In a clear indication of who will be burning the books this time, anti-White activists and their Communist, Anarchist, and LGBT allies have teamed up to lobby Amazon to remove all books by author Billy Roper. This is a follow up to the recent Jewish (successful) attempts to have books discussing the history of the Holocaust or the Second World War removed by Amazon, as well.
At the moment, anti-Whites are placing dozens of false book reviews on Amazon, in order to lower the rankings of such books as ‘The Big Picture’, as can be seen here.
Even if they are successful in having Amazon remove Billy Roper’s books, however, they have all already been republished through a different publisher, so they will remain available independently through Racial Observer Books.
Anti-Whites have also publicly announced that they are lobbying their local libraries to not carry books by Billy Roper.
There are three ways that supporters of free speech can counter this deceitful, dishonest censorship.
- Purchase a copy of ‘The Big Picture’ and other books by Billy Roper, to demonstrate to the retailer that their bottom line interest is in continuing to carry his books, as well as to make sure that you get a copy before further censorship efforts are carried out more successfully. This also supports the author under attack and lets them know that they are not carrying on the fight for truth alone.
2. Place a positive review of ‘The Big Picture‘ and other books by Billy Roper in the comments section for reviews at Amazon and elsewhere, to counterweight the false negative reviews.
3. Use your copy of Billy Roper’s books to slap an anti-White liberal in the face. Hard. On both sides. Repeatedly.
VINCENT REYNOUARD WEBSITE
Vincent Reynouard is a French revisionist who disputes the official version of the massacre at Oradour-sur-Glane. On 9 June 2004, his previous conviction on a charge of “approval of a war crime” was upheld on appeal and Reynouard was sentenced to two years in prison with 18 months of that time on probation, plus a 3,000 Euro fine. The court also upheld the confiscation of his research papers which had been seized in May 2001. Essentially, Reynouard’s crime was that he claimed that survivors of the Oradour massacre lied about the tragedy, and that the women and children were killed by an explosion in the church which was not set off by the Waffen-SS soldiers who were in the village that day. Contrary to Reynouard’s revisionist claims, the women and children were burned alive by a fire that was set in the church by the Waffen-SS soldiers, according to the official story. Reynouard wrote an article which was published in German on this web site, which has since been taken down: http://www.deutsche-
Vincent Reynouard is an independent French historian specializing in the Second World War who has been punished repeatedly for violating France’s controversial “Gayssot” law, which criminalizes dissident views on certain aspects of twentieth century history. For more by and about him, see the French-language website: http://www.phdnm.org/
Born in 1969, Reynouard studied in Caen, Normandy, and graduated as a chemical engineer. He then taught mathematics at professional secondary schools. In 1997 he was dismissed as a teacher by the French Education Minister after the discovery of revisionist texts on the hard disk of the computer he used at school. Since then Reynouard has survived on his writings, videos and other work as an independent historian.
BRUSHES WITH THE LAW
On October 8, 1992, a court in Caen, France, sentenced him to one month in prison (suspended), and fined him 5000 francs (about $850) for violating the country’s “Gayssot” law that makes it a crime to “contest” or dispute certain “crimes against humanity,” as defined by the Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal (IMT) of 1945-46. Specifically, he was punished for having sent to 24 secondary school pupils anonymous letters along with copies of writings that dispute claims of gas chamber killings during World War II. In June 2004 Reynouard was sentenced to two years in prison for having produced and distributed a video on the tragedy of Oradour-sur-Glane that allegedly approved war crimes. However that ruling was later overturned by another court. An earlier confiscation of his research papers was validated.
On November 8, 2007, a court in Saverne (Lower Rhine), France, sentenced Reynouard to one year in prison, and to pay a fine of 10,000 euros (about $13,000) for “contesting crimes against humanity” by writing and distributing a 16-page brochure entitled “The Holocaust: What They Hide from You.” He was also ordered to pay 3,000 euros to the anti-racist association LICRA. His incarceration attracted public attention, and hundreds signed a petition to press for his release and the repeal of the French “denial” law.
On June 25, 2008, the Court of Appeals in Colmar (Alsace) upheld the one-year prison sentence and ordered Reynouard to pay a total of 60,000 euros, which included a fine of 20,000 euros, damages, and the cost of publishing a notice with extracts from this judgment in the “Official Journal of the French Republic,” as well as in two French daily newspapers. Meanwhile, Reynouard fled with his family to neighboring Belgium.
In June 2008, a court in Brussels, Belgium, declared Reynouard and Belgian VHO publisher Siegfried Verbeke guilty of “disputing crimes against humanity” for having written and published “Holocaust denial” literature. The two men were sentenced to one year imprisonment and to pay a fine of 25,000 euros, as well as damages and various other costs. In 2011 an appeals court upheld the sentence.
