Monika Schaefer: All right. Good evening. Greetings far and wide. You are listening to the Republic Broadcasting Network. It is Saturday, the 22nd day of March, 2025. And this is episode 36 of The Flipside with Monika. I am your host, Monika Schaefer. Welcome to the show today.

So I would just like to send a shout out to last week’s program. Last week’s show we had a twofer, you could say a doubleheader with Blackbird 9 on his famous Saturday Snack Shack show preceding mine. And we did the two hours together with my brother Alfred. And you can find those shows in the archives. And yeah, we had a good time with that. And I would just like to remind the listener that this is a listener supported network and we just would like it if we could keep this network on the air. So if you can, please do consider supporting the network.

And if you are already a supporter, thank you so very much for supporting the network. And I’ll just give you the numbers. You can go to the website, of course, at RepublicBroadcasting.org, you can find all the information there. Various ways to either send cash or check in the mail. The address is there and here are the numbers that you could call, 512-246-9549, or toll free number 1-800-724-2719. Okay, now I have return. Okay, great, thank you.

So after the bottom of the hour, I will give out the numbers for if you would like to call in and join us in our conversation. I have a return guest today. His name is Jurgen Neumann and he came on in episode 15 and 18. If after you’ve listened to this one and you think, gee, I want to listen to the archives of the previous two shows, you can find them from last fall, episodes 15 and 18.

So his name is Jurgen Neumann and he was, I guess you could say, the right-hand man for Ernst Zundel or Ernst Zindl, if you pronounce it in German, for several decades. And Ernst Zundel [24 April 1939-5 August, 20017] is no longer with us. He died a few years ago, may he rest in peace. But I consider him to be an absolute giant in terms of having been a man who helped us along tremendously in our quest for truth about what actually happened during World War II. And the narrative about World War II, at least for my generation, and I would say for all of us, is probably the most distorted and lied about event in history. Everything was turned on its head and was really backwards.

I mean, the things I grew up with learning in school and through (((Hollywood))) and through the mainstream media is completely upside down and reversed from what actually happened. And Ernst Zundel did much to reveal that to the world.

And of course, for his efforts, he was persecuted, prosecuted, jailed, all those usual things. A great man who had so much to offer to the world. So in our first episode, we talked a little bit about his own awakening. Ernst Zundel, he didn’t know the truth about World War II until he was a grown man. He was born in 1939, so he was a war baby. He’s from Germany. He came to Canada as a young man. I think he was 18 or so.

And so, yeah, in episode one [15], we went through that, talking about his awakening and then some of the trials and tribulations. In our second episode [18] that we had last November, we continued with that. We talked about the Leuchter Report or Fred Leuchter who went to Auschwitz and did some actual investigation of the physical place there, and then his various trials and things that happen. So we really went into quite a lot of detail with that.

So today we would like to expand on some of the, I guess you could say, the epic work that Ernst Zundel did because there was so much that he did through the years.

So, first of all, greeting Jurgen Neumann. Are you there? Frank, did you say that you were able to pull him up?

Okay, so I guess I’ll just carry on until you do get him back on there.

So I’ll just tell you a little story. I pulled up a video from one of Jurgen’s online platforms. Not sure if it was on his Bitchute or Odysee channel. And it just randomly pulled up a video of Ernst Zundel addressing a crowd of people back in, I think it was in the early 1990s, I’m not sure. And I couldn’t find it just now to refresh my memory. But something really struck me, and it was quite amusing. In the first few minutes when he was greeting the large crowd in the room, and it was packed, I don’t know, maybe 50 people or so. he told the audience that a jew that he had been talking to before this talk, and I think he was talking mainly about Adolf Hitler in this talk, and the audience was mostly young people. And Ernst Zundel addressed that point and was so delighted that there were so many young people in the audience, because he says:

“Usually I’m speaking to a lot of gray hairs!”

So there were a lot of young people there. They were very interested to hearing Ernst Zundel talk. And then he told about what the jew had said. He said:

“Oh, you could do that, talk in a telephone booth.”

And Ernst says:

“Well, this is a mighty big telephone booth!”

And everybody, of course, roared with laughter.

Now, some of the young listeners to this show might not even get the reference to the telephone booth because we don’t see too many telephone booths out there in public anymore. [chuckling] But you might know from old movies and such, that was a pretty small thing that was on many street corners back in the day before everybody had a phone in their hand or in their pocket, you see. So yeah. Do you have our guest on the line yet? No! Maybe. Okay, no problem.

[08:17]

So what we’re going to address today is radio, I think it was all by radio, perhaps Jurgen will correct me, it might have been with video as well, but it was called “Another Voice of Freedom” that Ernst Zundel did, these radio shows or these programs. And I think he carried that on for a number of years.

Oh, wonderful! Jurgen, are you there?

Jürgen Neumann: Yes, I am. After going through a jungle of static and all kinds of other stuff, looks like we’re clear and full speed ahead!

Monika Schaefer: We are good to go. So perfect timing. I just gave a little bit of an introduction, talked about our previous shows that we did, and then I told the little story about the phone booth that Ernst Zundel, you know, was told by this fellow that. Yes, so I told that story already. And then I just started talking about the fact that he did many programs on something called A Voice of Freedom. And I wasn’t even sure if that was just radio or if it was with visual as well. I’ll pass it over to you to tell us a little bit about that and maybe how many years he did that for this show called, Another Voice of Freedom.

Jürgen Neumann: Yes, we got into that when we got enough support to be able to get some reasonable consumer video equipment and audio equipment in order to make material that could be broadcast. And we started off with video TV broadcasting. Chose, Another Voice of Freedom as the title, and we started it in June 1993. So we decided to get our outreach out there, better than it was.

And so this is before the Internet was a big thing, and we certainly weren’t conversant with the Internet at all at that time. So therefore, we’re doing the best we can. And this was satellite broadcasting. Down in the US they have companies that will broadcast for you up on satellites. There’s old satellites that are floating around in space that no longer fit the needs of the people who originally put them up there and now they put up new ones. But the old ones are still kind of useful. So they sell these companies time on the satellites that are still useful at a cut rate.

And then we send them our material and then they will broadcast it on a given time. Usually it was on a Sunday evening. So that of course, once we started that first thing we do, Ernst did, was send copies of the programs to the media.

And of course they just, they were very excited about that one. So we got lots of interviews about that and newscasts about that they even showed clips of the videos that we sent them. And so it was quite a job. Eventually we ended up, I think we were broadcasting about 275 programs.

Monika Schaefer: Oh, wow!

Jürgen Neumann: A lot of work over a number of years. And of course our opposition, they got very upset. And within the first six months, [chuckling] I think they went to the broadcaster that we had at the time and they said, this is the way I understand it, right? The broadcasting facility of that company was burned to the ground! So consensus was it was probably because of Ernst. They contacted the broadcasting company and they said:

“Look, we don’t like this here. We want you to, basically to censor him. You shouldn’t be putting that on there. It’s hateful. It’s this, it’s that.”

And their reply was:

“Well, we don’t censor things. This is the United States. We have freedom of speech here. But tell you what, we will make a deal with you. If you like, you can make counter programs against him. And we will play it before his program or after his program or before and after his program. But we’re not going to censor.”

So therefore that’s probably why it had something to do with burning the place to the ground.

After that, anyway, we got another one and that worked out quite well. And then we also started doing radio programs as well at the same time. Our TV video broadcasts were like once a week, but the radio programs were like every day.

Monika Schaefer: Oh, wow!

Jürgen Neumann: So he had two programs. One was on an AM station and one was on an FM station right in the heartland of the U.S. It was quite a large reach.

And yeah, we were pouring out the material. I was the, of course, editor for the video parts of it, stuff. And we had another supporter who did all the audio stuff.

So yeah, we were going concerned for a long time, that’s for sure! I think we had for five or six hundred radio shows, I think. All this is like all half hour stuff, right. Et cetera. So yeah, it was really interesting. They were all wound up about that, needless to say.

Monika Schaefer: Oh, I’m sure they were! [chuckling]

Jürgen Neumann: And at about that time we had a lot of supporters down in the US and they have a thing down there called Public Access TV stations that they are required by law to have to allow local people to make content and broadcast content on their cable networks.

So a lot of them would contact us and request our shows. So we would mail them to them and they would broadcast them in their local communities. But it wasn’t all the same.

[15:05]

Monika Schaefer: Oh, it wasn’t all the same. Go ahead. Sorry.

Jürgen Neumann: No, I mean like we were making half hour programs, right. But some of the public access stations, they didn’t broadcast half hour, they broadcast one hour. So there we had to re-edit stuff and maybe make something new just to fit the one hour slot. And all the formats were kind of different too. Some stations had regular VHS tapes, some used SVHS tapes, some used 3 quarter inch pneumatic tape.

So we had to get into all these different formats so we could fill the orders and they could broadcast all our material down there. So that was also a going concern. And they really got upset about that one too!

Monika Schaefer: You must have been working hard, Jurgen, because I understand that you were basically the guy who was really the tech guy and Ernst, you know, he was busy with the actual talking and that kind of thing. Right? I mean, you must have been really learning and working hard because this would have been a lot of new stuff for you?

Jürgen Neumann: Yeah, for some, yeah, it was pretty new. We were working an average of probably about 10 hours a day. And there for a while there when we were pumping a lot of material, we actually worked for about almost two weeks straight without a pause, about 12 hours a day.

So that was really something else. Certainly was happy when that was over. The big rush! Everybody putting it up. And then one of our supporters down in Canandaigua, New York, he had, they really came down on him a lot of the Holocaust lobby, I’ll call them, Shelley Shapiro and a bunch of these other, basically anti-revisionist jews who went down there and they put pressure on the station to cancel his broadcast and so on and so he was going to have a press conference and so Ernst went down there as part of the press conference and yeah, it was quite the thing.

They had police there, they had everything. One guy had a big boombox where he was cranking up some audio thing. I forget what it was offhand, but you know, trying to drown Ernst out from talking to the media and so on. Yeah.

So it took a better part of the day and the station actually got Ernst inside and interviewed him about that, what that was all about. That was nice to do that.

Monika Schaefer: Yes, of course! And it sounds like Antifa type of activities, doesn’t it? I mean these days that happens a lot with protests and then counter-protesters trying to scream louder or something so that nobody can hear the actual speaker. [chuckling] Yeah.

Jürgen Neumann: And if you want to know more about that incident, that’s in one of our another Voice of Freedom programs which you can find on my Bitchute channel. And it’s called. I forget the number of it, but it’s called Public Access and Freedom of Speech.

Monika Schaefer: So speaking of that, can people find all these, Another Voice of Freedoms on your Bitchute channel or your Odysee channel? Do you want to just tell people.

Jürgen Neumann: The BitChute channel is where the complete collection is on there.

It’s JohnRobinson101, all one word.

Monika Schaefer: Fantastic!

Jürgen Neumann: Yeah. So you can go through the whole works if you like. Lots of very good information on there.

Monika Schaefer: Indeed! It’s just heady times, I would say doing that. And just to put this into context for the listener, if you have aren’t fresh up on when things happened with Ernst Zundel and all his trials. The trials, the big Holocaust trials in Toronto, those were in 1985 and 1988. So this is after that.

[See: Andrew Hitchcock with Monika Schaefer on “Sorry Mom” — TRANSCRIPT]

So I think that’s absolutely fantastic that work that you both did! And yeah, so people can go and find those and listen to those and just there’s endless. You know, you can really learn a lot from those programs. You know the other thing that really caught my interest and we touched upon it in our last episode together that you and I did.

But then I started to learn a little bit more. And I’d like you to go into more detail about the Congress that Ernst Zundel organized in Germany called the Leuchter Congress. And things happened there [chuckling] made it very interesting. Can you get into that story, please?

Jürgen Neumann: Yes. It was by 1991. This is when the actual meeting took place. By that time Ernst has been on the wanted list for Germany, right. He’s a wanted man because of his revisionist activities. So they always after him, but that didn’t stop him. [chuckling] So he flew in somewhere else and then drove him to Germany. And he talked to all these people to organize this Congress.

Of course he wasn’t going to be officially part of it because otherwise he’d be arrested. But he was there anyway and helping them along. And it was one of the main organizers was a young man by the name of Ewald Althans [sp].

And so they got this whole thing together and they got speakers like all lined up like for revisionism, had people like Fred Leuchter, right, which they named the whole Congress after him. And French revisionist Robert Faurisson, Swedish revisionist Ditlieb Felderer, and of course famous British author David Irving, who hardly needs any kind of introduction or anything.

And then there’s another gentleman German former judge by the name of Wilhelm Stäglich. He wrote, he was back in the day, he was, I think he was part of an anti-aircraft unit as a young man around in the Auschwitz area.

[21:42]

[Image: Wilhelm Stäglich]

So anyway he wrote a book about that. And of course he had been retired at the time. So they took away, I think most of his pension and took away his judge credentials and all that, for that.

So it was all set up and it was on. It’s going to be in Munich in one of the big museums there. They had a big hall for rent, very big hall, perfect for our purposes. So we get there, everybody, you know, gets to Munich, we’re all set to go and wa laa, the last moment the hall cancels! Needless to say we were a little bit upset about that. Our lawyer, our main lawyer, Jurgen Rieger, he went in there and you know, needless to try to get them to change their mind stuff, but they weren’t having any of that.

Monika Schaefer: I’ll just jump in here Jurgen, because this is classic, absolutely classic tactic of our opponents! They knew that Congress was taking place. They could have said:

“No, you can’t do it here!”

They could have done that I’m sure a month ahead or even months ahead. But this is a classic tactic. I’m sure that other people have heard of events or been at events where the same thing happens.

I had it happen in Jasper, little town of Jasper where I organized a speaker event. And my downfall or the disadvantage was that I did have time to organize this. And so people knew well in advance. And the last day before this event happened they were going to cancel me. But I kind of managed to actually get the woman who was on the board of this church hall. I talked to her for over an hour and at the end she says:

“Monika, you are very persuasive!”

But I’m talking about a small town where [chuckling] I had known this woman for decades. You know, so!

But there was a big storm. We could not have had it outside at all! But yes, I’ve heard of big events in big places where that happens. But do carry on and tell the story. What happened next?

Jürgen Neumann: I mean, yeah, they just try to get you to waste your time and your money.

So anyway, so everybody was kind of:

“Okay, what are we going to do about this? Everybody’s here, all the people are here, etc.”

So it was decided that:

“Okay, heck, we’re just going to do it right out on the street in front of the museum!”

And of course all the police were there, etc.

And so we started off with a car where the speakers would come up and they would open the door and you’d stand up, you know where you get into the car, you stand on that, look over the roof of the car and speak to the crowd. And those who couldn’t speak German. Then Mark Weber from the IHR, California, he was there and he would translate from whatever the speaker was saying in English to German.

Monika Schaefer: Institute for Historical Review.

Jürgen Neumann: Yes, review.

Monika Schaefer: Continue.

Jürgen Neumann: Yeah, they have their own website, people can check that one out. They’re an excellent group to find all kinds of good solid intellectual information on these subjects. Plus they do a lot of political stuff.

Monika Schaefer: IHR.

Jürgen Neumann: Actually I think it might be IHR.org, okay, check both.

Monika Schaefer: But basically with the abbreviation IHR, not all spelled out is what you’re saying.

Jürgen Neumann: Yes, it’s just IHR.

Monika Schaefer: Yeah, so people can find that. Okay, carry on.

Jürgen Neumann: After be talking for a while, Fred Leuchter got up and he initially wasn’t going to say much because who knows who’s going to get arrested for what. So eventually our lawyer who had been talking with the authorities came up to Leuchter and he said:

“Look, just been talking to the judges lawyer, showed him the Leuchter Report and they agreed that it was just a scientific report and we can’t censor scientific reports. So you’re allowed to talk about it.”

So he did. The crowd went wild. They were just great! Everybody loved it!

And so after a bit of course it was decided that this car is not good enough. So somebody went out quickly and rented a truck, flatbed truck, and they brought that up and so all the speakers and everybody got up on the truck, so it was much better. Everybody could see you and everybody could hear you better. We had a sound system up, better sound system on the truck and so on. So it worked out very well. There was a like back in the day the Leftists in Germany were nasty to the point of being terrorists.

