Search
Free Speech Monika
~ Exercising My Human Right to Speak Freely!
Please Share
A Child Asks: Why Did You Go to Jail?
- 16 January 2024
- by Monika Schaefer
About a half a year ago, I was invited to write an article about my story for a popular magazine in the southern interior of British Columbia Canada. The magazine has a respectable print circulation, and it shall remain unnamed here as it is not my intent to embarrass anyone. The article was to be about my personal persecution story which of course would reveal some forbidden truths. The publisher of this magazine is a man who understands the truth about history, and he requested this story with the genuine desire to publish something which might help others to open their eyes about the controversial topic which got me into hot water. Unfortunately, he must have lost the nerve to publish my article. Considerable time and effort was put into writing this piece which was aimed at an ordinary audience, perhaps for folks who may not have looked into this hot topic yet, outside of the Hollywood version we have all learnt.
Thus, I offer the article here now. Please comment and/or share, as you see fit.
*************************
When I was a child in junior high school, I did not understand the significance of our social studies teacher’s words, “the victors write the history books.” I wondered, what difference does it make who writes the history books? Don’t they just write about what happened? I could not even conceive of the possibility of anyone writing down anything but the facts. The concept of lies being printed in books simply did not exist in my young mind.
A little later, as a young adult I read some novels about political prisoners, but those stories only happened in a far-away and distant land, where an evil dictator ruled over the people with an iron fist. Political prisoners – people imprisoned merely for the things they said and for their dissenting views – those only existed very far away, never in our land – or so I believed. Nothing like that could ever happen in our country, because we had freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and we also had democracy. We were told that democracy was the very best system ever, and anything else was just uncivilized. The mantra “government by the people, of the people and for the people” was drummed into us.
Now imagine that in our perfect democracies in so many of our modern western countries, there exist laws which tell us that we are not allowed to be critical of a certain group of people, and if we merely point to facts about what that group of people is doing and if we name that group of people, we are called haters and there is a law against being a “hater”. Imagine also that there are laws which legislate our history into place. Whoa! Stop the train! History determined by lawmakers? Isn’t history a subject for historians to figure out? I thought laws are supposed to be about basic things like thou shalt not steal or murder.
The other day some friends gathered in my back yard on a sunny afternoon for a picnic. One of the children, around 11 years old, held up a book and asked me if he was allowed to read it. The book was authored by yours truly, myself, and I had just given a copy to another guest, and so there it was, on the table where the child spotted it. I said, yes of course. He promptly sat down and read the first few pages. Maybe ten minutes later, the child looked up at me with big eyes and asked in a clear voice, without judgement only inquisitiveness, “why did you go to jail?”
It was a simple question from a curious child, and I needed to give him a straightforward and matter-of-fact answer to his perfectly natural question. There was silence while all eyes turned to me in anticipation.
“Law makers have made laws to tell us what we must believe about history. These laws forbid us questioning the history that has been taught to us. We have been told that certain events happened a certain way, and laws have been made which tell us that we must not disagree with that version of events. After I looked into these stories which were taught to us and which I had believed all my life, I came to the conclusion that it all happened differently than what they told us. Then I made a video and talked out loud about it, which means I broke their laws. Then they put me in jail.”
The child seemed satisfied with my explanation, he put the book back on the table and went off to play with the other children. That conversation was over, and everyone carried on where they had left off.
What is this story which is so set in stone, so untouchable, so sacrosanct, that we must not investigate, we must not question, and we must believe? What is the one word which elicits gasps of horror and incredulity when we dare say we do not believe it? You probably have guessed it by now: “The Holocaust”.
Indeed, many western countries have laws which criminalize anyone who dares to question and dispute the narrative about 6 million Jews being murdered in gas chambers in “Nazi Germany” during the second World War.
A bit of background is in order, to my own awakening to what is really going on in the world. In 2011, I began to figure out the false flag nature of the big event we call nine-eleven. My brother Alfred Schaefer sent some emails to family members about it and I responded with many questions and “how do you know this and how do you know that?” I had already heard about the “9/11 Truth Movement” but had not yet really delved into it, so when Alfred started talking about it, I was hungry for information. He sent a few links to articles and videos, and I launched myself onto this journey of learning, searching, reading, questioning, listening, until I was completely satisfied about the correctness of my conclusions that the government, media, and other institutions were lying to us about what happened that fateful day of September 11, 2001. At first I felt nauseous about it, as it was turning my world upside-down, but then I came through the tunnel into the light on the other side and felt an urgency to tell other people what I had learnt. I considered myself a peace activist, and I thought that if we could just explain this deception about what happened then everyone else would understand it too, and we could stop the wars abroad and stop the development of a police state at home.