In February 2015, a criminal court in Normandy sentenced Reynouard to two years in prison for “Holocaust denial” (or négationnisme) in videos he had posted on social media. In addition, the French court ordered him to pay 4,500 euros in damages. Reynouard had represented himself in the three-hour trial in the city of Coutances, although he was not present for the verdict. This sentence came in the aftermath of emphatic expressions of support for freedom of speech — by politicians, in the media and in large rallies — following the killing by Muslim extremists of staff members of the French satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo, which had enraged Muslims for its demeaning cartoons of Muhammed. The sentence of Reynouard showed, once again, that in France there are very real limits on freedom of speech – restrictions that reflect the outlook and interests of those who have power and influence.
Reynouard has written (Used on the Interview video with Jim Rizoli)
“Historical revisionism belongs to no one. Its findings are the fruit of traditional methods of inquiry where scientific expertise assists in the appraisal of testimonies and in documentary research. They will be obvious to any honest individual, whether on the political left or right, [religious] believer or atheist …
“… Its implications extend well beyond the historical scope. The stakes involved, gigantic ones, are political and even theological. If some refuse to see this – because of blindness, cowardice or mistaken strategy – our adversaries, for their part, have understood quite well. They know that a sudden bursting through of the historical truth about the period 1914-1946 would call into question the world order founded at Nuremberg in 1945-1946 …
“The way ahead, therefore, is all laid out for us: we must continue to repeat the truth, the whole truth, including the truth about what’s at stake in this struggle. Far from being merely a sterile quarrel between devotees of the past cut off from present-day realities, the fight for historical truth is, on the contrary, the continuation, on the intellectual level, of the war whose armed phase ended in 1945 with the defeat of the Axis forces. And it’s clear that this conflict, having begun not on September 3, 1939, but on January 30, 1933, is the modern form of the eternal struggle between Light and Darkness. In the twentieth century, National Socialist Germany embodied – doubtless imperfectly but successfully all the same – the very last attempt to return to a well-ordered society, that is, a society respecting the natural order.
“This is the reason why, even after the Third Reich was completely crushed militarily, the war continued, and has continued up to today. Our opponents in this never-ending fight have a weapon of mass destruction: the alleged ‘Holocaust.’ Since 1945, this lie has prevented any dispassionate debate on National Socialism and, more generally, on societies that respect natural order. ‘We know where that led! …’ is how people constantly respond to those who, against the ‘Rights of Man’ and their natural offspring: the unleashing of all selfish inclinations, dare speak of order, the Common Good, wholesomeness, moral standards, safeguarding the genetic heritage, the birth rate, rights of kinship …
“The German homicidal gas chambers never existed. Yes, ‘the Holocaust’ is a myth. For my part, I add: Yes, Hitler embodied the hope of Europe in the face of the ruinous ideals of 1789; Yes, we must take up the best of what National Socialism comprised in order finally to surpass it and forge a doctrine that will be able to save our Old Continent.”
JIM RIZOLI: Cofounder, producer/interviewer (Fred Leuchter and Assistant, Diane King) of the Series, LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY REVISIONISTS. This also entails seeking out UNSUNG HEROES and German survivors of Allied atrocities – The German Story, The German Way. Hard core historical revisionist, Jim and, his brother, Joe moved from combating the illegal immigrant hordes in their cable shows to dealing with the fundamental and pervading issue of the holocaust. Their immigrant battles led them to the plight of Ernst Zundel in Canada, being prosecuted for having reprinted *Did 6 Million Really Die*! Thus Jim and Joe’s efforts and cable shows also turned toward the issue of the holocaust. That’s when their troubles accelerated. In 2002 – 2003 they began producing numerous (1000s of videos) dealing with many issues and 100s of videos about the holocaust. Consequently, YouTube videos (700) under the name of Jim Rizoli were banned. His name was banned on Facebook. In 2010, their cable shows were suspended. They returned and then were permanently removed in 2014. We are back to provide a venue of/freedom of, telling the story for tried-and-true revisionists and Germans throughout North America, Europe and Australia.
Miss Baker recalls: “As soon as I left the call, I found the offending email in my inbox from the “Habitat for the Arts” in which they told me that because of my “publicly proclaimed non-inclusive beliefs”, they declined my request for a busking license. So my spidy senses from the encounter the day before had been correct. Irony of ironies, not only because I was at the forefront of getting busking to be legal in Jasper, but also because I have been playing my violin in this town for decades, donating my time and music to countless fundraisers, community functions, old-age home, hospital, you name it, I have donated my music to them. Now that I speak in a way that they deem politically incorrect, I cannot go busking, just when it is finally permitted! It is also important to note that I have NEVER used my “violin stage” as a “soap box” to pontificate about political issues. Never. Sometimes I think I should have, but I didn’t.
Parks Canada has been hosting a little music/culture event twice a week open to everybody, tourist and local alike, right downtown in the old firehall space. A close friend of mine, Marie-Helene is the host. She invited me to participate and so I have been doing that. I was really happy to do it, just to make a point that I am still playing and volunteering, showing my face in public, and of course all the tourists love it. Already last week Marie-Helene told me that Parks had a complaint about me being there and the complainant declared that they should not let me participate. Marie-Helene told me that she had firmly insisted with her boss that she was taking 100% responsibility for me being there, and her boss agreed, they could not stop me from being there.