But the only Leftists that showed up on that day was about half a dozen of them in a bus, in a regular street bus, who went by holding signs up in the bus.

So everybody got a laugh out of that. Obviously they’re not what they used to be.

So, yeah, it was a very exciting day and a lot was said and a lot was done. And then something happened. After it was over, we all went to the various beer halls and stuff, restaurants, got together and so Ernst showed up for that. And not long after that, somebody said something to the authorities because the authorities came in and they arrested him. They found him and they arrested him.

Monika Schaefer: Oh my goodness!

Jürgen Neumann: Yes. So they took him away to jail, etc. So that was kind of not the best of all things. [chuckling]

[27:54]

Monika Schaefer: Remind us what year this was.

Jürgen Neumann: 1991.

Monika Schaefer: Okay.

Jürgen Neumann: Then he negotiated his way out of there. They said:

“Okay, well, you’re going to be charged with anti-Holocaust activities and so on. Denying the genocide of the jews.”

And so on, which is a law in Germany, right. So what you can get, I think they had a maximum of five years, for that. So eventually they put him on parole because he said:

“Yeah, okay.”

Not parole:

“But you can leave, but you have to come back for trial.”

So they thought he would do that, and he would do that because, oh yeah, there’s a big chance he wanted to try to organize a Leuchter type trial in Germany. So he was all good with that.

And about that particular issue, his trial and so on, there are videos of it up on my channel, Ernst Zundel in Munich, Munich trial in German and in English, where he talks about all that. So I’m not really going to get into that. I haven’t really brushed up on that particular thing. But if you want to see hear more about it, you can go there or we can do another show on it at some point.

Monika Schaefer: Yeah. And we will come back after these messages. Thank you.

[29:26]

[music]

[29:44]

[ad]

[36:00]

[music]

[36:50]

Monika Schaefer: All right. Welcome back to The Flipside with Monika on the Republic Broadcasting Network.

So before the break, Jurgen Neumann, our guest, was telling us about this Leuchter Congress in Munich, I think it was in Munich. Did I get that right?

Anyway, in Germany in 1991, and exciting things were happening, and then he ended up being arrested and went to jail. How long did he go to jail for? He was let out pretty quick. Oh, yes, you said he was let out on the promise that he was going to be back for trial. Do you want to just carry on with that story?

And then we do have a caller on the line. He’s been waiting very patiently for a while, which is wonderful! Oh, and actually, I did forget to do that, is give the calling numbers if you’d like to join the conversation.

So I’ll just do that first and then Juergen, if you could tell the rest of that story and then we’ll start with callers.

So the number is 512-2488252 or 1-800-313-9443. Okay. Over to you, Jurgen.

Jürgen Neumann: Well, I must confess that I hadn’t brushed up on that story. So as I’m sitting here right now, my memory says:

“Well, can’t think of a whole lot but say about it at this moment.”

I just did mention [word unclear], but if we were going to ever do another show, I would brush up on it and we can get into some details.

Monika Schaefer: Oh, no problem!

Jürgen Neumann: Flopping around like a fish out of water wouldn’t work very well right now.

Monika Schaefer: Oh, God!

Jürgen Neumann: I would like to say one thing.

Monika Schaefer: Yes, go [chuckling] ahead.

Jürgen Neumann: I would like to say to me one of the final things about the Leuchter Congress that reflected in my life afterwards. And that was later on that year. This took place in March. So a few months later on, I was visiting my mother. And while I was there, the mail came. And in her mail was a copy of National Geographic. She’s never ordered National Geographic. She never reads it. So this was a mistake. This actually was addressed to somebody else on a different street, maybe six or eight blocks away. But it showed up in her place. Well, I thought:

“Just for fun, let’s have a look at it.”

So I pulled it out of the wrapper. And I had just started paging through it and lo and behold, what do we see? We see that National Geographic had been in Germany at that time of the Leuchter Congress. They were doing a thing about Germany and about the political situation and so-called Right-wing neo-Nazis, all that kind of stuff.

So they actually had part of their article on the Leuchter Congress. And they had a big picture, a big picture of that truck and the people standing on the truck talking. And on the truck, also on the left hand side of the picture was yours truly, me with the camera!

Monika Schaefer: Hey!

Jürgen Neumann: You couldn’t really see my face, the camera was covering it. But there I was.

And so I pointed it out to my mom and she was really excited:

“Wow, that’s cool!”

She never got another National Geographic, before or since!

Monika Schaefer: Yeah, into the National Geographic. That’s fantastic! That National Geographic magazine was meant to come into your hands even though it was mis-delivered. Yes, that’s wonderful, wonderful!

So we had Johnny from Michigan, but I guess he dropped off.

But we do have a caller, Joe in Florida. Are you there? Would you like to join our conversation, ask a question or give a comment on anything about Ernst Zundel or ask Jurgen a question, anything you want. Welcome.

[40:58]

Joe: Yes, Monika, thank you for taking my call. And greetings to Jurgen. Yeah, just a quick thing I want to say.

So thank you, Monika and Jurgen, for keeping the memory of this great man, Ernst Zundel alive. The other day recently I don’t know, Candace Owen, very kind of big, very popular blogger now she’s doing her pieces on the Hoaxicost is what I call it. And the lie of those events. And I just can’t help but think that, it’s Ernst that did the great groundwork. I mean he would be very proud.

But it’s on his amazing work that now it’s basically going mainstream. The lies that they built. I just wanted to say that thank you both for keeping his memory alive. And then Jurgen, the real question I wanted to ask you a question was. So among the things that jews like to do is to promote the idea that they’re all still peaceful people, but there can be very violent. And among the things they can be violent with this there preferential is bombing. We saw the King David Hotel, right? Jewish terrorists bombing people!

[See: Guns and Butter interviews Christopher Bollyn — The War on Terror – Dec 18, 2019 — Transcript]

So tell us about, if you can, how it was that Ernst was really the first, one of the first victims of this bombing in Toronto. And am I right in thinking they bombed his house, which was a residence, or exactly how, where, was that a place that he worked out of but tell us what you can remember about that terrible incident.

Jürgen Neumann: Okay. Talking about bombings and stuff, as far as I’m aware, when it comes to revisionists, the very first bombing was in France, I think it was 1965. Maybe a French revisionist by the name of François Duprat. Him and his wife were going out. They got into their car, turned the key, and there was a car bomb. And it blew up and killed him and took off her legs below the knee. So that’s first one, and probably worse for revisionist terrorism.

[See also: Jewish Militants: Fifteen Years, and More, of Terrorism in France]

Now come up to 1984. And we are at Ernst Zundel building. Okay. So what it is, or what it was, really was his, number one, was when he first got it, he was an artist. And so he made it, he had his business, commercial art, and then he was also fine art painted. He was the most prolific artist in Canadian history. Actually sold over 600 paintings.

Joe: Wow!

Jürgen Neumann: And so he had his gallery on the main floor and his commercial art business in the back. And upstairs he had the usual living quarters. That’s his home, dining room, kitchen, bedrooms, stuff like that. So, yeah, it was a combination of our work environment plus his home.

Actually, as it turned out, I ended up staying there with him for a decade or two. I’d stay there basically during the week and then go home on weekends and stuff. So that’s basically what the building was.

So 1984, there was a bit of an explosion we had. And it turns out at the back, by his garage door, they had set off a bomb, pipe bomb, as the police discovered, you know, told us about later, a pipe bomb. So it blew up the garage door and actually sent splinters all around the neighborhood, damaged cars and stuff. If anybody was walking by and been hit by those splinters, they could have been fatal. Not that they care, of course.

So that was the first one. But what was interesting about it was the police said:

“Oh, yeah, we’re investigating, etc.”

After a week had gone by, or 10 days ago by nothing. We hadn’t heard anything. So Ernst contacted the police. And the one officer was very honest about it. He said:

“No, we’re not investigating, actually. We think that you did it yourself for publicity.”

Monika Schaefer: Wow!

Jürgen Neumann: So, yeah, well, I was right. Okay, fast forward to 1995. About the anniversary of Victory in Europe Day, May 1995. Ernst was off on a speaking tour, Western Canada way. And I was holding fort there. And where I sleep is in, it’s a long building, right. Not wide, but deep.

So I was sleeping in the back on the second floor beside the washroom, my little bedroom. And I’m lying there in the neighborhood in which we were located, it’s called Cabbagetown. And always a lot of weird stuff happening. There’s a lot of weirdos in that area and stuff. So it’s not unusual to hear all kinds of interesting things happening.

But anyway, I was sleeping and suddenly I woke up. And I mean woke up just like snap of the finger from asleep to totally wide awake! And I thought:

“Wow, what’s that?”

So I’m lying there for a second, wondering, and I hear way in the back, some very low voice called “Fire!” So I thought:

“Oh, yeah, a bunch of, … I wonder what’s going on in the neighborhood tonight?”

So I lie there for a little longer. And then The Voice gets louder, it gets closer:

“Fire! Fire!”

I thought:

“Oh, no, I better go have a look.”

So I get up, and when I step out of the out of my bedroom, I can look down the length of the house, the second floor, right into the kitchen. And the kitchen has a big window out on the street. And here’s flames rising up above the second floor window.

Joe: Wow!

[Image: TORONTO, ON, 206 Carlton St., Ernst Zundel’s house on May 7, 1995, showing the aftermath of the fire there]

Jürgen Neumann: That’s what the fire is about. All right, so I ran up forward a little bit, grabbed a phone, but that one had already burned out for that one.

So I went downstairs and I got another phone and phoned you know, 9/11. And they said:

“Oh, yeah, oh yeah, no problem. Don’t worry about it.”

They said:

“Other people have already called in, so everybody’s on their way.”

I said:

“Okay, great!”

So I started getting myself together, getting stuff. I’m going to leave the house, right? I hear this pounding at the side door. So I go over the side door, and all it is kind of a regular framed wooden door. It’s got a couple of hooks and that’s it. And the fire department’s out there and they can’t get through this door.

So anyway, I go out and unhook it, and they come in:

“Oh, are you alone here?”

“Yep, I’m alone.”

“Well, you know, get out this fire. We gotta go!”

I said:

“No, I’ll leave when I’m ready.”

They said:

“No, you have to leave.”

I said:

“No.”

Monika Schaefer: Good for you!

Jürgen Neumann: :

“And when I’m ready, I will leave.”

Because I still had a couple of things I wanted to do. So I quickly packed up the last of the things and then I left. Oh, I did phone. Make one more phone call. One of our supporters lived about three, four blocks away. And this is about five in the morning. So I phoned him and I said:

“If you want some excitement, Ernst’s house is on fire, so come on over!”

Then I went outside and away. Eventually other people came up, our supporters, they came up to see what was going on, etc. And he showed up eventually and he said:

“Well, he said, boy, your voice was really calm for what’s going on.”

So we’re sitting there or we’re standing there. I was talking to one of the fire-fighters and we were talking about response time, you know how you get there fast. And he said:

“It doesn’t really matter how fast we get here.”

I said:

“What do you mean by that?”

He said:

“We can’t touch it until Toronto Hydro comes and turns off the hydro, so that we don’t get electrocuted with water touching the electricity. So they actually have to be here first.”

I said:

“Oh, okay.”

So we’re standing there waiting and a man comes up to me and says:

“Are you one of the people from the house?”

I said:

“Yes.”

He said:

“Well, I saw the whole thing.”

I said:

“Oh, really?”

He said:

“Yeah, I’m in the store next door to us.”

Somebody had broken their plate glass window.

And so he was there replacing the window. And he said the man walked past him with his container of flammable liquid. He saw him walk. I mean, he could have reached out and touched him as he walked by. So he walked up to the house, poured the liquid on there and a trail out, which he lit up and away it went. And then he walked past him again.

I said:

“Oh, so you’d be willing to talk to the police?”

He said:

“Sure. That’s why I’m still waiting here.”

“Okay.”

So I went and told the police:

“Hey, we’ve got an eyewitness!”

The guy waited another hour and a half and then he had to go because he had other business to do. And the police never did talk to him.

Monika Schaefer: Unreal!

Joe: Unbelievable! Yeah.

Jürgen Neumann: So that was that one.

And then about a month later, it was about that, maybe a little longer, maybe two months later, got a package in the mail. It was a brown box, basically, reasonably light.

And so I brought it in, mailman brought it in, and Ernst looked at it, looked at, and he’s getting, he’s very sharp man, experience. He says:

“Okay, everybody, nobody touched this. Something I don’t like about this.”

It’s addressed to him. It’s got a return address out in British Columbia. So, okay. So he put it on the shelf. And the way we went about our business, except me being a foolish man at the time, I couldn’t resist. I went over and picked it up when nobody was around, shook it a little bit. Very foolish!

But anyway, I didn’t hear anything, didn’t feel anything. Put it back. This one.

So eventually a fellow phoned Ernst and it was one of our supporters from out west BC. So he asked him about the PO Box address and he said:

“Oh, that was an address I used to have a couple of years back. So obviously somebody else is using it, blah, blah, blah.”

So this is suspicious. So we took the box down to the police station, told them it might be a bomb. They freaked out!:

“It might be a bomb! And you brought it here! What’s the matter with you?”

Anyway, they cleared out the area around the station by about three blocks. So they took it and eventually they took it down to the bomb disposal place where they set it off. And they got back to us and said:

“Yeah, it was a bomb.”

And it was set to go off when the package was opened. Having done so, it would have killed everybody within 100 meters.

Joe: Unbelievable!

Jürgen Neumann: Very powerful!

So that was the explosive encounters that we had.

Joe: Unbelievable! Thank you Jurgen and [word unclear] tell me to say thank you. So Ernst is a true hero, right? In other words, he was one of the free speech pioneers and they obviously tried repeatedly to kill him and he stood his ground.

So thank you, Monika, for this show, keeping his memory alive, because he is a real hero and it’s great to see if only he ived long enough to see that what his efforts really are paying off where people can speak truthfully about history. Thank you.

Monika Schaefer: Joe, I really appreciate. Yeah, I really appreciate that you called. That was an excellent call with these questions. And those stories are incredible! Thank you so much! Thank you again. And yes, we do intend to keep Ernst Zundel’s memory alive.

And I’m gonna do a shout out to Katana who encouraged me to do exactly that. And that did prompt me to call you up, Jurgen, or to write to you and say:

“I’m gonna have you on regularly. Like maybe every couple of months we’re gonna do another show on Ernst Zundel because there are very many things to talk about.”

So a shout out to Katana. He has a website, katana17.com. His specialty is making transcripts out of videos, or out of talk shows, or things that are in audio form, he turns into transcripts quite a lot. And his website is excellent! Has a lot of resources there. I would encourage everybody to visit that website again. That’s katana17.com. And katana with a ‘k’ and just like it sounds, so just another.

[53:54]

Joe: God bless you, Monika.

Monika Schaefer: Okay, bye bye. Joe, thank you so much!

Joe: Thanks. Jurgen too. God bless.

Jürgen Neumann: Bye bye,

Monika Schaefer: Bye bye. Jurgen, something else about those attacks and who, … Somebody claimed responsibility for at least one of them, did they not? Do you know about that? Didn’t a jewish, …

Jürgen Neumann: 1984 one? Some kind of jewish, I don’t know, it was a very convoluted name anyway. But yeah, it was some jewish organization that claimed responsibility for the 84 bomb.

But what was interesting is that one thing that not too many people know about that. Around the beginning of the 1985 trial, as it was just about to get underway, Ernst was approached by the RCMP, which is the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. And they gave him a folder and they said:

“We have information that seems that there’s an assassin. An assassin has been put on a case to assassinate you. It’s a foreigner who’s going to be coming into Canada, or might already be here. And it’s a woman. And so you should be careful and on the lookout.”

And in the folder they had a picture of her even:

“So that if you can recognize her, everybody should look at the picture and if you see you’re wandering around or something, you know what’s going on.”

So that was nice of them to do that.

[Image: Police image of Merchant assassin]

Monika Schaefer: Wow, isn’t that something?

And yet the contrast to the police not being interested seemingly in talking to the eyewitness at the later episode. I think that was the later up episode. And then also just, yeah, they didn’t seem to want to uncover this or they didn’t seem to want to help Ernst Zundel. You know, this slow response, what not. I just find that quite interesting.