It surprised me when I experienced some resistance to my leafletting and other educational efforts. Why was there this pushback?
Little did I know that some time later, the pushback would take on whole new dimensions as I dove down the proverbial rabbit hole and discovered that lying was not invented in 2001 and learned that they really lied to us about WW2. By now almost everyone knows that 9/11 was a false flag military operation and so when you talk about it, hardly anyone bats an eyelid. But the holocaust? That is entirely on another level.
They say it is the most documented event in history. What does that actually mean? Where is the evidence? Just because they say it over and over again that it is the most proven event ever, does not make it so. In fact, when it comes to proving it in court, they cannot and they do not present evidence to prove it. Their solution? They declare that if something is common knowledge or is self-evident, then evidence is not required. The judicial subterfuge began with the Nuremberg trials right after WW2. Articles 19 and 21 of those trials stipulated that the tribunal shall not be bound by technical rules of evidence and that something that is common knowledge or self-evident does not need evidence to prove it.
Judicial notice has been used in courts ever since then, with very few exceptions. The holocaust trials in Toronto in the 1980’s when Ernst Zündel was being tried under the “Spreading False News” law, was one such exception. Zündel’s attorney Douglas Christie was successful in bringing much evidence into the court, evidence and testimonies which shredded the official story. At the same time the key witness for the Crown, Raul Hilberg, was unable to produce a single piece of forensic evidence that a gas chamber existed.
In holocaust court cases in Germany, they simply forbid evidence. This I experienced firsthand during the Schaefer sibling trial in 2018.
What was I on trial for? A video. In 2016 while visiting my brother Alfred in Germany (he reverse migrated in the 1980’s back to the country from where our parents had come in the 1950’s), we made a short video entitled “Sorry Mom, I was wrong about the Holocaust”. In this video, I tell the story about how I learnt early in life to hide my German roots while at school, but at home loved the German traditions. Then as a teenager after learning about the terrible things that were done by the “bad Nazis” and by Adolf Hitler, I bitterly reproached my mother for not having done anything to stop those horrors from happening. My mother answered me by saying that they did not know about those things back then. She assured me they never heard about any gas chambers until much later. They knew there were work camps, but they did not know about death camps. Less than 3 minutes into the video I say,
“Now I know why she did not know. It is because these things did not happen.”
After I explain a few more things about those camps, I apologize to the spirit of my parents (they had both passed away years earlier), and express my relief that my parents and grandparents had not been part of a generation that suddenly turned into monsters. I could be proud to be German after all.
In late 2017 I went back to Germany for a little holiday over Christmas and New Years, and on January 3rd, 2018, I was arrested. Later I learned that my cousins had reported Alfred and myself to the police after they saw the video a year and a half earlier. My cousins are kind and good people. They thought they were doing the right thing. But they are very much the product of the “re-education” program à la George Orwell style.
Here is what Sefton Delmer (1904-1979), former British Chief of ‘Black propaganda’ said after the German surrender, in 1945, in a conversation with the German professor of international law, Dr. Friedrich Grimm.
“Atrocity propaganda is how we won the war. And we’re only really beginning with it now! We will continue this atrocity propaganda, we will escalate it until nobody will accept even a good word from the Germans, until all the sympathy they may still have abroad will have been destroyed and they themselves will be so confused that they will no longer know what they are doing. Once that has been achieved, once they begin to run down their own country and their own people, not reluctantly but with eagerness to please the victors, only then will our victory be complete. It will never be final.
“Re-education needs careful tending, like an English lawn. Even one moment of negligence, and the weeds crop up again – those indestructible weeds of historical truth.”
Back to the 2018 trial of the Schaefers in Germany. Evidence was simply forbidden. We were not allowed to present evidence or argument which would support us in explaining how we reached our conclusions, as that was deemed to be a new crime. The chief judge stopped Alfred numerous times during his testimony to warn him that if he was to continue speaking along those lines, then new charges would have to be pressed. Alfred would reply,
“You want to lock me up for 6 million years anyway; I am just speaking the truth, and so I will continue.”