Well, today I got the call from the boss, and she told me that a certain person (who remains anonymous) was threatening a protest at the event if I was there, so the boss told me that now it is all about the program, they don’t want to have a spoiled program. I agreed not to attend this week, but I made no promises for future events. I said I needed to think. Again, this is small town, and the stress right now is big.”
Thank you very much for showing me yesterday exactly where you stand on the issue of my busking permit. Before having finally seen you face-to-face for the first time this summer, I had given you the benefit of the doubt. I believed that surely someone else is whispering in your ear, giving you direction. I believed that, because I did not recognize the Dave Baker that I have known since many years, in the curt email which you sent on 23rd July 2016, quoted here:
“We have considered your application for a busking permit in Jasper. In light of your recently publicly proclaimed non-inclusive beliefs we have decided to decline a permit to you at this time….Please see the attached Values and Principles statement.”
The hostility with which you treated me yesterday, at the “soft opening” of the new library-and-arts facility, gave me quite a clear picture. It became much more obvious to me that it must indeed be you who has made the decision to arbitrarily deny me a busking permit. Your attitude was belligerent and quite frankly, cowardly.
“You – already – have – the – only – answer – that – you – will – get.”
You and I have been generous with each other and with the community in the countless endeavours that we have participated in and shared over the years. Is that all forgotten? It seems you have left your humanity behind.
You have designated yourself judge, jury, prosecutor, and enforcer all at once, on a spurious assumption that I am guilty of a crime, when in fact I am acting in good conscience to rectify past wrongs. My actions are based on my new understanding that the Hollywood version of history we have been taught is indeed full of factual errors.
You made it perfectly clear that answers are not forthcoming to my two questions which I asked in my email of August 1st quoted here:
“There has been a stunning silence from you since the cursory email you sent me on July 23rd, 2016 … I am wondering who you are accountable to, and who the “we” refers to in your (original) message to me. These are two very important questions and I expect that you will be forthcoming with an answer to these…. Monika”
I asked those questions again yesterday, peacefully and in person, and you repeatedly told me “I will not discuss this here, I will not discuss this now. This is a sacred place.” So I asked when and where? When would the answers be coming? Could we set up a meeting please? You then told me point blank “You – already – have – the – only – answer – that – you – will – get.”
I see… final judgement has been made, and the proverbial jail key has been tossed out.
My first question was about accountability. I received a partial answer from the cover of this week’s Fitzhugh newspaper. The caption under the front-page picture of happy buskers says “Music in the Streets… thanks to a new pilot-project between the municipality and Habitat for the Arts.” For that reason I am sending this to all the town councillors and mayor, as they have a role to play in this. Are they also playing the role of thought police?
The Habitat “Values and Principles” statement is very good. The second paragraph follows (emphases mine), to show the absurdity of your accusation of “non-inclusive beliefs” against me. I contend it is you who is being non-inclusive.
“We believe that learning never stops
We know it enhances social inclusion, active citizenship and personal development.
We embrace new challenges and ideas.
We welcome new methods and change.
We help each other grow through knowledge exchange and support.”
Dave Baker, since you do not want to talk with me, then you simply become part of the wider story. My ‘bcc’ list is growing ever larger, as more and more people from around the world are taking an interest in this story. It is beginning to look like this pretty little town in a National Park and a World Heritage Site is becoming a leader in the totalitarian anti-free-speech direction that Canada is taking.
THE CANADIAN RED ENSIGN
TUESDAY, JULY 26, 2016
What is your true Faith? & The Monika Schaefer Story
If so, please permit me to ask you the following two questions.
If someone were to deny the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, to say that He did not rise bodily from the grave, would you want that person to be punished by the state with a fine or a prison sentence or to be driven from career and community and turned into a pariah?
The second question is the same as the first except that instead of denying the Resurrection of Jesus Christ the person in question denies that the Holocaust took place, or questions the veracity of certain elements of the Holocaust narrative, such as the death count of six million.
If your answer to the first question is yes then I would suggest you need to think through your faith. If you are a Christian then you yourself believe that Jesus Christ rose from the dead for you cannot be a Christian without believing this. If you believe that Jesus Christ rose from the dead then you believe that this was an actual event. The truth of that event does not depend upon your faith or that of anyone else and therefore cannot be harmed by anyone’s denial. Nor should another’s denial be able to harm your own faith in the Resurrection if you recognize that your faith relies upon the truth of what you believe, rather than the other way around, and are well-familiar with the evidence for that truth. The denier, therefore, can only harm himself by his denial, and so the appropriate response on your part, as a Christian, is to testify to your own faith in the Living Christ and to pray that the eyes of the denier would be opened that he might see the light of the Gospel, be converted, and believe.
If a yes answer to the first question suggests that the believer is insecure in his own faith, a yes answer to the second question, especially when joined with a no answer to the first, indicates a far more serious problem. It indicates that the Holocaust is of greater importance to you than the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, that the Holocaust is now in the space which the Gospel ought to occupy in the heart of the Christian believer.