But good that they did warn him and good on Ernst Zundel that these things did not stop him from carrying on with his epically important work. And it was always his intention to restore the honor of Germany and the German people once he realized what had happened with the lies and deceptions.

But we don’t have a lot of time left. I want to pass it back to you. Do you want to tell people where they can find your channels? We did already talk about the Bitchute channel. John Robinson 101. I do believe you have an archive also. Do you want to talk about that, please? Where do people find your work?

Jürgen Neumann: Okay, yes, on Bitchute, you might call it my flagship channel. It’s called JohnRobinson101, and it is all videos. And I have about, I’m guessing about 500 Ernst videos on there. Want to look at it? But I have well over a thousand videos.

And so it’s not just material about Ernst, but there’s material from other sources about subject matter that would be of interest to all of our people and all people who are interested in different points of view on various documentaries. I even have culture on there. I’ve got some classical music, orchestras playing and so on. Everything that may be a interest to us and help for us, I have on there.

Now on archive.org I have, I had a couple of other channels and they’ve been kind of deleted in the meantime.

But finally, of the two that have been deleted, I finally figured out that maybe the problem there was is that I had a lot of material about Holocaust revisionism and Ernst Zundel. So I figured, okay, I’ll start another channel on there and stay away from those directly.

And so I started a PDF channel called Researcher_PDF and it’s all books and David Irving books, pamphlets, all kinds of stuff. If you have an interest in history from our point of view, that’s a good one.

Monika Schaefer: That’s on archive.org is it?

Jürgen Neumann: Yes.

Monika Schaefer: Okay.

Thank you so much for joining us again. Jurgen Neumann, and we will talk to you again next week. Thank you very, very much, all the listeners and the caller and the producer. Thank you all. Bye bye.

[58:30]

[music]

[58:49]

[ad]

[1:00:00]

END

top

============================================

RBN Comments

top

(Comments as of 3/24/2025 = 4)

kati
March 23, 05:21
Here my favorite of Ernst Zuendel, all episodes of his “german holocaust” in one big video file, i sure listened them 10+ times, as german alot new things.
https://archive.org/details/ernst-zundel-the-german-holocaust-the-complete-collection-parts-1-34

kati
March 23, 05:25
All Samisdat episodes of Ernst Zuendel, about 300 maybe, are sure on Archive org too, or easier to watch on Odysee, this link you will have all episodes https://odysee.com/@ErnstZundelVideos:8

kati
March 23, 05:39
I linked the Odysee, here, i cannot watch Jürgens Bitchute here in germany, it gets geoblocked cause of the content against our laws, but the Odysee channel is not blocked.
Im avoiding bitchute in general now, too much blocked in germany and the ads are annoying.

kati
March 23, 05:48
Micheal Collins Piper told me alot about Mark Weber, its now silenced but Weber took shekels to let nationalist books out of print, you can hear the story on Pipers podcasts over several episodes. I asked a friend of Piper, the one who runs now FTJ if the story is true, he said yes.
So im careful to recommend Mark Weber now, sure the IHR is not to blame, its jsut Webers doing long ago, maybe 2 decades ago. I think “Silesias Inferno” is one of the books he run out of print, i got the german version here, its witness reports from what the red army did in Silesia/Schlesien, its the most graphic book i ever read and i had to pause a day after most reports. You can still buy the english version sure, for a good price. The german version is cheaper, from 1966 i think and not printed anymore, noone would print that now, i paid 2€ for it.

==========================

See Also

top

Monika Schaefer – The Flipside with Monika – Ep 1 – Intro – Jun 29, 2024 – Transcript

The Flipside with Monika – Ep 2 – Jul 6, 2024 – Transcript

The Flipside with Monika – Ep 03 with Paul Fromm – Jul 13, 2024 – Transcript

Monika Schaefer – The Flipside with Monika – Ep 04 with Oscar – Jul 20, 2024 – Transcript

The Flipside with Monika – Ep 08 with Alfred Schaefer – Aug 17, 2024 – Transcript

The Flipside with Monika – Ep 09 with Grace Eki Oyama – Aug 24, 2024 – Transcript

Monika Schaefer – The Flipside with Monika – Ep 15 with Jürgen Neumann on Ernst Zündel – Oct 12, 2024 – Transcript

The Flipside with Monika – Ep 18 with Jürgen Neumann – Nov 2, 2024 – Transcript

The Flipside with Monika – Ep 20 with Kathleen Dudley – Nov 16, 2024 – Transcript

Monika Schaefer – The Flipside with Monika – Ep 24 – Prof Tony Hall – Dec 21, 2024 – Transcript

The Flipside with Monika – Ep 27 – Germar Rudolf – Jan 18, 2025 – Transcript

The Flipside with Monika – Ep 36 with Jürgen Neumann on Ernst Zundel – Mar 22, 2025

The World’s First Anti-Holocaust Convention — Instauration Dec, 1979

An Open Letter to New Jersey’s Governor

Historians or Hoaxers?

House of Orwell

Misha: Surviving with Wolves or …

Bradley Smith’s Smith Report # 1

The Liberation of the Camps: Facts vs. Lies

The Plum Cake

Auschwitz: Myths and Facts

Powers and Principalities XI – Ewen Cameron, MK-Ultra, Holocaust Revisionism — TRANSCRIPT

Tales of the Holohoax – A Historian’s Assessment – Part 1

The Holocaust Lie — Made in America

Probing the Holocaust: The Horror Explained — TRANSCRIPT

Jim Rizoli Interviews Prof Robert Faurisson, Oct 2015 — TRANSCRIPT

Holocaust Eyewitnesses: Is the Testimony Reliable?

Alain Soral – My Homage to Robert Faurisson, Oct 2018 — TRANSCRIPT

Inside Auschwitz – You’ve never seen THIS before! — TRANSCRIPT

Amazion Bans 100s of Holocaust Revisionist Books!

AUSCHWITZ – A Personal Account by Thies Christophersen

Jim Rizoli Interviews Bradley Smith — TRANSCRIPT

London Forum – Alfred Schaefer – Psychological Warfare – TRANSCRIPT

The Realist Report Interviews Eric Hunt — TRANSCRIPT

Red Ice Radio – Germar Rudolf – Persecution of Revisionists & Demographic Disaster – Part 1— TRANSCRIPT

Red Ice Radio: Nicholas Kollerstrom — TRANSCRIPT

Red Ice TV – Ingrid Carlqvist – Scandal in Sweden When Ingrid Questions the Unquestionable — TRANSCRIPT

The Realist Report with Carolyn Yeager on Johnson vs Anglin debate — TRANSCRIPT

Joel Davis – WWII Revisionism Re-enters the Mainstream – Sep 6, 2024 – Transcript

Monika Schaefer: All right. Greetings. Hello, good afternoon, good evening, good morning, wherever you might be listening from. You are listening to Republic Broadcasting Network at Republicbroadcasting.org and this is episode 27 of The Flipside with Monika. And I am your host, Monika Schaefer. And I am very pleased that my guest today will be Germar Rudolf.

Before I bring him on, though, I have some announcements, you could say, a public service announcement. And one is about an event, and the other is sad news that we will talk about with Germar together.

But the first one has to do with there’s a meeting going to happen in Powell River, British Columbia, Canada, and that is on the West coast. It’s on the Sunshine Coast. And I am telling you this because if you know anybody that’s on Vancouver Island or in Vancouver or along the Sunshine Coast, please tell them about this meeting because they should go! What it is Leah Gazan, that is the Member of Parliament from Manitoba, who has introduced a Bill last Autumn that is to criminalize the promotion of hatred against indigenous people. If you are condoning or justifying or downplaying the historical and lasting impact of residential schools.

Now, these are these Indian residential schools in Canada that I have spoken about before. She will be in Powell River this coming Monday, January 20th. And just a little bit about her. She has this thing called “being a survivor”. I mean, it’s in her blood, on her maternal side. Her grandmother was a Lakota Indian and apparently was a survivor of a school. And her grandfather was Chinese. And her paternal grandparents, they were both jewish. Father was born in Holland, the paternal grandfather, I should say. And he was a toddler when Germany invaded, and he spent the war years in hiding in Holland. And the grandmother was in a concentration camp apparently in Germany. So Leah Gazan has this survivorship all really, she’s expert at it. She’s got it down pat. She introduced this bill. To me, this Bill sounds very, very similar to the Holocaust denial bills in various countries, including in Germany, where myself and my brother Alfred were both in prison.

And so, yeah, it’s an issue that I think is really important.

Now, the woman who is the local MP there on the Sunshine Coast and Powell River, somebody Blaney*, I can’t remember her first name. She says:

“It’s not debatable that it occurred.”

And she’s talking about the residential schools happening. Yes, they did happen, just like the work camps in Germany happened.

And another parallel, you see. So she says:

“Every time we act as though it’s debatable that it occurred, we are silencing the voices of people and their families and their loved ones who went through that lived experience.”

Again, I see so many parallels with the Holocaust and this is our own, you know, Canadian so-called “genocide”. And they are going to criminalize you if you are merely skeptical about what they are telling us in that regard.

So that meeting again, if you have any friends in that area of either Vancouver Island or Vancouver or north on the Sunshine Coast, tell them about this meeting. It’s January 20th, starts at 5 pm at the Evergreen Theater. And yeah, that was that public service announcement.

And then I have sad news that a great man in our movement and that is the, you could say the “Revisionist” movement. I personally am not fond of that word. I would rather call it “Correctionist”. We are correcting history that we’ve been lied to about.

Nevertheless, Jurgen Graf (15 August 1951 – 13 January 2025), he has passed away this week, Monday, January 13th. And like Germar Rudolf, Jurgen Graf is a giant in our movement of trying to get the truth out there. He not only wrote books, he translated many books, and he apparently was very fluent in quite a few languages. And I think that Germar will be able to tell us more about that after I bring Germar on.

And I think at the beginning I was distracted by the fact that we didn’t have Germar on yet. I forgot to tell you the date today is January 18, 2025.

Also, just a little reminder that if you possibly can, dear listener, if you have the means, please remember that this is a listener supported network and if you go to RepublicBroadcasting.org you will find all the information there for how you can support the network either through phone number, through PayPal, through mailing cash or check. There are different means. There’s a donate button there and there’s the information there.

So all right, now I see that we have Germar here. I’ll just give a little bit of background and then I’m going to bring him on.

Germar Rudolf has written books. He has published many books through this codoh.com, that’s Committee on Open Debate on the Holocaust and Castle Hills Publishers. He will tell us more about all these things. The latest big work is the Holocaust Encyclopedia. Fantastic information in there! And he has been under the gun for all these things.

[Image: Jurgen, Carlo, and Germar]

Now he comes from Germany, he is a PhD level chemist, became curious about certain things that were a little bit of anomalies there in Auschwitz and then started to investigate and get into some trouble he is in the United States. I have no idea where, but he is on the line now. And Germar, are you there? Greetings to you.

Germar Rudolf: I am. Can you hear me?

[08:33]

Monika Schaefer: Yes, we can. So would you like to just before we get into, actually two topics. One would be to talk a little bit about your dear friend Jurgen Graf, and also your latest adventure, or shall we say your latest encounter with “the system” in quotation.

Before we get into that, would you like to expand a little bit about your history in case we have some new listeners? I’m always hoping that we have new listeners. And on that note, I do encourage listeners to share these programs with others who you think need to hear these programs. Okay, go ahead, Germar.

Germar Rudolf: Yes. Well, where do I start? Shall we start with my dear friend Jurgen?

Monika Schaefer: Yes, let’s start there and then we’ll go into these other matters. Please do.

Germar Rudolf: We both had a similar introduction into revisionism in the early 1990s. We both learned about skepticism on the mainstream Holocaust narrative via the Canadian free speech trial by Ernst Zundel, the second one of 1989, where American expert on execution technologist Fred Leuchter appeared as a witness. And his report [The Leuchter Report] caused quite some stir internationally. Well, internationally you can say, it was translated into a lot of languages. And both Jurgen and I found out about it, got curious about what’s going on since forensic evidence is considered superior to any other, in particular to anecdotal evidence. We both picked up our ears. He was, however, a linguist and not a scientist, where I was a scientist and not a linguist.

[See: Book: White World Awake! — Stopping the Planned Extermination of Our Volk]

Actually, as a matter of fact, I couldn’t speak any foreign languages. My English back then was so bad that I couldn’t even read normal English text fluently.

So he is fluent in, or was, I should say, unfortunately, 12 languages, if I’m correct, maybe it may have been more. And he took a historical-social approach to the topic. He was in touch with French scholar Dr. Robert Farrisson, who is one of the early leading lights in Holocaust skepticism and learned from him the ropes and then started writing a book in seclusion. And I was at the same time going down the scientific, the forensic rabbit hole, trying to figure out whether the infamous Zyklon B deployed in Auschwitz, presumably for mass murdering jews, could have left any long term traces in the Masonry of those alleged gas chambers. And if it could have left them, would they survive the time? And if they survived the time, could we still find them there?

[Image: Fred Leuchter holding up his original report]

So there’s this question that was raised by Fried Leuchter. But it was answered too hastily, too superficially. And I wanted to figure out really properly. I was not doing it in seclusion because as an expert witness, I was then actually showing up in various German trials, summoned by defense teams to testify on behalf of people who were on trial for, quote, unquote, “Holocaust denial”. And that, of course, I had to have my name under the expert report I wrote. And I had to appear under my real name as a witness. And that got me straight away in the cross-hairs of the authorities who were targeting me. And persecution started right there.

My expert report and a popularized book that was broadening the scope to many more topics. Both were published in 1993. At the same time Jurgen Graf had also published his two books. One called “The Holocaust Swindle”. The other one is “The Holocaust on a Test Stand”.

And we found out about each other’s existence only when we heard that each other’s books had been published. It was a little bit surprising because our point of contact should have been Robert, who was in contact with both of us, who advised us. And he actually kind of proofread my first version of my expert report to make sure that from his point of view, everything is straightened out. And he found a few flaws in it, fix it, helped me along the way.

But anyway, he kept us separate. So we found out about each other sometime in 93. We met for the first time in 94, which was about the time that he got in touch with Italian researcher Carlo Mattogno, who is probably the most knowledgeable Holocaust expert on the whole planet. He was just gearing up back then, and the way he geared up, he wanted to go, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, to all the archives that were containing massive amounts of documents on the camps where “it” is supposed to have happened, whatever “it” is.

They were tucked away for decades after the war. The Soviets or Poles, or whoever, had tucked them away for the most part, were not accessible, or not even known to exist to Western scholars, or any scholars for that matter. And after the collapse of the Soviet Union, they became known and accessible.

So Carlo Mattogno, who couldn’t speak neither Polish nor Russian, wanted to get into these archives. Jurgen Graf was fluent both in Russian and Polish. So they teamed up and went on numerous trips to various places where the “crime of the century” is said to have happened. To get not only a forensic look at the leftovers in those camps, but also go into the archives, copy thousands and tens of thousands of documents, and started analyzing these. They sat down and wrote a number of books together, one on Treblinka, one on Majdanek. They are probably the most well known that they did together. They are part of the Holocaust Handbook series that I then started publishing.

So we were kind of a trio with Carlo Mattogno doing most of the hard archival work. Jurgen Graf was being the interpreter, doing the journeys and he was translating Carlo’s Italian stuff into German for me. I was the publisher initially only in German, and later when I was in English or American exile, polishing up my English, improving it to the point where I could actually publish academic level texts, was the one who was getting the message out.

Over the decades to this point, we have published 53 hard hitting archival forensic studies, for the most part. It’s the most comprehensive research study series on the Holocaust that exists in the world. It puts any mainstream work to shame! And it is the one series that makes the saying true that:

“The Holocaust is the best investigated and documented event in history.”

But not as the mainstream claims, but we are the ones who actually document it. The mainstream has, since the war, until the Soviet Union collapsed, collected anecdotal evidence. That’s not documented history! That is “chatted” history.

[16:04]

Monika Schaefer: I like that what you said, because that’s always what they say:

“This is the best documented event in history!”

And yeah, it is.

Germar Rudolf: Yes it is! Because of holocausthandbooks.com. So 53 books, so much information and they’re complete overkill! Carlo Mattogno has the ability to go into the last nooks and crannies and describe every nut and bolt that was ever fixed in a German concentration camp because so much is documented. The Germans with a bureaucratic frenzy had documented every pencil then pushed from the left to the right of their desks. So I exaggerate here a little, of course.

