protraction of
discussions that had begun as early as 1935, numerous attempts had been made to
secure Jewish emigration to other European nations, and these efforts culminated
in the Evian Conference of July, 1938. However, by 1939 the scheme of Jewish
emigration to Madagascar had gained the most favour in German circles. It is
true that in London Helmuth Wohltat of the German Foreign Office discussed
limited Jewish emigration to Rhodesia and British Guiana as late as April 1939;
but by January 24th, when Goering wrote to Interior Minister Frick ordering the
creation of a Central Emigration Office for Jews, and commissioned Heydrich of
the Reich Security Head Office to solve the Jewish problem "by means of
emigration and evacuation", the Madagascar Plan was being studied in
earnest.
By 1939, the consistent efforts of the German Government to
secure the departure of Jews from the Reich had resulted in the emigration of
400,000 German Jews from a total population of about 600,000, and an additional
480,000 emigrants from Austria and Czechoslovakia, which constituted almost
their entire Jewish populations. This was accomplished through Offices of Jewish
Emigration in Berlin, Vienna and Prague established by Adolf Eichmann, the head
of the Jewish Investigation Office of the Gestapo. So eager were the Germans to
secure this emigration that Eichmann even established a training centre in
Austria, where young Jews could learn farming in anticipation of being smuggled
illegally to Palestine (Manvell & Frankl, S.S. and Gestapo, p. 60). Had
Hitler cherished any intention of exterminating the Jews, it is inconceivable
that he would have allowed more than 800,000 to leave Reich territory with the
bulk of their wealth, much less considered plans for their mass emigration to
Palestine or Madagascar. What is more, we shall see that the policy of
emigration from Europe was still under consideration well into the war period,
notably the Madagascar Plan, which Eichmann discussed in 1940 with French
Colonial Office experts after the defeat of France had made the surrender of the
colony a practical proposition.
Continue to Part
2