These are all things that Canadian Christians ought to keep in mind in hearing or reading the recent news story about one Monika Schaefer and contemplating what they ought to think about the whole affair.
Schaefer, the Canadian born daughter of German immigrants who were of the generation that saw the Third Reich, is a violin instructor in Jasper, Alberta who has run, unsuccessfully, as the Green Party candidate in the federal constituency of Yellowhead on several occasions. In June she posted a video on Youtube, in which she played the violin and apologized to her parents for believing their generation to be guilty of perpetrating the Holocaust which she has come to believe to be “the biggest and most pernicious persistent lie in all of history.”
As you have probably guessed, certain people are rather upset about this. The head of B’nai Brith, an organization which, if I had as little class as they have I would describe with a considerably greater degree of accuracy than they have ever seen fit to exercise, as a Christophobic hate group, demanded that the Green Party “must denounce Schaefer and distance itself from all Holocaust denying groups and individuals.” Of course the party did just that, declaring that “The Green Party of Canada condemns in the strongest possible terms comments by Monika Schaefer, a former candidate, regarding her views on the Holocaust” and that at the next meeting of their Federal Council they will hear a motion to revoke her membership. Elizabeth May, the party’s leader, declared her condemnation of Schaefer’s “terribly misguided and untrue statements,” saying that Schaefer “does not represent the values of the Green Party nor of our membership.”
The matter of whom the fringe, leftist, eco-crackpot Green Party kicks out of their movement is of no concern to me in and of itself, although I find B’nai Brith’s bullying political parties into kicking out people they do not approve of for reasons that have nothing to do with the party’s policies and platform quite irritating. Schaefer faces more than just being kicked out of her political party, however. Thanks to Ken Kuzminski, the president of the Jasper legion who, according to the CBC was at one time a friend of Schaefer’s, a charge has been filed against her with both the Alberta and the Canadian Human Rights Commissions. That yet another person may find herself the victim of the injustice of being punished for expressing forbidden thoughts at the hands of these Stalinist inquisitions is something which concerns and ought to outrage all Canadians.
The Canadian and provincial Human Rights Commissions are fundamentally un-Canadian institutions if by Canada we mean the Dominion of Canada that fought against Adolf Hitler and the Third Reich alongside the United Kingdom and the other countries in the great British family of nations between 1939 and 1945. The Dominion of Canada was established in 1867 by the Fathers of Confederation on the Loyalist foundation of preserving in the new country they were building, our rich British heritage including our parliamentary monarchy form of government, our Christian religion, our English Common Law, and the basic freedoms and legal rights that developed in the course of over a thousand years of history that included such highlights as the constitution of Alfred the Great of Wessex and the Magna Carta Libertatum. These Human Rights Commissions and Tribunals, which investigate and pass judgement upon the expressed thoughts of Canadians to determine whether they have committed what in the Newspeak of George Orwell’s 1984 was called “crimethink,” are foreign to that heritage and tradition, being much more at home in totalitarian ideological states like the Soviet Union, Red China, and North Korea.
It was the ideology that drove these states – the ideology of Marxist-Leninism, more commonly known as Communism – to which the Liberal Prime Ministers who governed Canada from 1963 to 1984 subscribed, secretly in the case of Lester Pearson, more openly in the case of Pierre Trudeau who was responsible for the Canadian Human Rights Act which established these Soviet-style tribunals. This ideology was an enemy of National Socialism, the ideology behind the Third Reich, but the enmity was that of bitter rivalry between virtually identical twin siblings. The only significant difference between the two was that National Socialism, being racist and nationalist, rejected the liberal universalism, internationalism, and cosmopolitanism of Communism. Otherwise they were revolutionary ideologies that attracted young thugs, hated the old, traditional, order, and established virtually identical party-ruled, police states that governed by fear and required everyone to at least give lip service to the tenets of their ideology.
The British family of nations, including the Dominion of Canada, was forced to make a temporary alliance with the Soviet Union in the war against the Third Reich, but the wisest of our leaders, such as Sir Winston Churchill, recognized that the ideology of the USSR was just as bad and dangerous as that of Nazi Germany and it would serve us well in this day to remember that the two ideologies were twins. Those who think that ideas like those of Monika Schaefer ought to be punished by law maintain that they hold this position to prevent a resurgence of National Socialism. The Nizkor website, on its home page, asks the question “Given the evidence…why do people deny the Holocaust?” which it answers with a quotation from some American neo-Nazi group “The real purpose of holocaust revisionism is to make National Socialism an acceptable political alternative again.”