Monika Schaefer: [chuckling] I think that’s great what you say, because the Germans are kind of, shall we say, putting it politely, they’re teased for being very meticulous about detail. So that is very important. It’s exciting.

Germar Rudolf: And it is fortunate because when it comes to two of the most important camps Majdanek and Auschwitz, there are mountains of documents! And the claim that the Germans destroyed something because they wanted to hide their crimes, it’s just wrong! No, they left it all behind. The Russians grabbed it and hid it in archives. And now it has become accessible, for a while.

In 1998, 99, the German government put both the Polish and the Russian government under pressure to close the archives and make them accessible only to accredited, officially recognized scholars. So we were excluded again from that point onward. But by that time we had enough material and we think the most important material to actually fill all these studies.

Now there is so much material that I have published over the past 35 years, both in English and German, over and over again in new editions and transformed into audio books and ebooks and all the rest of it.

And I had all this knowledge and access to it, but I had no overview. Even though I should be the one that has the best overview. It was just too much information even for me to retain. Many times I was looking for something that I know is written in some of the books. Where can I find that information? And I could pinpoint 3, 4, 5 volumes where it probably is. I had to look it up and search until I finally find it in one of my PDF files. And it happened over and over again! And finally I was sick of it!

And we had the idea we need to do something about it. An encyclopedia needs to be done, where certain keywords and buzzwords can be looked up and all the pertinent information is right there with a reference where you can find it mostly in our own books, but also mainstream literature, in periodicals, articles and so forth, whatever the case may be. So that the eternal search for something:

“I know I published it! Where is it? I can’t find it! This or this, or this?”

It finally ends! If I want all the witnesses that have ever claimed that flames shoot out of chimneys, which for technical reasons it is impossible, it’s invented. This is a cliche of the Holocaust that you can now find which witnesses have said it. How do I know? I go to the Encyclopedia. “Flames coming out of chimney” is an entry in there. Boom! There’s a long list of witnesses, all of which have copied from each other and all of which have lied!

And so there are a lot of features of the Holocaust where you can do that. And you look it up and boom, there it is! You will find it in no other resource. It’s wonderful! And I finally don’t have to search my own books anymore because I have it summarized.

Monika Schaefer: Yay!

Germar Rudolf: Yay!

So it was a selfish enterprise to finally not have to do it anymore. But the thing has been out for two years. We’re in a third edition now. So print on demand. We always make new editions that we keep up to date and correct whatever corrections are necessary. We have sold so far 2,000 copies. Roughly 2,000 copies direct marketing mainly of a specialized encyclopedia. This is unique! We are completely banned from Amazon. No libraries buy our book. Normally these specialty encyclopedias almost exclusively get bought by mid size and large libraries. There is no market really for it. But this one is such an amazing book. People read it cover to cover because every entry is just wonderful!

Monika Schaefer: Well, I can attest to that. I can attest to that. One of those is getting into my home. [chuckling]

Germar Rudolf: We are getting off the track. We were with Jurgen Graf.

Monika Schaefer: Yes, well, we wanted to talk about., … But you know, this is great anyway because I did want you to give some of your own history. And in so doing this is what is going on. So that’s fantastic!

[20:42]

Germar Rudolf: And just that was created by this trio of Carlo Mattogno, Jurgen Graf and me. I’m putting it out, making it fit for publication, present it that is presentable and accessible. Jurgen Graf has done a lot of the translation work, at least for the German edition. And Carlo Mattogno is the heart and the engine of the whole operation with producing most of the stuff.

So one of these trio of massive revisionist, skeptical producers of hard hitting scholarly material has now died, unfortunately, just a week ago. And I’m very sad for that.

I met him the last time in 2002. He came visit me with his wife. Back then I lived in Alabama, and he was with me for two weeks. We went hiking, we sang our German hiking songs and even back home we were having some campfire romance without the campfire, but the romance was there with singing folk songs. His wife Oda, Belarussian, and she is rooted into Russian tradition of Russian folk music. And there are some German folk music songs which have been translated or borrowed, should say, from Eastern European countries. They have a little bit of a Russian feel to them when it comes to the melody. And she loved it! Listening to music that sounded like home in the middle of America sung in the German language. A cultural mix that was quite amazing!

Anyway, we had a good time, last time I met him in person. Wonderful fellow, dear friend and a genius when it comes to languages. Speaking Indonesian, Chinese and almost all of the European languages they can come up with. A fantastic fellow! Unfortunately a victim of cancer.

Monika Schaefer: Yes, I’ll add, I only got to know him and not in person, not face to face like you, just in the last couple of years because, and I think this is probably it turned out to be one of the last major pieces of work he did because he did become ill during this project. But he did translate my book “Sorry Mom, I was Wrong about the Holocaust” into German. And we worked together on that. He would, because I do have a fairly good knowledge in German, he would send me chapter by chapter as he was translating. And I must say he does his translating work from his head. He does not use any computer translating, what do you call it, program? So it is, I think, very, very superior translation because he would just describe something the way one would say it in German, rather than sentence by sentence, just fixing the grammar or whatever. But really I think the German book turned out better because he made improvements and then the publisher did as well. So usually the translation of a book is not as good as the original, but in this case, that is not correct. I think the German book turned out better because of Jurgen Graf’s amazing work!

And so each chapter he’d sent me, and then if he didn’t, I would read them, and if it didn’t quite get the gist of this or that in the telling, then I would give him my feedback and he would make the corrections to that, and then we’d send it off to the publisher bit by bit by bit.

And I got to know this man, and not only is he a genius with knowing, I didn’t know that until a few days ago that he knew so many languages. Somebody told me 15 languages. I don’t know if that is correct, exact. But he obviously was a genius. He was a genius, but not only in the languages and also in his knowledge about historical events, but a very, very nice man! Good humor, just really sensitive. I have nothing but good things to say about this man. I’m going to pass it back to you, Germar, please.

Germar Rudolf: Yes, yes, absolutely! He was an artist when it comes to two languages. He would turn a book, a text in general that was a little dry, a little on the boring side, a little bit too technical, turned it into a text that was wonderful to read. He enlivened text with spirit! Sometimes he put in irony and sarcasm where I think it was deserved, because some of the material you have to deal with as a Holocaust skeptic is really absurd and sometimes even grotesque. Now, with scholarly text, you have to be careful with sarcasm and irony. And he was pushing it a little bit too much at times. [chuckling]

But when it comes to my. To my personal flavor, I would say:

“Right on, give it to them!”

Sometimes I had to edit it out because the author didn’t want that. So he wants it to be dry because such a controversial topic, he doesn’t want to ruffle any feathers.

But anyway, other than that, yes, he constantly, systematically turned text into something that was better, that was more pleasant to read. So it was wonderful!

He focused on translating from the 12 languages. German, French, English, Russian, Polish, Danish, Swedish, Norwegian, Spanish, Italian, you name it. He was roaming throughout Europe, and he would lecture in those languages live in those countries to audiences. This is amazing! You have to have this fluent ability to speak and express yourself expertly in all of these languages. And he taught many years German, I think, in other languages in Indonesia and in China. So he learned those languages too, along the process. So quite amazing! Quite amazing!

Monika Schaefer: Germar, I have a question regarding the translating services that he did. The work that he did he translate in both directions? Like, for example, would he translate a German book into French or Italian or whichever other language? Did he do that, or did he mainly translate other languages into German?

[27:18]

Germar Rudolf: He could, but he refused to. He has done here and there, English text, but he knew that his command of those other languages is not on par level with what he expected the quality of his translations to be. Therefore, he usually refused to do that, and only when pushed would he agree to that.

So, yeah, mostly he would translate from those languages into German, and not the other way round.

Monika Schaefer: Yeah.

So I think we’re gonna be at the break soon. And the original intent to invite you on my show was to speak about your latest adventures, or misadventures. But I am so glad that you were able to talk about Jurgen Graf, because you know him better than most of us, certainly a lot better than myself. And I just think this was very, very important to talk about him.

And we will talk about some of the things that you, I think you were arrested. Why don’t you just start on that? And then when the break comes, we’ll go to the other side.

Germar Rudolf: Well a little bit of the background. If people had humor in this country, you know, I’d say the cliche is the Germans don’t have humor because I tell people:

“Well, because in Germany, humor is illegal. You can go to prison for it. Therefore, Germans are not inclined to make jokes.”

So I say:

“The shortest German joke is ‘Auschwitz’, because the German word for joke is ‘witz’.”

So the last syllable of Auschwitz is the word witz. So Auschwitz is a witz. Auschwitz is a joke!

Monika Schaefer: Oh, wonderful!

Germar Rudolf: You go to prison for that if you say that! And there are so many other [word unclear], you make jokes about mass immigration, about minorities, you go to prison for that!

So if you have a culture for decades, it started with Frederick the Great, and he started the censorship in Germany, and it’s been a tradition ever since. And it’s gotten worse and worse and worse with the first pinnacle, you can say, under the Nazis. And now in modern Germany, again.

Monika Schaefer: So Germar, we’ll carry on with this after the break and so I hope everybody hangs on and we’ll talk to you in a few minutes. Thank you.

[29:30]

[music]

[29:45]

[ad]

[36:01]

[music]

[36:43]

Monika Schaefer: All right, welcome back to The Flipside with Monika. I will give out the numbers now if you’d like to call in and join our conversation with our very special guest, Germar Rudolf. And the numbers are, 512-248-8252, or 1-800-313-9443.

Now, I just want to say that what I have seen of just the accomplishments of Germar Rudolf is that he must be one of the hardest working people that I know. And it is just phenomenal, how in German there’s a word “fleisig”, he’s just very hard working man. And so I just want to thank him now publicly for all the work that he has done over the years, over the many years and paid quite a price for all that work.

Now, Germar, I wrote you a letter and I don’t think you got that letter. And let me tell you where I sent that letter. I wrote it on December 27th and this is after our long mail strike in Canada. Finally, things were moving a little bit, although they were moving pretty slow, but I think you still wouldn’t have got it. I sent it on December 27th to Cattaraugus County Jail. Am I saying that right? Where is that? And what were you doing there? [chuckling]

Germar Rudolf: I was moved from there the day before. So you wrote it a day after I had been moved from there. So it would have been completely an effort in futility. Cattaraugus Jail, Cattaraugus County is, if I’m not mistaken, the West most county or one of the West most counties of upstate New York.

I was driving in my car west. I was planning to go to a dear friend of mine who had succumbed to cancer and was having health problems. And she was the last survivor of her family and had no one really. And I said:

“I’m coming over, I’m taking care of you. I can take my stuff with me and work from there and we’ll just have a good time, whatever time is left for you.”

Because she was terminal and they didn’t give her a lot of time, even though it turned out at the end it was even faster than they had predicted.

Anyway, I was on the way there and I got pulled over by the police because there was allegedly an arrest warrant out for me for or some minor thing in a different state, that is to say Pennsylvania. And normally that is a non-extradition affair because for misdemeanors they don’t go through the hoops of making extraditions. It’s very complicated. It goes from one state to the next and it’s time intensive and cost intensive and usually they don’t do that. And actually my case was marked as non-extraditable. So they called the Pennsylvania prosecutors and evidently that changed their mind. And he said:

“Yes, we want him.”

Monika Schaefer: And just on that note, I’m going to interject here. Do you think that this changing of their minds had anything to do with your volumes of work that you do? Even though this was on a completely unrelated trivial charge from a couple of years ago? What do you think?

Germar Rudolf: Pure speculation! Fact of the matter is, the case was two and a half years old. And in those two and a half years I have written an encyclopedia and the team I’m working with on marketing and all the rest of it, we had quite some success lately. As I mentioned, we have so far sold 2,000 copies to normal people for all walks of life. This is completely unusual!

So we have two unusual things. Normally a person doesn’t sit down and writes an encyclopedia. That’s to say teamwork of many scholars usually and takes a long time. And I wrote that thing in just five months.

So this is an unusual. A Singularity in history because I had all this knowledge already gathered and on my desk and right there at my fingertips. I was in a unique situation to be able to do that.

And then I had all the energy after my family had collapsed. It’s a different drama story.

[40:59]

Monika Schaefer: I’m very sorry. I’m very sorry.

Germar Rudolf: Yeah. That has a long story. I don’t want to go into detail, anyway.

Monika Schaefer: No, we don’t really have time to get into those.

Germar Rudolf: Anyway. I was a caregiver of three children and ran a household. That was my primary thing. Revisionism, I was doing on the side.

And then suddenly all this disappeared and I was without purpose and aim. And a good friend of mine gave me purpose and aim back by saying:

“We need this encyclopedia because nobody can wrap their heads around this massive amount of work of 53 volumes. Impossible. You want to read it by the time you reach the middle you have already forgotten at the beginning!”

So I sat down, did it and then we got a good marketing strategy. It’s actually working! We’re breaking through all the censorship and blocking attempts of the enemy, going directly to the customer, circumventing anything of what they have put into the roadblocks there. Working wonderful!

Does it have an impact? When I saw we’re having more success, I said to one of my associates:

“Looking at past successes we ever had, knowing that as soon as we have success, the hammer falls. Some big move comes and they shut everything down.”

So something is coming our way. We don’t know yet what it’s going to be. Is it that? I don’t know. Behind the scenes, maybe it is, maybe it’s not so pure speculation at this point.

Now, coming back to what the background is of, why is there an arrest warrant for me. Let me get back to the humor and try your American-Canadian humor. Talking about cultural collisions. So as an immigrant who, by the time I came, had a fairly good command of the English language already. Not perfect, but fairly good, what struck me, coming from England to America, one of the first things, driving in people’s cars, showing me the countryside, is that you guys park on driveways and drive on parkways. You people need to clean up your language! [Monika’s laughing]

So this is a joke. But no, there’s a second, and that’s where it gets serious. If I were to buy, as a boy, boy shorts and wear them as boy shorts, should that be acceptable?

Monika Schaefer: The boy shorts, you say, or body shorts? I didn’t quite catch that.

Germar Rudolf: Boy shorts.

Monika Schaefer: Okay.

Germar Rudolf: Okay. I’m in the habit of doing triathlons, and that time I was doing triathlons very early in the morning. It started, actually, when I was at the military. I rode my bicycle 20 miles to the barracks early in the morning. And I realized that normal bicycle clothes for men, almost everything, particularly the warmer ones for the wintertime, they’re all black! And back in the days, there were no LED lights.

But if you have LED light, it doesn’t matter. You have so little light on the bicycle. You have black clothes. You don’t get seen by cars. You could get run over. I had near collisions with cars because they weren’t seeing me a number of times. And I threw away all this standard clothes for cycling and went into a store to find gaudy clothes! Neon anything. Neon yellow, green, pink, whatever it is, I want to be seen because I don’t want to get run over!

Monika Schaefer: Yes.

Germar Rudolf: So that was prior to the Internet. I had to actually go to a store for sportswear, and I couldn’t find anything in the men’s department. I went to the women’s department. Rainbow colors, neon pink, neon green. Everything is there! Can’t find in the men’s departments, all black, gray, brown, dark blue. Suicide clothes! I’m not gonna wear this!

So I went to the women’s department and got the shorts and the jogging pants there that have these gaudy colors. I don’t give a rat’s arse. There’s no sex assigned.

Monika Schaefer: Besides just to remind, you were going at like early hours of the morning when it was still dark. That’s the idea.

Germar Rudolf: Having coming to America the issue is that in the areas I lived initially it was as I mentioned in Alabama. But then in southern Pennsylvania, summers gets quite hot. Hotter than the summers are in Europe from what I’m used to.

And if you go to triathlons, you don’t want to wear cyclopants which you can’t go swimming with and you can’t do jogging with. And I was doing also calisthenics. So I needed different clothes. We had the Internet, I went on the Internet and I wanted short legged shorts, gaudy colors. And I found online a pink pair of boy shorts. Wonderful! That’s exactly what I want. Can’t ride up. Keeps my thighs, where there’s massive heat from cycling is produced. Free. So that can cool. And what I didn’t know is that boy shorts is a type of women underwear!

Monika Schaefer: Oh, [chuckling] I didn’t know that either.