Sure enough, they pressed new charges against Alfred and he was sentenced to an additional year in prison for the things he said and did during the 2018 trial.
Our lawyers submitted applications on numerous occasions for recusal of our judges, on grounds of extreme prejudice and bias. Each time, the higher up panel of judges would over-rule the application, and the inquisition continued. Here are just two examples of the many demonstrations of extreme bias. When Alfred was half way through reading page one of a seventy-plus page defence statement, the chief judge interrupted impatiently and told Alfred to summarize the statement in a few sentences. On another occasion the judge was caught commanding a psychologist to write an exemption letter for a police witness whose testimony was likely to be favourable for us.
On another occasion the judge had all the pens, pencils and paper removed from the people in the public gallery, so that they were unable to take notes during our trial. If you, dear reader, try to acquire a transcript of the Schaefers speech-crime trial of 2018, you will fail. It does not exist. The proceedings were not recorded. The only things which would remain on the record are written statements, but any questions and answers, or speeches which were not read from a prepared script, those would not be recorded. One could be forgiven for thinking this resembled an Inquisition of the Dark Ages rather than a trial in a modern western “democracy”.
The judges seemed uninterested in facts and evidence. But they were very interested in whether or not the act of clicking certain buttons to release videos onto the internet had occurred in Germany or elsewhere. A huge amount of time was spent on cross-examining a technical computer expert who had been tasked with examining the hardware on which the videos were made and what IP addresses were used in their dissemination. Germany has a law, and the judge wanted to determine if we broke their law.
Nothing drives that point home better than the final words of the judge presiding over the Ernst Zündel trial in Germany in 2007. The judge said,
“It matters not whether the holocaust happened or not; what matters is that it is against the law to deny it and you broke the law.”
He then sentenced Zündel to 5 years in prison, the maximum penalty under Paragraph 130 of the German Criminal Code, the same law that Alfred and I were charged under.
If Canadian readers think this kind of thing could never happen here in Canada, think again. Already in the 1980’s, when Ernst Zündel was on trial in Toronto, the culminating statement of the judge during one of Zündel’s hearings was that truth is not a defence.
By the way, even lawyers go to jail in Germany if they do their job too well. In other words, if they present evidence which would explain how the defendant reached his or her conclusions, they are charged under the same law that their client was charged under. Precisely that happened to Sylvia Stolz, one of the lawyers on Ernst Zündel’s defence team during his trial in Germany. She went to prison for over three years for that “crime”.
Perhaps we are all wrong in thinking we need hard evidence to prove something happened or not. Let us look at the erudite statement coming from 34 French historians. This piece of wisdom was published on February 21, 1979, in Le Monde, the paper of record in France.
“It is not necessary to ask how, technically, such a mass murder was possible. It was possible technically since it took place. That is the necessary point of departure for any historical inquiry on this subject. It is our function simply to recall that truth: There is not, there cannot be, any debate about the existence of the gas chambers.”
There cannot be any debate, because those who push the holocaust narrative will lose the debate, and they know it. That is why they must make laws forbidding dissent.
Truth does not fear investigation. Only lies need to be protected by laws.
Just as I was editing and completing this article, an interesting event occurred, very relevant to this story. On September 1st, 2023, the BC Hate Crimes unit of the RCMP arrived on my doorstep. They spent two days driving (one day here and one day back), lots of expenses, just to have a conversation with yours truly, Monika Schaefer. They had received a complaint, anonymous of course, about the Truth and Justice for Germans Society website, (truthandjusticeforgermans.com), that it incites HATE. Anyone can complain if they do not like the contents of a website, and their identity is protected. Then the taxpayers of Canada pay for the witch hunt and inquisition that follows.
Perhaps readers of this article would like to visit the website and search for the “hate”. You may be surprised by the education you receive there.
History is not changeable by writing laws. No amount of hand-wringing or squealing or persecution of dissidents will change the facts about what actually happened or did not happen during WW2. The entire population of Canada or even the World could be jailed over this, but that would still not change the facts about what happened in the past. The truth is the truth is the truth, and ultimately, the truth always wins. I am happy to be on the winning side. And so should we all be.