This, however, is clearly nonsense. The first holocaust revisionist was Paul Rassinier, a French Communist and pacifist, who joined the anti-Nazi resistance and was himself imprisoned in Buchenwald and Dora. The American history professor, Harry Elmer Barnes, who had Rassinier’s books published in English, was an American classical liberal. Calvinist theologian Rousas J. Rushdooney, after reading Rassinier and Barnes, pointed to the claims of the standard Holocaust account which they disputed as an example of bearing false witness against one’s neighbour in his commentary on the Ten Commandments in his Institutes of Biblical Law. David Cole, who became a Holocaust revisionist in his youth, going to the site of Auschwitz to investigate after the fall of Communism in Poland, is a fairly mainstream American conservative and certainly no Nazi-sympathizer. None of these men had or have an interest in making National Socialism “an acceptable political alternative again.” Most holocaust revisionists, according to journalist John Sack, in an Esquire article from 2001 in which he described his encounters with David Irving, Ernst Zundel, and other revisionists at a meeting of the Institute for Historical Review, were simply ordinary people of German descent who did not want to think ill of their ancestors.
It would be more truthful to say that it is the influence of Communism, National Socialism’s rival sibling, that lies behind the suppression of Holocaust revisionism. Due to the similarity between the ideologies, it is therefore also true to say that those who want to see people like Monika Schaefer silenced, dragged before Human Rights tribunals, and punished for their views, are closer to the spirit of Adolf Hitler than those they seek to persecute. It has been pointed out that the adherents of these totalitarian ideologies often had no problem switching from the one to the other and it is interesting to note that when the Dominion of Canada was fighting Hitler at the side of Great Britain, Pierre Elliot Trudeau, the author of the Canadian Human Rights Act who throughout his political career praised Communist tyrants like Mao and Castro, was riding around on his motorcycle, denouncing the war effort, with a German helmut on his head and a big swastika on his back.
Fellow Canadians, if any of the spirit of the old Dominion still lives on in you, I urge you not to remain silent while another Canadian is persecuted for expressing an unpopular point of view. It is those who wish to silence and punish Monika Schaefer, not Schaefer herself, who represent all of the things our country went to war to fight in 1939.
As for the Holocaust – make up your own minds about it. Read both sides – conventional history books, such as Raul Hilberg’s The Destruction of The European Jews – and those by the revisionists. David Cole, for example, has an interesting summary of his present views on the matter in the last chapter of his memoir Republican Party Animal. If you find the conventional history more convincing, believe it. If you find the revisionists have better arguments, believe them. If you cannot make up your mind, don’t be afraid to admit it and say that you just don’t know. Any of these options is fine. Just don’t let bullies like B’nai Brith tell you what to think.
Finally, Canadian Christians, when you see Holocaust revisionists being persecuted for their views, recognize this for the injustice that it is. This, and not the unevenness of the distribution of wealth, is what real injustice looks like. Do not be fooled by the wolves in sheep’s clothing, who preach social justice, while licking the jackboots of the ideology responsible for these injustices, an ideology that has been dedicated to the destruction of our faith since the moment its founder penned his foul Manifesto in 1848. If you do not want people thrown in jail or otherwise persecuted for denying the Resurrection – and you should not want that – then you ought to be opposed to their being persecuted for denying the Holocaust. Otherwise, you testify that the Holocaust is more important to you than the Resurrection, raising the question of where your faith truly lies.
Monika Schaefer Defends Herself Against Jasper Fitzhugh Smear Article
On June 17, Monika Schaefer, a well-known Jasper resident and former Green Party candidate, appeared in a video on Youtube denying the Holocaust. The video was subsequently posted on her Facebook page.
“This is the most persistent and pernicious lie in all of history,” said Schaefer, about the Holocaust.
In the video she described the Holocaust as the “the six-million lie” in reference to the six million Jews who lost their lives at the hands of the Nazis during the Second World War.
The six-minute video quickly went viral and garnered more than 30,000 views at the time of publishing.
At the end of the video Schaefer invited viewers to read several books published by Holocaust deniers, including Ernst Zündel, who lived in Canada for four decades before being deported to his native Germany where he was imprisoned for five years for denying the Holocaust.
Ken Kuzminski, president of the Jasper Royal Canadian Legion, described the video as hate speech.
“Monika has a right to say whatever she wants to say, but once she’s published it I feel that’s moved on to hate speech,” said Kuzminski.
“She can stand up and say whatever she wants, but she has to accept the consequences of doing that.”
He said he has written a formal complaint to the Alberta Human Rights Commission, contacted the local RCMP detachment and the German embassy.
“By her denying that this ever happened it perpetuates hatred, racism and discrimination,” said Kuzminski, adding he’s heard from several young people in town that they no longer feel safe.
“This is not the community we are and what we believe in.”
The Alberta Human Rights Commission neither confirmed nor denied it had received a formal complaint.
“All of the information that comes into the human rights commission with regards to complaints is confidential,” said Susan Coombes, with the Alberta Human Rights Commission.
With that said, she said any complaint involving hate would fall under section three of the Alberta Human Rights Act.
“It’s really difficult to prove,” said Coombes, about whether someone is in violation of the act. “What you have to do is say that there was intent to incite hate.”
The Jasper RCMP confirmed it was aware of the video, but said no formal investigation has been launched.
“At this time what I can say is that I’m aware the video exists and it was brought to my attention,” said RCMP Sgt. Rick Bidaisee. “Discussions are ongoing.”
Schaefer said she stood by her comments in the video during a telephone interview July 11.