Germar Rudolf: Yeah, boy shorts are for girls and girl shorts are for boys! Which brings us back to the yeah, so you can laugh. Everyone can laugh. The problem is some people cannot laugh. If I have pink boy shorts riding on a bicycle that has even pink emblazoned on it. And I don’t know that this is a prominent women’s underwear brand! [chuckling]

[46:11]

Monika Schaefer: So Germar, I have to just kind of cut in here because we’ve got to cut to the chase a little bit.

And one thing that you told me on the phone, only because we’re running out of time, I’m enjoying this so much. Don’t get me wrong, this is a lot of fun. But we also do have a caller on the line. But I’ll bring him in soon. But not right away.

But one thing you told me on the phone because the whole thing is you got charged with something, what do they call it, “indecency” or something?

But you told me nothing was seen by anyone. Nothing! But wasn’t that something the prosecutor actually said?:

“Nothing was seen by anyone.”

Germar Rudolf: The police report said when they interviewed says:

“They didn’t see any genitals, anything exposed.”

They charge me for indecent exposure anyway because of a case where they said:

“Well even if nobody’s there and nothing is seen, if you expose yourself, you’re still doing indecent exposure.”

It’s a new case law and the legal profession is up in arms because that’s nonsense! Anyone pulling their pants down with no one around 4:00 in the middle of a night going pee. It’s also medically induced exposure.

In other words, we all are guilty of it because at some point when we were hiking, we had to do some business. Indecent exposure, right there! If you confess to having done it, you’re done! It’s insane!

Monika Schaefer: It is why I posed that rhetorical question. I’ll just say it was a rhetorical question. Do you think that all of this has anything to do with your actual work of publishing all these politically incorrect volumes and books?

Now, just before we bring on Chance from West Virginia, and we’re not forgetting about you. Thank you. But where can people get your books and where can people go to find those things? Because we’ve talked a lot about the Holocaust Encyclopedia. I think it’s probably pretty straightforward, isn’t it?

Now I’m going to put these things into my chat room, which is at Flipside Mo Chatango. I did put Codoh already in there for people who are visiting the chat room. But just tell us where they can get your books and then I’ll invite Chance onto the call.

Germar Rudolf: Yeah. The Holocaust Encyclopedia can be accessed, all the information free of charge and a version downloaded free of charge. Or you can buy either ebooks or printed books at holocaustencyclopedia.com Very easy.

The Holocaust Handbooks, the 53 I mentioned can be had at holocausthandbooks.com. Very easy. Now if you go to Holocaust Encyclopedia, it has a link in the top menu it says bookstore. You click on that and you’ll get to the general bookstore, which is armreg.co.uk. Armreg is ARMREG. That’s kind of Germar backwards. It’s actually Gamra, so couldn’t make it quite fit because it is actually Academic Research Media Review and Education Group limited. That’s what it stands for. But it was designed to kind of be my first name backward because that’s the legacy.

Anyway, these are the ways to get to the stuff. Just brief thing. Is there a link? Yes. When I was at my hearing two and a half years ago when they charged me with this, the prosecutor, when it was about bail or not, said:

“Not only do I have these weird habits of wearing weird clothes and gaudy colors and do stuff in the early morning, but I’m also an intellectual pervert because I’m the leading international Holocaust denier who dodges the law by running from one country to another. And that’s the reason why I shouldn’t be allowed to get bailed.”

So there you have it. Clear violation of First Amendment. Throwing stuff in there has nothing to do with it. And declaring me an intellectual pervert because I dare to single handedly write an encyclopedia. That’s perversion!

Monika Schaefer: Bingo. There you have it. They’re trying to charge you with being a pervert. But it’s the intellectual pervert that they are calling you.

Okay, Chance from West Virginia. And we do have only a few minutes left and we’ve also got another caller on the line. So please give your comment or question for Germar.

Chance: Hello. Yes, yes, gutenab Monika and Herr Rudolf. I couldn’t believe Jurgen Graf has passed away. He’s only nine years older than me.

Now, Mr. Rudolf, you rekindled my memory hearing Jurgen Graf’s name. I went to my personal library and I pulled out a book that I bought over to 20 years ago, if you can recall it. The Giant with Feet of Clay.

Germar Rudolf: Of course. I published it. Yes.

Chance: Yes. Raul Hilberg and his standard work on the Holocaust. Yes, and I like that phrase that Raul Hilberg made in the lower right hand corner of the book:

“Superficiality is the major disease in the field of Holocaust studies.”

Germar Rudolf: Includes him!

Chance: Yes, yes. And can I ask you another question, Mr. Rudolf? You wrote a book in German with Sybil Schroeder, it says. I’m skimming through the book right. Now I’m going to reread it again to refresh my memory. I haven’t read it in 15 years. Do you still write with Sybil Schroeder?

Germar Rudolf: Sibyl Schroeder was a pen name of Ingrid Weckert. And that was not a book, that was an article. And it was included as an introduction to the article on Einsatzgruppen murders in Dissecting the Holocaust. You can find it there.

Chance: Yes. It was written in the German language.

Germar Rudolf: Yeah. It’s translated in English, in Dissecting the Holocaust.

Chance: Yes. Yes. This book here, the Giant with Feet of Clay is, I think, the English edition is 2001, I believe. I purchased this book quite a while ago. And Jurgen Graf would have only been 73 or 74 years old when he passed away, correct?

Germar Rudolf: Yes, 73.

[52:21]

Monika Schaefer: He was born in 1951, so in August.

Chance: Rather young.

Germar Rudolf: The Giant with Feet of Clay exists now in a new edition that was put out just two and a half years ago. Updated and you can find it as I mentioned on armreg.co.uk. You search for “giant”, and boom, there it is.

Chance: If I may ask you real quick before I hang up, if you don’t mind. What part of Germany are you from?

Germar Rudolf: Northwest of Frankfurt. That’s where I was born and grew up.

Chance: My relatives are from the Black Forest region, originally.

Monika Schaefer: Okay, Chance, I’m going to let you go. Not to be rude, but we do have several more callers in just a few minutes left. Thank you very much for calling.

So, Joe from Florida, are you there? Mr. Producer? Yeah, is that Joe? Hello?

Joe: Hey, Monika, thanks for taking my call.

Monika Schaefer: Yeah, all right. Do you have a question?

Joe: Yeah, real quick. By the way, I just want to validate what Germar was saying. I’m a crazy addicted man who’s a bike rider and I know exactly what he means about wearing light clothes at night. I totally identify, just FYI. So I validate that.

But here’s the thing. It’s my opinion, Germar, that you are, and Monika and the great Ernst Zundel, you have all done the thing, which is, in my opinion, you have paid great tribute to your ancestors. Okay? And speaking as somebody with Swiss German heritage, we need to honor you and for you and for Monika and somebody like Ernst Zundel.

But it’s interesting. I want to see your idea. It seems as though it was almost necessary for each of you in your own way to actually get out of the homeland, get out of Germany in order to be free enough and courageous, I have to say, to write and do the work that you’ve done that has done such great tribute to your ancestors, who were very viciously maligned by the jewish Mafia in this country and in Germany, which they controlled. What do you think about this idea that it was necessary to emigrate?

Germar Rudolf: This is a German tradition. Karl Marx had to go to England to write his books. He couldn’t do it in Germany.

Now, that’s the polar opposite of maybe, in a way, but there is a tradition. There were German Professors who were fighting for national unification of Germany in the 1840s. And they all had to leave Germany, or many of them, because they were persecuted and they had brought to work from outside Germany. Unfortunately, that is tradition that comes with a tradition of censorship and oppression in Germany that has been there for centuries. It’s not a domain of National Socialism. It’s a domain of German culture and tradition unfortunately. People do not fight for their freedom of speech. They are easy to submit to government demands of ratting out neighbors and thinking pretty correct. And forming a lynch mob against dissidents. That’s an unfortunate tradition in Germany, I must say.

Monika Schaefer: Yeah, so that’s a very good observation, Joe, that you make, first of all, about people leaving to be able to speak, and also about honoring our ancestors. And sorry to let you go, but thank you for your call.

Joe: Thank you.

Monika Schaefer: And I’ll take another caller. And we just have a very short amount of time. Barbie from, I’ve lost where you’re from, but please, Mr. Producer, could you bring on. Yes, Washington, D.C.

Barbie: It’s Barbie from Washington, D.C.

Monika Schaefer: Barbie Novak!

Barbie: Yes, I want to talk about the nudity. And I wanted to stick up for him because I was a nude model in Washington, Las Vegas.

My art teacher from Harvard was a nude teacher. I’ve taken lessons with her. And she gave me three of her paintings. I bought one. I have three nude males in my storage. [chuckling] You know what I mean? And it’s like:

“What are they doing to him?”

Now the one thing is, I was going to sell those three paintings. No one on Ebay wanted them. They would give a million dollars for a nude female. Zero. They don’t even exist.

So I think you’re being prejudiced against because you’re a male and nude. And I love to be at your trial! I love to speak up for you! I’ll bring my three paintings, my nude males with me.

Monika Schaefer: Germar, please, can you tell people where and when the trial is that that she could come?

Germar Rudolf: It’s not scheduled yet. It’s not scheduled yet. The schedule may happen in late February, so I don’t know yet. When it comes to this, I’ve gotten in contact with people who call themselves nudists and naturists. And the first encounter I had after these things, and I found out I didn’t even know what that means. And I happened to live together with a guy who called himself naturist. And I must say, I’m neither of these things. I have a completely relaxed German attitude to my body. I think that the natural state of anyone’s body can’t be a crime in itself. It depends on what you do with it.

But I’m just coming from a different culture and I’m thoughtlessly changing in public from one pants to another without thinking anything, because that’s what everyone does in Germany. And I didn’t realize initially it’s a problem in this country. Even though it is not a sexual activity, it’s not indecent exposure. It’s decent exposure for a few seconds to change! And there are other things that are going on. I don’t do these things intentionally. It was cultural collision because it’s just different in Germany.

Monika Schaefer: I like that word. We’re going to end on that “cultural collision”.

And of course you know your intellectual [chuckling] activities that they didn’t like. Thank you so much, Germar. Thank you to the listeners and the callers and thank you to the producer. And we will catch you next week. Thank you everybody.

[58:40]

[music]

[58:48]

[ad]

[60:00]

END

top

============================================

RBN Comments

top

(Comments as of 1/20/2025 = 3)

Blewitt
January 18, 22:31
I first learned of Holocaust Revisionism from a book written in the 1970s. This book was _The Hoax of the Twentieth Century_ by Arthur Butz, who was a professor of electrical engineering at Northwestern University.

kati
January 19, 09:04
im living near Hannover in germany, von der Leyen is near me here, we are said to be the most humorless in germany, stocksteif hochdeutsch thats what we are, wir gehen zum Lachen in den Keller is a saying we have here, we are serious by nature. Even the most nothern germans at the coast have more humour, south germans sure anyway always, or famous rheinländisch humour, thats not the case here, we go into the basement if we have to laugh.

kati
January 19, 09:21
Gemma oDoherty did a 2 hour talk with Germar too, highly recommended, and Kevin Barrett too, sure he tells the story more detailed when he is over 2 hours at them.
Imho the police did a trap on him, it was on purpose they got him, Germar should be careful in future he does not run into another trap.
And his experience in the jail was pure nightmare for me, they put him on purpose to the blacks, i would be rather with turks together but never blacks, thats the worst. Here in germany the prisons are mostly filled with these, but Alfred sure made that experience. My record is clean, i keep my opinions private, if i had to go to prison here in germany i would lose the last bit i have.
Thanks for the show like always very amazing und Grüße aus Deutschland!

==========================

See Also

top

The World’s First Anti-Holocaust Convention — Instauration Dec, 1979

An Open Letter to New Jersey’s Governor

Historians or Hoaxers?

House of Orwell

Misha: Surviving with Wolves or …

Bradley Smith’s Smith Report # 1

The Liberation of the Camps: Facts vs. Lies

The Plum Cake

Auschwitz: Myths and Facts

Powers and Principalities XI – Ewen Cameron, MK-Ultra, Holocaust Revisionism — TRANSCRIPT

Tales of the Holohoax – A Historian’s Assessment – Part 1

The Holocaust Lie — Made in America

Probing the Holocaust: The Horror Explained — TRANSCRIPT

Jim Rizoli Interviews Prof Robert Faurisson, Oct 2015 — TRANSCRIPT

Holocaust Eyewitnesses: Is the Testimony Reliable?

Alain Soral – My Homage to Robert Faurisson, Oct 2018 — TRANSCRIPT

Inside Auschwitz – You’ve never seen THIS before! — TRANSCRIPT

Amazion Bans 100s of Holocaust Revisionist Books!

AUSCHWITZ – A Personal Account by Thies Christophersen

Jim Rizoli Interviews Bradley Smith — TRANSCRIPT

London Forum – Alfred Schaefer – Psychological Warfare – TRANSCRIPT

The Realist Report Interviews Eric Hunt — TRANSCRIPT

Red Ice Radio – Germar Rudolf – Persecution of Revisionists & Demographic Disaster – Part 1— TRANSCRIPT

Red Ice Radio: Nicholas Kollerstrom — TRANSCRIPT

Red Ice TV – Ingrid Carlqvist – Scandal in Sweden When Ingrid Questions the Unquestionable — TRANSCRIPT

The Realist Report with Carolyn Yeager on Johnson vs Anglin debate — TRANSCRIPT

Monika Schaefer – The Flipside with Monika – Ep 1 – Intro – Jun 29, 2024 – Transcript

The Flipside with Monika – Ep 2 – Jul 6, 2024 – Transcript

The Flipside with Monika – Ep 03 with Paul Fromm – Jul 13, 2024 – Transcript

Monika Schaefer – The Flipside with Monika – Ep 04 with Oscar – Jul 20, 2024 – Transcript

The Flipside with Monika – Ep 08 with Alfred Schaefer – Aug 17, 2024 – Transcript

The Flipside with Monika – Ep 09 with Grace Eki Oyama – Aug 24, 2024 – Transcript

Monika Schaefer – The Flipside with Monika – Ep 15 with Jürgen Neumann on Ernst Zündel – Oct 12, 2024 – Transcript

The Flipside with Monika – Ep 18 with Jürgen Neumann – Nov 2, 2024 – Transcript

Joel Davis – WWII Revisionism Re-enters the Mainstream – Sep 6, 2024 – Transcript

Monika Schaefer: I’m not hearing the broadcast yet. Can you hear me? Thank you.

All right. Good day. Good evening. Hello everybody. Welcome to another episode of The Flipside with Monika. And it is November 2, 2024. You’re listening to the Republic Broadcasting Network on RepublicBroadcasting.org and this is episode 18 of The Flipside with Monika. I am your host, Monika Schaefer.

I’m going to bring in a return guest. I’m very excited about that it’s Jurgen Neumann. But before I bring him on, I’m just going to give you a little update about some recent developments in Canada. I would say, you know, Canadiana, it’s really important actually, this stuff. And in the end, this all relates very much and very deeply to the topic we’re talking about today. And that will be about centering around World War II history and the so-called “Holocaust”, Ernst Zundel’s work, because Jurgen Neumann was Ernst Zundel’s videographer and worked with him for decades.

So what I’m talking about is our own little quote, unquote, “Holocaust” developing scene. And I say that quite deliberately. I use those words deliberately because they, there are so many parallels, … I’m hearing some noise in the background. Are we? This is going out though, is it? Okay, so anyway, I’ll carry on here.

I’ve talked about this story before about Canada’s own so-called alleged genocide. It’s these mass graves or unmarked graves. And yeah, so October 29th, that’s just a few days ago, there was the release of a report by Kimberly Murray, she’s the special interlocutor on these mass graves, the missing children at the residential schools.

Now this story goes back to May of 2021 when it went like wildfire around the world in big headlines that Canada has these mass graves and has murdered all these children at the residential schools.

And in the meantime, have any of these graves been dug up? Did they find any evidence? In spite of millions of dollars being spent on investigations or perhaps we should say non-investigations, nothing, nothing has been found. No evidence.

So this report that came out on Tuesday of this week, it highlights the need for, … Drumroll, please, legal mechanisms to address “denialism”. And now the report says that children were “disappeared”. So what started out as these absolutely incendiary reports about mass graves, they then became unmarked graves. That all came about because they had some ground penetrating radar that found anomalies. You know, these could be rocks and roots. And now they haven’t found any evidence.

So I guess the Canadian government and, or the Churches who ran the residential schools, they just simply “disappeared” the children. That’s a verb. They disappeared them. They got disappeared.

So I guess that’s why they have to now make laws to criminalize you if you question the story. And this has really been ramped up in the news lately. And, oh, funny enough, this past month there was a Bill tabled in the House of Commons, Bill C413, by an NDP Member of Parliament, Leah Gazan. She introduced a Bill that would indeed criminalize residential school denialism. She says:

“The purpose of the schools was to extinguish indigenous cultures and languages. And if government is serious about reconciliation, it needs to protect survivors and their families from hate.”

[chuckling] Oh, my goodness, there’s so much to say about that. I could go on for hours about just this topic. I did talk about this topic in episode seven. You could find that in the archives. But I’ll just ask a couple of questions here and then we’re going to move on from this topic.

But why would it be that some of the Indian chiefs and families, they were lobbying the government to keep the schools open when the government was closing them? All right? So they wanted them to be kept open. That’s one question to ask if they were genocidal places where children went missing.

And by the way, why didn’t the parents report these children missing? Like, there’s no evidence that there were reports of missing children at the time. Now these parents just go:

“Oh, okay, well, so what? Our child didn’t come home this time.”

And no. Anyway, another question to ask. Why is it that these the Oblate fathers, they actually created syllabics to have these languages?

Okay, so I’m just hearing noise there. I’m not sure if. Okay, I’ll carry on. The syllabics were, … This was a form of written language for these native languages. Now, this was done by the Oblate fathers. These were some of the Oblate, … Okay, thank you, Frank. I’m just going to carry on with this subject a little bit longer and then I’ll bring our guest on.

So they wrote these languages down. These languages had never been written before. Now, if one of the charges against the schools and the government is that the purpose of the residential schools was to obliterate the languages of the indigenous people. Why would they create a written language for it? Methinks that it was to help to preserve these languages! So anyway, that’s just some questions to ask about it.

[08:33]

Okay, I’m going to now give you a little bit of a recap of episode 15 of this show that we had on October 12th with the guest Jurgen Neumann, just to bring you up to speed. And then we’re going to carry on and I’ll bring him in. Jurgen Neumann was Ernst Zundel’s videographer and helped Ernst Zundel for decades with his work. Ernst Zundel was a German. I’m hearing a lot of background noise. I don’t know if that’s going out on the airwaves or if it’s another line. Anyway, …

Okay, so Ernst Zundel was a German immigrant to Canada who challenged the mainstream Holocaust narrative. He had his moment of awakening when he met Adrian Arcand, a French-Canadian who had been in a Canadian concentration camp. Yes, you heard that right. A Canadian concentration camp, for six years during World War II. Arcand, he showed Ernst Zundel historical information, his immense library of books and just so much information which he had been denied all those years. And Ernst Zundel felt he was “born again”. That’s the way he described it. [chuckling] He was born again with the truth! In the late 1970s, Ernst Zundel ran for leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada. It gave him a platform to speak about issues facing German immigrants at that time.

And in 1980, there was a major raid on Ernst Zundel’s supporters in Germany because he had done a lot of mailings and he had a lot of supporters. I think some maybe 2,000 of these German homes were raided by the police. It was the largest peacetime police raid as far as I know, in modern times in Germany.

And then after that, reports about that that led to, or it was followed by protests against him in Toronto.

And then he began to use video to document events and spread his message. He met Robert Faurisson, the world’s foremost revisionist who focused on questioning existence of gas chambers! And then some big legal troubles began, including his mail being cut off. And he was charged with, quote, unquote, “spreading false news”. In 1985, there was a trial that lasted six weeks. And the trial included testimony from Holocaust survivors. First time that former camp inmates were properly cross examined by a lawyer!

In other words, they didn’t, you know, shrink back from doing that thinking:

“Oh, but that would be too insensitive!”

Anyway, that’s about where we left off last time in our episode 15 with Jurgen Neumann.

And I just wanted to give a shout out to katana, his website, katana17.com he did do a transcript of that last episode and he does transcripts of a lot of videos and talks and interviews that he deems worthy of preservation. And so that is a great compliment to that show we did three weeks ago. And I encourage the listener to visit that website at your earliest convenience. It’s Katana. That’s katana17.com. And you will find a lot of good stuff there.

Okay. So, Jurgen Neumann, are you there?

Jürgen Neumann: I certainly am. How are you this evening?

Monika Schaefer: Good. Welcome back. Welcome back!

So, yeah, we talked this morning about carrying on from, … And I just did that little recap. I’m sure you heard it. That’s what we talked about generally last time. And you had told me you had touched upon the fact that there was an appeal.

Well, first of all, that Ernst Zundel was found guilty. Right. And then there was an appeal a year later in 1986. Can you carry on with that story, please?

Jürgen Neumann: Sure.

So after the trial in March 1985, that was when he was found guilty on, actually, he was charged under two charges. One was about the booklet Did Six Million really Die? And the other one was about, I guess you might call it a leaflet or pamphlet called The West, War and Islam.

And so which we think they just threw that in just to kind of mix things up, keep people kind of confused. So they didn’t just concentrate on the main subject.

Anyway, he was found guilty on just “Did Six Million really Die?”, but he was found not guilty on the “The West, War and Islam”.

So after that, the next month, he was dragged in for the his deportation hearing. They were going to deport him. It seems they started deportation proceedings about halfway into the trial. [chuckling] So I think they already had a plan, but the plan eventually got upset.

Monika Schaefer: So are you talking about the, … Excuse me. Are you talking about, they started their procedures to deport Ernst Zundel back to Germany? Is that correct?

Jürgen Neumann: Yes.

Monika Schaefer: It’s so interesting because I remember hearing over the years back then, that was kind of a topic that came up over and over again in the news to deport Ernst Zundel. And they never did. They never did until much later, you know, following the debacle when he was arrested in Tennessee, years later. And of course, that was following 9/11, when they had whole new set of rules. [chuckling] But please carry on.

Jürgen Neumann: Yes, they started working on his deportation papers and all that stuff before the trial was even over! I mean, normally you wait till the person’s guilty before you do that.

So anyway, they started that. And of course, they couldn’t exactly deport him right away because he was appealing the decision. So in 1986, they went to the Ontario Appeal Court. And it was heard by the Chief Justice and five justices, five judges, for the appeal. So that was a pretty big appeal. So they heard it and that was in the summer of 86. They didn’t come down with their verdict until January of 87, at which time he won the appeal. They said:

“Yes, it was wrong, what happened during the trial and so therefore, we overturn the verdict of the trial.”

And immediately the authorities stepped up and they appealed the appeal. And so it went to. What was that? That was spring of 87. So April and June. Well, April they went to the Supreme Court of Canada with us.

And so they heard the case and they thought it over. And in June, they come back with their verdict, and that again, was overturned, the verdict of the 1985 trial. So therefore, in that case, what happened was the deportation hearing or deportation order were thrown out because that was based on the verdict, which is no longer good.

And also his, what do you call it, his gag order was also null and void because of that.

[16:39]

Monika Schaefer: Oh, good. Just on a point here, people might be wondering why they threw out the 1985 verdict. Was it because of things that happened during the trial that were actually improper? Like they didn’t do proper proceedings? Like they did illegal things, perhaps during the trial?

Jürgen Neumann: Well, they didn’t really say the things were illegal, but they were improper. The judge of the trial made improper decisions and refused to allow evidence that should have been allowed, and allowed things that shouldn’t have been allowed and things of that nature.

Monika Schaefer: It’s funny that it just kind of reminds me of the Schaefer sibling trial in Germany in 2018! [chuckling]

Jürgen Neumann: Ha ha! Yeah!

Monika Schaefer: They didn’t allow any of our witnesses that would have been favorable to our side of the story. They didn’t allow any of those to even appear. And then they did all kinds of things that were completely illegal, every single trial day. [chuckling] But carry on with this, your story, please.

Jürgen Neumann: Yeah. I think it was even the next day when the Attorney General of Ontario, I think it was, he had the choice of either dropping the whole thing or ordering a new trial. And so undoubtedly, under pressure from certain (((groups))) and things, he decided it was best to have another trial. So he ordered a new trial.

And, oh, by the way, for those who don’t know, the concept of appealing something is its not another trial if there is a problem with the legality and all the technical things of the trial. It’s not a new trial.

So anyway, so therefore new one was ordered. And as it turns out, evidence surfaced that jewish groups had gone around to various news outlets and stuff and discussed with them that they should not report that trial the same way they reported the first trial. First trial got mega coverage, millions and millions of dollars! I mean, Mr. Zundel was a household word all across Canada and part of the northern United States, because it was broadcast everywhere for six weeks.

And of course, they didn’t want that to happen again.

Monika Schaefer: Very true, because there were a lot of details in the fine print of, for example, newspaper articles in mainstream newspapers that had I read past the headlines, I would have learned a lot. They actually reported what was going on in that trial, and evidence coming forward was not favorable to the mainstream orthodox narrative, was it?

Jürgen Neumann: No.

Monika Schaefer: So that was really quite something. It was very historic!

Jürgen Neumann: And especially the TV newscasts and stuff. They were really devastated.

So anyway, so they did actually manage to curtail the media reporting, restricting it for the second trial. There was nowhere near the amount of information that got out, which, of course is too bad because there was a lot more information that was revealed during the second trial. Second trial was actually four months long. It was even longer.

And anyway, so went to trial the second time around with everybody. Ernst got all his people together again. And so we started on the second trial. And during the second trial, it was Faurisson, for who you have mentioned, Robert Faurisson, who, by the way, had been, … Oh, no, he hadn’t been yet. Okay.

Anyway, it was him that kept saying:

“We should do this in a technical material fashion. We have to find somebody who knows something about the technology of gas chambers.”

And stuff like that. Because he was sure that what is suggested are gas chambers over in Auschwitz and stuff is total nonsense, because he had been there himself and looked at it. Right?

But he didn’t have the expertise in order to say it. Because he tried to introduce that evidence in the first trial, but he was not allowed because he was not an expert in execution equipment and gas chambers. So the judge disallowed him. So, Mr Faurisson said:

“Well, we have to find somebody.”

And so they started sending, during the trial already that’s when we started sending out letters to American prisons and to the state prisons, things who had executions, they had capital punishment, and those who had gas chambers and stuff, and asked them, the wardens and whoever else, if somebody would be willing to talk about this. Become maybe a witness for that kind of stuff.

And I think it was the was Missouri. I forget which state it was. Maybe Missouri.

Anyway, he only got one really. Well, he got a couple of replies and they said:

“No, actually we wouldn’t want to do that.”

But the warden of the one state penitentiary, Bill Armentrout, he replied that:

“Yeah, sure he wouldn’t mind.”

He understood the freedom of speech aspect and he thought:

“Yeah, sure, if my expertise and my evidence could be helpful, I would gladly be one.”

He said:

“But if you really want to know the nuts and bolts about gas chambers and things like that, you should talk to our engineer, Fred Leuchter.”

So right away we got in touch with Fred Leuchter. And so Robert Faurisson, he talked with him and they agreed. He flew down, flew to Boston where Mr. Leuchter was living, and he discussed it with him, and said:

“Yeah, this and this, and would you be willing to take part in all this?”

And Fred Leuchter said:

“Yeah, I would be willing to do that.”

So he flew back to Toronto and talked to Ernst. He said:

“Okay, he’s willing to do that, but, oh, we got a problem.”

And Ernst said:

“What’s that?”

He said:

“Well, Fred Leuchter believes in the Holocaust and the gas chambers.”

And Ernst said:

“Not to worry, not to worry. Didn’t we all at one time?”

[23:22]

Monika Schaefer: Exactly! Just like everybody else believes, that’s what we all learned, that’s what we all heard. So he probably hadn’t given it any more thought than that.

Jürgen Neumann: Exactly:

“So we’ll let him do it. And what he finds out is what he will find out.”

So he paid for him to fly to Toronto and he came and he discussed everything with Ernst and Faurisson on everything. Went over all the evidence and all the documents and everything and oh, that’s right. What had happened during the first trial was, … No, hold on a second here. I got this kind of or was it? I think it was made up for the second trial.

Yeah, one of our supporters is a professional model maker. And so we gave him the blueprints of the alleged gas chamber buildings and stuff like that. And he made proper scale models of these buildings that you could take apart and stuff and look and discuss and point out what’s what with them. So he pointed that out. He showed Fred Leuchter that as well. And Fred Leuchter was quite amazed at the whole thing. So he agreed that:

“Yeah, okay, we’ll go.”

So we set a team together, which is translator, Fred, Fred’s wife, the secretary, a draftsman, and myself as a video man. And in February during the trial, we flew to communist Poland and we started investigating these areas. And I’ll always remember the first time. And it was cold in February, it was cold!

Anyway, we were the Auschwitz camp and we approached the building that they claim is the gas chamber. And we were about 20 yards away, or more, and Fred stopped, so we all stopped. And he looked at it probably for a minute or more and he said:

“This is bs!”

He hasn’t got in the building yet, but he can already see for a distance that there’s something wrong with this one. And so anyway, so we went there and sure enough we went through the whole thing and he made his report on it. He also took samples from the walls. Because if it had been a, a homicidal gas chamber, there should be residue of the gas used, which was the same gas supposedly used, or the same gas that was used at American gas chambers was the one supposedly used here to murder people.

And of course that’s what made him an expert for these ones as well, because it’s supposed to be the same gas. So technically it should be, generally speaking, the same technology. Which of course it wasn’t.

So anyway, he took all these samples and we went through Auschwitz and Birkenau and Majdanek and eventually we got back, took the stuff back. He took the samples to a very well known lab in Massachusetts, I think it was, and they checked it. You know, he said:

“Oh well, didn’t want it biased, the test.”

So the laboratory was told that these are samples from an industrial accident and could they please tell us how much hydrogen cyanide is in the samples. So they did that.

Monika Schaefer: Yeah, that was, that was wise, I would say, wasn’t it? Because if they actually told them where it was from Auschwitz, that might have skewed the procedures for actually telling what’s in it.

Jürgen Neumann: Yeah, it definitely would have. I mean, later on the guy who did the testing, who was actually the manager of the lab, actually said that in a documentary that was made about it afterwards, he actually said that:

“Well, if we had known it was from Auschwitz.”

Well, right, that tells you everything you need to know.

Anyway, so Mr. Leuchter wrote his report, et cetera, came to the conclusion that all is not the way they say it is. And so it was tendered as evidence in the trial, right near the end of the trial, because it took a while for everything.

And of course that just absolutely blew everybody away! All the prosecution and the judges, everything. They were basically speechless!

Monika Schaefer: And yeah, quite something. It would have been like this big smoking gun going off, wasn’t it?

Jürgen Neumann: Yep. So they brought this in and after they realized what it was, the judge said:

“The jury has to leave the room.”

So the jury filed out so they could discuss this. So they discussed it and the judge said:

“Okay, we can allow this as a lettered exhibit.”

Whatever that actually means, because it wasn’t allowed to be shown to the jury.

Monika Schaefer: Oh!

Jürgen Neumann: So I don’t know what alleged “lettered exhibit” actually meant, but it wasn’t allowed to be shown there to them.

Monika Schaefer: So they were going to withhold this very, very critical piece of forensic evidence? They were withholding that from the jury. Did I hear that correctly?

Jürgen Neumann: Yes, you heard that correctly. Absolutely! See, because if he gave as regular exhibit, they could have access to it and actually read it and think about it.

Monika Schaefer: Right! Jurgen, this is just actually got me on the edge of my seat because even though I knew quite a bit about this, I didn’t know that that that was withheld from the jury. But we’re going into a break. I just heard the music begin. Please stay with us and we’ll also invite callers after the break. But this is really interesting. Thank you so much!

[29:43]

[ad]

[35:59]

[music]

[36:12]

Monika Schaefer: All right, I’d like to welcome you back to The Flipside with Monika. First, I’d like to remind you, dear listeners, if you possibly, possibly can do support this network and there are three ways you can support Republic Broadcasting Network, but I will tell you right now there is an urgency. So I’ll say the first method is the best. And that would be a direct financial donation. You can go to RepublicBroadcasting.org and you’ll find the donation instructions or call 1-800-724-2719 to make an immediate contribution. And the reason being that I say there is urgency to this because they are barely able to cover their bills for the next couple of weeks. So it seems to happen from time to time that they get very low on funds. So that is the case right now.