“Right now the issue for me is freedom of speech,” said Schaefer. “Last I checked I thought we had freedom of speech in Canada and suddenly I’m the criminal.”
She confirmed she shot the video in Germany, where it is illegal to deny the Holocaust.
“If we don’t have the right to question a historical event then we don’t have freedom of speech,” said Schaefer.
Schaefer was slated to perform during Canada Day, but was pulled from the schedule after the Canada Day committee learned a group of residents were going to protest her performance.
“We had really reliable information that there was going to be a protest and in the interests of public safety and her safety for that matter, we decided it would just be in everybody’s best interests if she stood down for this year,” said Pattie Pavlov, general manager for the Jasper Park Chamber of Commerce.
Kuzminski confirmed she is also banned from the legion.
The Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) quickly condemned the video after learning of its existence.
“As a Holocaust denier, Ms. Schaefer, who appears in this absurd video, has earned her place on the very margins of society,” wrote Martin Sampson, director of communications for CIJA.
“Her comments would be laughable but for the intense pain they cause the survivor community and their descendants. Denying the Holocaust exposes her as an anti-Semitic ignoramus.”
“The truth is the Holocaust was industrialized, state-sponsored murder committed by the Nazis against the Jewish people. It is the most well documented genocide—by both perpetrator and victim—in history. To deny this fact is to spit in the face of truth.”
News that a formal complaint was lodged with the Alberta Human Rights Commission, comes after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau visited the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp, on July 10 in Poland, where one million people, mostly Jews, were killed in the Second World War.
by Diane King (1999)THE FOURTH OF JULY is a sentimental time which builds strength in the national soul. This is reinforced by the memorials – the Vietnam Memorial, though long overdue is of great comfort to the bereaved (were you in Vietnam?) I have a second cousin whose name is on that wall. And eventually there will be a D-Day Memorial (though I am somewhat
ambivalent about this prospect). And the U.S. isn’t the only nation which enjoys the reaffirmation of their National Spirit by celebrating their nation’s holidays, remembering events of the past with festivities, parades, signs, banners, flags, music, memorials, and portraits. Others such as Canada whose citizenry just celebrated Dominion Day this weekend, enjoyed their holiday. But there is one nation which is prohibited from enjoying what every other nation enjoys. In fact, it is against the law for them to do so should they choose to celebrate it in the same fashion that we all enjoy and take for granted.
GERMANY has no such national holidays marking historic events. There is no Chancellor’s Day to remember the birthdays of former Chancellors. Or a day for remembering the Kaiser or any other of the royalty. There are no parades, no flags or banners. Men in military uniforms do not march before an adoring and appreciative citizenry which line the streets. There is no Veteran’s Day or Memorial Day or memorials to remember those who fought on behalf of the Fatherland. There is no Veteran’s Wall to touch the names of those who have fallen, no D-Day Memorial of those defending the shores of the Fatherland. And except for the National Anthem there are no songs reminiscent – no reminder of the years Germany ruled Europe. Well, that’s understandable you say, they don’t deserve it (?) When Germans did such things, they nearly conquered Europe.
And that’s supposed to be a bad thing. But if that’s the criteria for denying a people their national identity, then the Russians should not be allowed to express their communist sentiments or memories on May l with the huge banners of Lenin and Stalin and the Communist Flag (and that awful anthem that I can’t get out of my head) as they march in mass down various Russian streets in remembrance and celebration of the most vicious and barbaric system known to the history of man (so far). Nor should Red China be allowed to celebrate their tyranny and oppressive regime nor even those who might be considered renegade nations … or used to be.
Why the inequity? Why the oppression against one peoples and preference for another? (The victors write the history books. They also determine international agendas). You have probably observed how the enemies of free speech andthought attempt to associate – at every opportunity – the free thinkers and usually “right” with the dreaded “Nazis”. That’s supposed to be insulting and degrading, to demonize the motives and actions of conservative people who oppose those enemies in and out of political office. WELL, I OPPOSE THEM! They are vicious, malicious, and dangerous. And had theframers of the constitution been forced to live under them, you’d have heard a strong call to abolish the government that is run by them – to scrap it and start over, as is provided by the Constitution.
One of the tactics of the enemies of free speech and expression is to cover, obscure, attempt to destroy, color and otherwise misrepresent the truth. And one of these ways, first of all, though ranging from subtle to blatant attacks, is the attack on Germans with a clear anti-German bias in the media, the entertainment industry, and the literary world. For you see, because of German history, any Nazi-bashing is also German-bashing, so I reject both. I’ve boycotted the History Channel as the yellow journalism it is because of its ardent anti-Nazi (and consequently anti-German) position. Nearly every reference to Germans in the Media is with disrespect or hostility. It would be one thing if this posturing were accurate, but they are sorely lacking in the simple truths discovered since WWII. The Germans are still suffering from it as are we. No one wins in National character assassinations, especially on this scale.
So, what is at the foundation of this national mudslinging? This hostility? What is the one thing of which the Nazis areaccused and eternally found guilty? What is the one word that describes it all: THE HOLOCAUST: The alleged state-ordered, planned and executed extermination of European Jewry to the tune of 6 million – the most barbaric act in all humanity – that is the indictment. And maybe it would have been … IF IT WERE TRUE!
THE SHRINE TO GERMAN-BASHING illustrates this very point with the Jewish Holocaust as the foundation composed of 8 “bricks” (not in any order of significance) This information was gleaned from the Zundelsite, the Institute for Historical
Review, CODOH, the work of Germar Rudolf and many others who have availed much crucial information and truth in many forms to include the incredible work: DID SIX MILLION REALLY DIE? By Richard Harwood. These eight components of the foundation of the shrine are:
l. The number of 6 Million.
2. Mass murders/cremation
3. Death Camps-Auschwitz
4. The Hitler Order
5. Warsaw Ghetto
6. Wannsee Conference
7. Diary of Anne Frank
To study the “shrine” you have to study each of the integral parts – dare to go where few have thought to go? Ask the
questions, read the evidence. You too may never be the same. For me, it was the next step, the final conclusion to my
search and research and studies. Some questions remain unanswered, of course. If not “beyond all shadow of a doubt”
then “beyond a reasonable doubt” until we learn more and what is available out there. The consequences of finding these
discoveries … You will never be the same! But you will know, without apology, why you bristle at anti-German comments, and why you would and should love Germany, the people, and their history even more. And then you will KNOW without a shadow of a doubt what you had suspected all along about Germany and its history: A heritage of which to be proud.
Remember that not all nations have the privilege of enjoying their national heritage. That there is one nation for which it is illegal to do so and in fact suffer a national character crisis: GERMANY!
The future of any nation is in the nurturing and training of its children. German children are unclear and confused about
their history and their identity as Germans. Of course they are confused. They are born into a world universally hostile
towards their Germanness and their heritage.
In the LIFE WORLD LIBRARY book on GERMANY (1965), one statement was made: “Nazis personify the known power of evil ….” This is the prevailing international opinion. In another place, the author attempts to identify the cause of emotional unrest in Germany, especially among the young. He says: “The undercurrent of uneasiness in Germany … (in the mid 1960’s and still in the 1990’s) can be traced largely to the fact that while a great many Germans would like to forget the past, most are unable to do so. To them, the past means the uncertainty, the fear, the shame of the Nazi era. And that uncertainty, fear, and shame still intrude relentlessly into their comfortable presence …. difficulty of escaping the past.”
In another place, they say concerning Eichmann’s capture that no one spoke on his behalf in Western Germany (no doubt since sympathies with the “Nazis” was punished harshly — it is understandable in war-destroyed Germany). But the author
states that the trial and execution of Eichmann was helpful for the Germans:
“Indeed, (they) accelerated a national soul-searching and did much to bring home to the Germans the full horror of what the
Nazi’s had done.” (Really, that’s what they want us to believe because that’s what they’ve told us despite the contrary.)
They state that it is difficult for the German to evaluate this time period and all that was involved because it is still being thrown up in his face even though this matter should be settled.
“Even the great majority of Germans who agree that the holocaust (a major part of the reason for their problems) must never be forgotten must wonder whether they’ll be required to examine it from a fresh historical perspective with every publishing season (when books like HITLER’S WILLING EXECUTIONERS – about the German people – come out) … and how many times (do) Americans or their puppet masters plan to revisit the holocaust?”
These sentiments and all of these difficulties forced upon the Germans for time immemorial “… approach a kind of
reverse racism.” (Kind of!?)
“And to take it a step further since the end of WWII, it’s been open season on National Socialists specifically (or anyone who is “unfortunately” decried or labeled as “NAZIS”) and Germans in general. Anyone, no matter how disreputable, can and are encouraged to say whatever he wants to whomever whenever about the National Socialists of old, and byassociation, the Germans. This is malicious RACISM which often takes its form in hate crimes – institutional and otherwise – against Germans.
Now, the elderly and middle-aged Germans still suffer today from a guilt complex. They further state that “there is probably as much unhappiness of mind among millions of Germans who failed to oppose Hitler as among the millions who actively supported him: (because they couldn’t do anything to stop him).” It seems that this is what they are told and the guilt is how they are supposed to feel. It perpetuates the national guilt.
So, with all of these attacks from all sides, directed toward the German people, it is no wonder that the children along
with their parents are in a quandary about who they are. The editors/authors of LIFE’S GERMANY stated:
“Grave difficulties exist for German parents who are called on to answer their children’s questions about the country’s
past.” Parents avoid it. “Young Germans declare, “It’s no good asking Father about what happened under the Nazis. He
just says the subject is too complicated to discuss.”
The parents have lost faith and trust with their kids because the kids believe that (the parents) didn’t stop what they saw
happen to the Jews and others. (What did they actually see? The deportations? There is a great leap of logic without
evidence to move from the deportations to deportations for the purpose of extermination. But then that’s what they and
we have been told.)