The other ways you can support the network and it’s a little bit less direct, but it is important nevertheless. One is to support the sponsors the advertisers, the things that get advertised on the network.

And another is, and this is really important, you know, sometimes people, they might say:

“Oh, you’re just in an echo chamber!”

Well, I say, no, not if we share these shows. If you like what you’re hearing, if the show is good, you can pass it on to somebody. Because these kind of networks, these kind of shows, they don’t get spread around very easily unless we do it directly. So share, share, share!

Oh, and I just have a note from the producer here that mail in is good too. And mail in a donation. And the address is on that website. And I’ll repeat the website. It is RepublicBroadcasting.org.

Okay, that was a first thing I wanted to take care of oh, well, there it is. There’s the address. Thank you. 2251 Double Creek Drive 302 Round Rock, Texas 78664 USA.

So that’s the mailing address. If you wanted to do it the old fashioned way, write a check, that kind of thing.

Okay. I also want to tell you we are really having to condense this incredible story that Jurgen is telling right now. But he has a channel on Bitchute and the channel name is called JohnRobinson101. So go to Bitchute, put John Robinson 101 in the search bar and you will find a ton of videos because he is very actively re-uploading some of the old stuff plus new stuff. So you’ll find a lot of good, good things there.

And actually when you come back on Jurgen, you can give your other website, I think on Odysee if you like. I don’t have that in front of me right now. I’ve also put a couple of links to things in the chat room, and that’s the flipsidewmonica.chatango.com.

And one more thing, the call in numbers. If you’d like to join our conversation today, it’s 512-248-8252 or the toll free number is 1-800-313-9443.

Okay, with all that said, I don’t want to take any more time away from Jurgen. And we were just on that part which illustrates the extreme corruption of the court system. I would say it’s the criminals are on the wrong side of the they should be in the docket, or in the dock or whatever they call it! [chuckling] But they’re running the show where you said that the jury was not permitted to actually read The Leuchter Report . The Leuchter Report was a bomb that like, it just blows apart the Holocaust narrative right now! And of course that’s why they wanted to keep it hidden from them.

Carry on from there, please, Jurgen.

Jürgen Neumann: Okay, before I say a little bit more, I would like to comment a little bit on Fred Leuchter’s character, him and his wife who were there. And that is, he was a very honest and dedicated guy. He had a great sense of humor. When we were there, I got this headache and I didn’t know what to do about it. They had aspirins and stuff here:

“Here, here, have some aspirins.”

I had some aspirins. At night in the hotel room they brought along a deck of cards, played cards. They were always upbeat, smiling, great people! I really enjoyed it. And he was very dedicated in his work. When we were in Auschwitz Birkenau, which is the big camp, when they had destroyed the so-called, what do you call it, gas chamber buildings and stuff, crematory gas chamber buildings. In order for to get proper samples from that one, the only way you could access it was to go down, there was one hole that was left over in the ground. So he’d get into the basement and do these things.

And so he was going to crawl down on there. Remember, it’s February, it’s super cold. He gets there and he can’t fit through the hole because of his heavy coat. So what does he do? He takes off his coat, he’s all cold, and he goes down in there and we videotape that where he gets down there in the water and everything else and takes all the samples, etc. So he’s very, very dedicated.

Monika Schaefer: Wow!

Jürgen Neumann: So back to the trial, they couldn’t read the report itself. However, Fred was then called as a witness and he was allowed to testify in front of the jury and so on. So he talked about everything that he had done and what he had seen and so on and so forth, and so jury at least got to hear him personally, although they couldn’t verify anything by reading the report.

Monika Schaefer: Do you think that it might have made them wonder, though, why are we not allowed to see the report that this man produced? Do you think that, or would they even have been privy to that information, that there existed a report but they were not permitted to see it? Like this is very puzzling to me. Any logically thinking person would, it would raise their alarm bells, would it not?

Jürgen Neumann: I would hope so.

Monika Schaefer: Yes!

Jürgen Neumann: I will say that I was not in the courtroom at that time.

Monika Schaefer: Okay.

Jürgen Neumann: So from what I heard afterwards in the debriefings and stuff, was that when the judge told the jury to leave the room and stuff, that was before they actually talked a lot about the concept of the report. So I have a feeling that maybe they didn’t quite realize that there was a written report for that.

Monika Schaefer: Okay, right.

Jürgen Neumann: I think so, anyway.

Monika Schaefer: Mmm.

[44:13]

Jürgen Neumann: Anyway, so the last witness was David Irving. He was a very controversial British historian. And he himself, when he got up there, he actually changed his mind on the stand. Because the prosecutor said:

“Oh, you believed in the Holocaust. You’ve said so in your books and stuff like that.”

He said:

“Yeah, well, that was until now. And so now I’m going to have to change this and I’m going to have to change that, and I will change all these things to conform with the new evidence that I now know about, et cetera.”

So that was a big sensation as well.

Monika Schaefer: Incredible, isn’t it? It is sensational! It really is, yes.

Jürgen Neumann: So anyway, it’s all over.

And once again, as was expected, he was found guilty. Right. So then, time to go for another appeal.

So, okay, so the appeal, this went on for a while. September 1989, Professor Faurisson, who was the number one helper for number one revisionist, number one person helping research, I think, for the trial, and a witnesses at the trial as well, near his home in France, he was beaten almost to death in the park by three assailants who, they don’t know, never did catch them.

So he was in the hospital for quite a while in critical condition, had to wire his jaw closed and all kinds of different things. But that did not deter him! He still kept on with his revisionist views, etc. Turns out that he had actually been beaten altogether about eight times, and that never stopped him at all! That did not terrorize him into silence!

Monika Schaefer: A man of integrity, honesty, and his favorite word, exactitude!

Jürgen Neumann: Yes. We must not forget courage.

Monika Schaefer: And courage! Yes, thank you. The most important of all. Thank you. Go ahead.

Jürgen Neumann: Yes.

So anyway, put in the appeal, because when we want to go to the Supreme Court of Canada, you ask for leave to appeal, you don’t automatically get one. So we put together the factum, put together all the material that’s necessary, and then it was handed into the Supreme Court so that they could have a look at it and see if an appeal was warranted. And so wait a month, a month later, finally in 1990 the Supreme Court agreed to hear the appeal after they thought about it for 10 months, which was pretty good that they even agreed to hear it. So that was good.

So then they set the appeal for, I think it was 1991. So it’s going to be a little while down the road. In the meantime, Ernst went back to Germany. He had helped organize this great big huge, what was called the Leuchter Congress. Great big meeting of all kinds of revisionists in Munich, et cetera. They rented a hall in one of the big museums there.

And of course on the day when they got there, the museums canceled their contract:

“Oh no, you can’t do this.”

Monika Schaefer: Oh! I’ll just interject a little bit very briefly here. That is how the enemy operates. They will wait till the day of or the day before an event. Surely they knew well in advance this was going to happen. But they wait till the day of, just so that it’s very difficult for the people to deal with that then, just to carry on with some kind of an event. They don’t give them notice, in other words, so that they could reorganize elsewhere.

And the other thing to make note of is that is prior to 1994, because I think it was 1994 when it would have been difficult to even enter Germany for Ernst Zundel without risk of being arrested. Isn’t that correct? I think 1994 is when they came down with their Paragraph 130. I might be wrong on that. But anyway, carry on please.

Jürgen Neumann: Well, they may have come with a more stringent one, but at that time so-called “Holocaust denial” was still against the law.

Monika Schaefer: Oh, okay, it was already against the law already.

Jürgen Neumann: Yeah, which was very interesting. So everybody was there. This is in March of ’91. All these people, hundreds and hundreds of people were there for the Leuchter Congress and stuff.

And so what they decided to do was they held it in the street outside of the museum.

Monika Schaefer: Oh great! [chuckling]

Jürgen Neumann: And the police were there and everything and they allowed it, so everything got going, etc. And then when Fred got up and he was going to talk, everybody of course can’t say anything because you of what you really want to say because you’re going to get arrested and all that.

But as it turns out, the lawyer had already been in touch with the legal department with the local authorities and stuff like that. And he told them about the Leuchter Report and so on and so forth. And the decision was that, well, this is a scientific technical report and therefore you are allowed to talk about it.

Monika Schaefer: Wow!

Jürgen Neumann: Yeah, wow!

Monika Schaefer: That’s something.

Jürgen Neumann: It’s not propaganda. So therefore he did have a few words to say about that in public. And it was really quite an amazing day. We produced a couple of videos on that one, but it’s all in German language pretty well, so.

Monika Schaefer: Okay. We might have some German speaking listeners. You never know. Are they on your BitChute channel or that other channel?

Jürgen Neumann: Yeah, they are.

Monika Schaefer: And just while we’re on that, I forgot to get you to actually give that other channel on Odysee. I think it’s got another name, Dzray or something. Did you want to give that out too?

[50:53]

Jürgen Neumann: Well, I rather do a little bit more of this stuff here and then maybe at the end I will talk about that more.

Monika Schaefer: All right, great!

Jürgen Neumann: Anyway, during this time Ernst came over and he was trying to keep a low profile, of course, but eventually they found him and they did arrest him. And that started a whole series of trials in Munich.

So eventually he went, …

Monika Schaefer: So you are saying Ernst Zundel was arrested there?

Jürgen Neumann: Yes, he was.

Monika Schaefer: Oh my goodness!

Jürgen Neumann: Yeah, he was arrested.

So anyway, so he had to go through all the trials for that. Eventually at that time he kind of was found not guilty. And he had to fly back and forth a couple of times for the trials, etc.

Monika Schaefer: Okay, so when he was arrested, they didn’t jail him, but they just basically told him to get lost, get out of the country? Because you’re now talking he’s flying back and forth, which means he’s not in jail.

Jürgen Neumann: No, he’s not in jail. They held him in custody, charged him and all that and said:

“This is it. And do you give your word that you will come back for the trial?”

He said:

“Yes, he wouldn’t miss it for the world!”

Monika Schaefer: [chuckling] That’s how Alfred and I talked to them. But they didn’t care about that they threw us in jail anyway before the verdict! [chuckling] Okay, carry on.

Jürgen Neumann: Well, the paragraph that you’re talking about were put in afterwards after his legal thing. I think they thought:

“No, this is not going to work. We got to add something more stringent.”

Anyway, so he managed to win that one as well. They had even taken away his passport, which he managed to get back through legal channels and so on. So he was always busy, always busy, busy, busy!

So eventually, in 1992, the Supreme Court came down with their verdict and they said that the law under which Ernst Zundel was charged, was unconstitutional and they scrapped the law. And therefore all the charges against Ernst were dropped. Which is very interesting!

Monika Schaefer: These are now the Canadian charges. Right? Because you were talking about being in Germany. He was charged, arrested and charged.

But now we’re talking back onto the Canadian, the 1988 trial. But this was the last appeal and they threw that out, Is that correct?

Jürgen Neumann: Yeah, the Canadian Supreme Court threw out that law, “Spreading false news” because it was against free speech.

Monika Schaefer: And it was hundreds of years old, that law, was it not?

Jürgen Neumann: Yeah. Like from, was it 12th century or something? 13th century, something like that.

Monika Schaefer: Well, taken over from the British Commonwealth. I mean, from the UK, Right? Yeah.

Jürgen Neumann: Yes. Which is very interesting. They said it was unconstitutional nine years before, wherever it was when he first got charged with all this. The first argument that our lawyer, Doug Christie, made in court when the trial started was that the law was unconstitutional. And they said:

“No, no, it’s fine!”

So it took nine years and half a million dollars and all the BS for the Supreme Court of Canada to say, finally:

“Yes, it’s unconstitutional!”

They could have done that at the beginning, you know! Nonetheless, it was incredible! Definitely incredible!

Yep. So anyway, that was ’92.’93 we started doing the another Voice of Freedom series of videos and we’re broadcasting them via satellite and so on. And that was very groundbreaking. Caused a lot of stir, etc. As a matter of fact, [chuckling] our opposition was so upset that one of the broadcasting facilities which we bought time from down in the US was burned to the ground. So it was arsoned!
I

Monika Schaefer: Yeah, all kinds of attacks on him still, of course, but this is just incredible stuff! Yeah, go carry on, please. We just have a couple of minutes left, so.

Jürgen Neumann: Well, exactly!

So eventually the Supreme Court basically said that he had the Right as a minority to say whatever he want, even if it was false, etc.

So he had won all these rights. And did that stop them? No, it didn’t stop them. They created this so-called Human Rights Commission and he was charged under that. And of course, the basics of the Human Rights Commission is that “truth is no defense”.

Monika Schaefer: I’m so glad you just said that because that is that famous or infamous line that came out of the mouth of a Canadian judge that “truth is no defense”.

Jürgen Neumann: Yep, that’s right.

And so he realized that they were just trying to bankrupt him because to bring in his lawyer, you know, once a month or whatever it was exorbitant and money and all that kind of stuff. So he said:

“Enough of that nonsense! I can see where this is going.”

And so he married an American citizen, moved to Tennessee, and he was working on getting his citizenship, green card and citizenship, all through legal channels, etc.

And then the 9/11 thing happened. The Department of Homeland Security was created and under those new laws, they came one day to his place in Tennessee and arrested him. And his wife said:

“Hey, you can’t take him!”

Lawyers and all this stuff. They just ignored her and took him away, and they flew him back to Canada, of all places. Because they didn’t know where else to put him.

Monika Schaefer: We have one minute left. So he spent a couple of years in solitary confinement. I do believe he was in solitary the whole time he was in the Toronto jail. Then they finally did succeed in their deportation back to Germany and he spent five years in jail there. But, Jurgen, please give us information where people can find your videos. That would be like, this is just incredible! There’s so much. And if people want to see some of this historic footage of these shows, these interviews, all kinds of stuff, please go ahead.

Jürgen Neumann: Okay, the two channels that I would suggest are my main one on Bitchute, as you mentioned earlier, JohnRobinson101, that’s all one word.

And the second one I would recommend is I have a PDF channel on archive.org for reading. I’ve got over 200 books and papers and things like that on there that I would think that people would probably really enjoy.

Monika Schaefer: Is that also UnderJohn Robinson101 when they go to archive.org?

Jürgen Neumann: No, it’s called Researcher_PDF.

[Note: Type in Researcher-PDF. at archive.org, i.e., hyphen, not an underscore.]

Monika Schaefer: Okay, thanks. Researcher underscore PDF. I want to thank the listeners. I want to thank you, Jurgen, for coming back. I was on the edge of my seat. I want to thank the producer, Frank, and thank you everybody.

And remember, please, if you can support RBN, we’ll see you next week. Bye Bye!

[58:37]

[music]

[58:50]

[ad]

[60:00]

END

top

============================================

RBN Comments

top

(Comments as of Nov 10, 2024 = 9 )

9 COMMENTS

Blewitt
November 2, 22:38
It was not hydrogen cyanide itself that was looked for but a compound resulting from a reaction of hydrogen cyanide with iron that exists in bricks and mortar, which compound is extremely stable and will not deteriorate for many, many years.