School teachers suffer the same problems. “Better history books are being written today,” about the true perspective on
the holocaust. Now would be the time to inject some balance in this fact-finding and reporting and teaching mission about
the Third Reich. It is fairly certain how the Third Reich will be depicted. And in the attempt to re-educate and “help”
by giving the internationally accepted anti-Nazi, anti-German view, the authors and editors of these learning materials
will only succeed in confusing these children further.
But maybe it is too late. Maybe the new generations since the war have no interest in their German roots. Or maybe, again,
that’s what they have been told concerning how they should feel and how they should think. Again in LIFE’S GERMANY, “(The youth) are more internationally minded.” Perhaps they have already been programmed to think from a world view rather than as Germans. And yet there is a generation coming up that just might not accept this very old and badly preserved diet of hostility and hatred against their nation and against themselves.
Tragically, the children are affected by their history, their lack of understanding from not being taught, and they are
robbed of their perspective, even over two decades later. Again from LIFE’S GERMANY, (of the youth):
“There seems to be a lack of intellectual sparkle about them, a serious-mindedness conditioned by steady concentration on
material objectives. This is at least partly due to uncertainties of mind, which are due in turn to lack of candor on the part of the parents and to an uneasy awareness of the shadows of the past. One thing is certain about young people in West Germany – the vast majority of them reject the traditional ideas about German grandeur and glory, and about an overbearing German role in Europe, and they are skeptical about any “mission” other than the modest one of being a loyal partner to the western democracies.”
In essence, they are so concerned about saving their lives, what they have, that they are actually losing their lives. And this doesn’t sound too promising. Evidently, lack of knowledge and “correct” education have formed a vacuum. So the only opinion they hear, the only teaching they receive is from the international Weltanschauung which is the one which includes and even requires the typical German (Nazi) bashing curriculum. Whether or not this damage can be undone remains to be seen.
The Army evokes similar concern. Whereas before, the Wehrmacht historically represented and depicted the most powerful army in the world, now its successor, the Bundeswehr has resigned itself to a subservient position.
According to NEWSWEEK, July 25, 1994, “The Bundeswehr is back in business.” It sounds good, energetic, national, promising, a hint of its grandeur, strength, and discipline of times past. But that is not what this new army portends. The former allies cringe at the sight of a revived German army in spite of constant reassurances that the Bundeswehr has changed and is not the army it was in the past. And the powers that be need not be concerned with the new Germany Army; the new German Army has a different agenda, a different look. In the same article, “Now the military faces the challenge of training “good soldiers” instead of blind followers …. Germany has reinvented the concept of the military …. They have chafed under the country’s inability to play a wider international role.”
They want to participate on the international playing field. But can the German military compete or even participate and
should they? German soldiers aren’t required necessarily to obey orders. “Student officers aren’t required to train physically at all – or even wear their uniforms to class.”
Instead of classes entitled: Military Strategy or Great Battles in History or Great Field Marshals in German Military History being the most popular classroom topics, “Peace Ethics” rises to the top of the list of popular classes. That is shameful! Perhaps the current German Military is more interested in participating in international affairs than being militarily fit to do so. But perhaps playing on the international field doesn’t require the traditional discipline and skills of which the Germans of the past have been particularly skilled and famous.
Others have come to this same conclusion. Chile’s General Augusto Pinochet “irked Bonn by declaring the Bundeswehr an
army of ‘drug addicts, long-hairs, gays, and union members.'” He seems to suggest that the new German army is far from the ideal military tradition of the crack Prussian tradition of the past and is hardly prepared for the hardships of war.
Additionally, former East Germans whose army copied the Wehrmacht “right down to the goose step,” called the new
Bundeswehr a “second-class army.” Tough stuff!
And a final note on the new Army and how the new officers consider its function. They “look forward confidently to the
day when they can further demonstrate their mettle — by helping the UN defend democracy.” This is an ominous cloud on
the horizon of our future. That the German military rather than having an identity of its own will be assimilated into
the UN/NATO peace-keeping forces for their purposes and oppressive use.
Why??? – Why the confusion for the parents and the children of the Reich? Why is their history maligned? Their education
robbed of its power to teach and inspire from correct history, the animosity toward Germans in general, and their history in particular, and why is the German Army groveling and forfeiting their national honor and their very soul to serve at the despotic UN/NATO’s feet, stained with the blood of their victims. Is it worth this price in order to play on the international playing field? This is all very clear when one understands the foundation and structure of the SHRINE erected to GERMAN BASHING.
So, on the 4th of July, when we see the “rocket’s red glare” and “bombs bursting in air” the symbolism of our nation’s
struggle for nationhood in the past, the parades, the red, white and blue, the flag with the stars and stripes, the soul-
stirring music, we should remember that there is one nation that cannot enjoy such celebrations and who has been beaten
down and robbed of their national soul. Is not the American spirit to champion the cause of those oppressed? Can we not
export a freedom-loving spirit instead of our own brand of terrorism to the nations of the world? Should there not be a
call to arms, in a way, to fight the forces against free thought and expression so rampant now? Should we not renew ourown “declaration of independence”against such blatant hostility? For then we will have the right to have “the land of the free” because we are the “home of the brave.”