Blewitt
November 2, 23:33
The Jews destroyed Leuchrer’s business, which provided the money he lived off, in response to his testimony at the Zundel trial. Leuchter’s business was to build various kinds of execution equipment, including plans for a gas chamber for one prison, for prisons throughout the United States that executed prisoners. The Jews contacted all the prisons that did business with Leuchter and persuaded them to cut ties with Leuchter. Leuchter was also charged with the crime of practicing engineering without a degree in engineering (he had a bachelor’s degree in history, not engineering — which was irrelevant for the man was an inventor, not an engineer). A lawyer freed Leuchter from this charge, but Leuchter eventually became embittered because he felt the right-wing people who persuaded him to produce his Holocaust-denying evidence must have known that the Jews would respond by destroying his execution hardware business.

kati
November 3, 09:05
Someone edited all parts of the german holocaust into one big video, 15,5 hours i listened it sure 10 times by now, downloaded it so i got it local, one day its gone from the archive
https://archive.org/details/ernst-zundel-the-german-holocaust-the-complete-collection-parts-1-34
here is one of the better Zuendel archives of all his samisdat
https://odysee.com/@ErnstZundelArchive:6

kati
November 3, 09:17
I have to thanks Mr Neumann thanks to him i listened to all interviews i could find, Ernst Zuendel was very wholesome and he would be a good leader if they let him, my favorite interview is this 3h40m long one, its very good
https://odysee.com/@ErnstZundelVideos:8/AVOF-258—261—The-Ultimate-Interview-with-Ernst-Zundel—full—July-21st-1999:9

katana17
November 9, 02:26
Thanks kati for that reference.

kati
November 3, 09:24
Mr Neumanns bitchute channel is blocked here in germany, Operas buildin vpn is already enough to watch the videos here in germany, really good collection and videos he has there

kati
November 3, 09:35
Grüße aus Deutschland, sicher sind hier deutschsprachige Zuhörer.

katana17
November 9, 02:22
[The Flipside with Monika – Ep 18 with Jürgen Neumann – Nov 2, 2024 – Transcript]

The Flipside with Monika – Ep 18 with Jürgen Neumann – Nov 2, 2024 – Transcript

[In this weekly podcast episode The Flipside with Monika on Republic Broadcasting Network, Canadian nationalist and author, Monika Schaefer talks again with Jürgen Neumann and his time working with Ernst Zündel, the famous Canadian-German revisionist.
Key points include:
• Guest is Jürgen Neumann, Ernst Zundel’s former videographer (1:30)
• Discussion of recent Canadian report on alleged “mass graves” at residential schools (2:00)
• Criticism of efforts to criminalize “residential school denialism” in Canada (4:00)
• Recap of previous episode about Ernst Zundel’s work challenging Holocaust narrative (7:00)
• Ernst Zundel found guilty in 1985 trial but verdict overturned on appeal in 1987 (15:00)
• New trial ordered in 1988, lasting 4 months (18:00)
• Fred Leuchter brought in as expert witness on gas chambers (20:00)
• “Fred Leuchter said, ‘This is BS’” upon seeing alleged gas chamber at Auschwitz (25:00)
• Leuchter Report not allowed to be shown to jury, only entered as “lettered exhibit” (28:00)
• David Irving changed his views
on Holocaust during testimony (35:00)
• Ernst Zundel found guilty again but the law “spreading false news” ruled unconstitutional by Supreme Court in 1992 (40:00)
• “The Supreme Court basically said that he had the right as a minority to say whatever he want, even if it was false” (45:00)
• Zundel charged under Human Rights Commission where “truth is no defense” (46:00)
• Zundel moved to US but arrested and deported back to Canada after 9/11 (48:00)
• Spent years in solitary confinement in Canada before deportation to Germany (49:00)
• Served 5 years in prison in Germany (49:30)
• Jürgen Neumann has a Bitchute channel “JohnRobinson101” with historic footage (50:00)
• Also has book archive at archive.org under the name “Researcher-PDF” (50:30)
– KATANA]
[TRANSCRIPT – Words: 8,235 – Duration: 60 mins]

Monika
November 9, 12:53
Thank you once again, Katana, for all your fantastic work to preserve these interviews in a written form!

==========================

See Also

top

Monika Schaefer – The Flipside with Monika – Ep 1 – Intro – Jun 29, 2024 – Transcript

The Flipside with Monika – Ep 2 – Jul 6, 2024 – Transcript

The Flipside with Monika – Ep 03 with Paul Fromm – Jul 13, 2024 – Transcript

Monika Schaefer – The Flipside with Monika – Ep 04 with Oscar – Jul 20, 2024 – Transcript

The Flipside with Monika – Ep 08 with Alfred Schaefer – Aug 17, 2024 – Transcript

The Flipside with Monika – Ep 09 with Grace Eki Oyama – Aug 24, 2024 – Transcript

Monika Schaefer – The Flipside with Monika – Ep 15 with Jürgen Neumann on Ernst Zündel – Oct 12, 2024 – Transcript

The Flipside with Monika – Ep 18 with Jürgen Neumann – Nov 2, 2024 – Transcript

A Message to the Anti-White System – Laura Towler’s 2024 PA Conference Speech – Oct 19, 2024 – Transcript

Patriotic Alternative – Hope is Our Duty – Blair Cottrell’s 2024 PA Conference Speech – Oct 19, 2024 – Transcript

/>

Joel Davis – WWII Revisionism Re-enters the Mainstream – Sep 6, 2024 – Transcript

Jim Rizoli: Hi everyone. I’m Jim Rizoli here with Germar Rudolf. We are going to be talking about the new books that have come out with the “Holocaust Handbook” series. And Germar is the one behind that is. And I think this is very important, because these books are very critical to the revisionist movement out there.

So, Germar welcome to the show. And I hope you have some good news for us in regards to what you’ve been doing with the new books.

Germar Rudolf: Yeah. Thank you for having me on.

Jim Rizoli: So what’s been going on? Tell us. I know you’ve been busy. I haven’t talked to you in a couple of, I don’t know, maybe what two years? Probably a couple years? It’s been a while.

Germar Rudolf: Yes. Well the “Holocaust Handbook” series, which I started officially, now 21 years ago. So it was in 2000 – when we issued the first edition “Dissecting the Holocaust” – and has grown over the years. And I was initially aiming at getting to 20 volumes, which was an ambitious project back then. And I reached that just about the time when I was arrested in 2005, and got deported from this country.

[Image] Dissecting the Holocaust – 2nd and 3rd Editions.

So this series got suspended, then I picked up, at a slow pace, initially. But then accelerating, particularly in 2015, 2016, when I resumed editorial responsibility for the series.

After I’d been arrested, and for the first years after my release from the German gulag, the responsibility for publication had been with the Barnes Review. They picked up that project when I was unable to.

But in 15, 16, I resumed the responsibility again.

And we have been adding volumes steadily to the series. Right now it stands at 44 volumes, that have appeared. And five more in the pipeline. Two, I already have on my hard drive here to be translated when I start. And two more I am in constant exchange with the author, which is Carlo Mattogno in Italy, while the projects are evolving. So four of them are already in some stage of preparation.

[Image] Holocaust Handbook series (click image to enlarge)

So it looks like we’re reaching 50. And at some point we have to make a stop to it! [chuckling] Because it’s getting too much like an encyclopedia, with 50 volumes is huge! And that’s probably the limit of what people would ever consider owning, or buying. Because beyond that the costs get just exorbitant.

And also at some point, to what detail do you want to delve into a topic that anyone would still be interested in? And there’s always danger of repeating yourself. So we need to cut. We need to trim down. We need to focus more on what’s important. We need to take repetitions out.

And all of these things we have been doing over the past two years; a) adding new volumes; b) replacing old ones that have had become inappropriate, I would say unsatisfactory, because they were outdated. One of the volumes, Volume 1 and 3 was a review of Raul Hilberg’s magnum opus, “The Destruction of the European Jews”. And he [the reviewer] had written that in 1999. So that’s 22 years ago. And back then his knowledge was limited in his ability to do a deep critique of Hilberg’s work was limited.

And Carlo Mattogno has written one that is based on his 20, 30 years of experiences in the field, which is much more thorough and superior in quality. So we have replaced the old Volume 3 with this new one.

Also Volume 28 used to be a two-set volume of more than 700 pages each. And it was a step-by-step, point-by-point, refutation and critique of the mainstream work that was trying to refute books we had published about the actual Reinhardt camps – Treblinka, Belzec and Sobibor.

And that’s my son in the background, cleaning the table. So he’s going to be on camera and will be published too [chuckling]!

Jim Rizoli: Well, that’s okay.

Germar Rudolf: Anyway, that bulky two volume work was unattractive for the reader. Let’s say it, that way. There’s a book of thousand five hundred pages being a point-by-point refutation of something that somebody else has written, that doesn’t even exist as a book but only as a PDF file online. It’s a little bit difficult to read and understand and wrap your head around it.

I mean, I edited it. I’m very familiar with the details of all the things involved, but still I found it challenging to read it, and to really understand at each point of the discussion what’s going on.

So we thought this needs replacement with something that is readable, that’s enjoyable, that is more concise.

Also, because on these three camps, two of them particularly – Treblinka and Sobibor – more research had been done over the past years ever since that massive two volume book had appeared. That was 2013. There had been archaeological research going on in Treblinka and Sobibor and these results needed to be incorporated into something new.

So we took all the new research. Also the Poles started publishing from their archives, eyewitness testimony that were recorded during, or in the immediate post-war time, during the war, or shortly thereafter. They published them in books.

So they have not been accessible, so far. Hidden in some archive unknown, or unaccessible, to revisionists at least. They are now accessible. So they need to be included.

This has been published. That was just the recent release that we issued last week. And it’s called “The ‘Operation Reinhardt’ Camps Treblinka, Sobibór, Bełżec”. And so that is a replacement one.

Volume 40 had been a gap in the series. That was on the delivery of coke, wood, and Zyklon B, to Auschwitz. There are documents in the archives that prove how much coke, and how much wood, and how much Zyklon B, has been delivered to that camp. And the mainstream, let’s say some scholars from the Auschwitz museum, tried to use that documentation to prove that mass murder has been going on. But the methods they used to prove it were untenable, if not to say, outright ridiculous!

By saying, for instance, that:

“The cremation of a corpse just requires three kilograms of coke.”

Which is ridiculous!

And that was a book length review based on that documentation of this Polish – it’s actually only an article – a journal article, some 20, 30 pages, or so, that addresses these issues. And that booklet in front of you, had been written a long while ago. I can’t even remember. It’s four, five, six, years ago that Carlo Mattogno wrote that. And when I translated it several years ago we had some major issues with the math in it. So it basically didn’t pass peer review. Because one chapter in there, his math was just wrong.

And his extrapolations from the documentary material was “daring” to say the least! Speculating.

“We don’t have documents. But let’s assume that’s what it would have continued if the documentation would have been preserved.”

This is a limb out of which the mainstream can go on, but speculations shouldn’t be part of history. That’s just part of fiction, and it shouldn’t be in there.

So we had a standoff between peer reviews and Carlo Mattogno saying, … Carlo Mattogno wanted to have it as it is. Peer review would say there’s no way, this is just fraud.

Jim Rizoli: Who does that? Who does the peer review?

Germar Rudolf: It depends at any time who is an expert. We have a few people who look it over who know about stuff. In that case it was actually me, because when it comes to math and physical stuff I have a necessary background to do these things. And I was doing the checking there. [chuckling] So, I was checking all his math and putting it in proper form and ran into a lot of problems and wouldn’t let it pass.

We have some anonymous experts. We assume by the access they have to archive material, and judging by their knowledge of the topic, that they are probably mainstream professors, experts in the field. But they will not reveal who they are. They communicate anonymously with us. And that’s fine. We don’t want them get exposed as helping us.

But they do, and we get feedback from them when it comes to archival material, to source verification. And also to finding new sources, because we can’t get access to archives, to most archives, directly.

If you show up at an archive with a revisionist name you may get arrested in most European countries. Germany and Poland particularly! So we need helpers whose reputation is not on a black list. So let’s say, his name is not on the black list.

[10:38]

Jim Rizoli: Who’s written most of your books? Carlo?

Germar Rudolf: Yeah, Carlo Mattogno is the main author. Now I was joking lately, because most of the projects we’re putting up right now are all written by Carlo Mattogno And, of course, the publishing outlet I have is Castle Hill Publishers, CHP. And I joked in one of these emails I was sending out to customers, saying:

“Well maybe we should rename it to ‘Carlo Mattogno Publishers’, CMP!”

Just joking!

But yeah, he’s the most prolific writer. He has gathered documents, tens of thousands of documents, while he was still able to access the archives in the 1990s. And, because of his reputation among historians, he has gained support from some of them, anonymously, and are helping him, getting him archive of material that he otherwise would not have access to.

So we have people actually going for us to archives getting stuff and sending it to us. And also pointing out when we make mistakes, or when we have missed something that’s crucial.

So in that case the math peer review I did, and I didn’t let it pass.

So eventually this year he agreed to take out his entire speculative, flawed math calculations, and publish the book without it. And that cleared the way for it. And so this way we could actually publish it. And that closed this one gap we still had in Volume 40.

Volume 41 to 44 have appeared in succession since December last year. And 42 has been out for a while. It was a project that I entered. That’s written by myself.

But 41, 43, and 44 came out in December, January, and February, if I’m not mistaken. So in quick succession.

Jim Rizoli: Do you ever have anybody buy the whole series?

Germar Rudolf: Yes, yes. We offer the whole series as a set, at a discount. And I would say we, … If I look at the turnover, I would say that a good 15 to 20 percent of our turnover is from selling the whole series.

Jim Rizoli: Wow!

Germar Rudolf: Because it’s such a big chunk. If somebody buys buys 44 books all in one go, that’s like 44 sales of individual books, with normal sales are just one book. We even offer all of our books. So the 44 volumes of the Holocaust Handbooks, plus all the other books that we have in our program, which is some 30 more books, or so. And some people even go for that. I would say on every four sets of “Holocaust” handbooks we get one set of all the books that we have in our program!

Jim Rizoli: Well, that would be quite a bit of bundles of books coming to the home, wouldn’t it?

Germar Rudolf: Yes. It’s not quite 80 books. And it comes in several boxes, indeed.

Jim Rizoli: I mean, it’s amazing, because most people don’t know anything. I mean, we do, but most other people don’t know anything about these books, because you can’t get them on Amazon, right?

Germar Rudolf: Each time we publish them they go through international distribution, and as such, Amazon offers them for a week, or two, until they become aware, …

Because every bookshop nowadays has an automatic online hookup to the distributors. And the distributors here in the United States, they are not allowed to turn down books. Because the main distributor in the United States has a monopoly, legally recognized monopoly. And therefore, they have to stock books, take them in their program, because they have a monopoly. They’re not allowed to turn anyone down as long as the book is legal.

And this way our books are in international distribution. So every bookseller online, or offline, having a hookup to that distributor, which everyone has – because that’s where everyone gets the books from – knows about the book and has it automatically in their system.

And so Amazon, and all the other online retailers that do that hookup, as soon as we publish the book the next hour, or two, boom! There it is! It’s an automatic process. And then for them to take it out of what they offer, requires the manual step of ticking some box:

“Hide this book.”

Or something, or whatever it is they’re ticking.

And usually it takes about two two weeks on average for them to get taken down.

So we assume there is the usual suspects of “thought police” monitoring books of a certain topic. And once they run into it, they have their hot wire to Jeff Bezos to have him push the censorship button, or whoever in his company does that kind of dirty job.

[15:51]

Jim Rizoli: Have any libraries ordered the series?

Germar Rudolf: No.

Jim Rizoli: Well, you know what happens in libraries? Let’s say they even did order the series. They’d put it in. And then what happens is they’d take the books out and never bring them back. And nothing you could do about it!

Because I’ve had this happen with books I wanted to get in the library. And that’s what happens. People will take the book out. And they’ll never bring it back. And then you say:

“Well who took the book out? I want to get the book back!”

And they don’t do anything about it. That’s what the libraries do! Just to let you know. They would never last in the library.

But anyway, that’s how they operate. Sad.

Germar Rudolf: Well, this series actually comes in three formats right now. And that’s one of the reason why we worked so hard.

We have a PDF format. So you can get them as ebooks, PDF, which we offer as a bundle for download. The list price is $70 for that, for all 44 books.

But in theory you wouldn’t have to pay for it. Every single book can be downloaded as a free PDF. If you want to go through the process of downloading 44 books, one after the other, you can do that on our website that’s dedicated to the series; holocausthandbooks.com.

And if you want to get them in a bundle in our shop at shop.cohdo.com you can do that. The list price is $70.

Now, we have a feature in our shop where you can actually change the price. You don’t see it in any shop, online shop, anywhere else. You have a product, a price is attached to it. And then you can put it in the shopping cart and buy it that way.

In our case, every single product we have has a price to it. But you can push the up, or down, button and reduce the price, or increase the price.

Now with many of our books there is a minimum price for the printed books, beyond which you cannot go. That’s the list price in this case. Because we can’t give them away for cheaper, because somehow we have to cover our costs and make a living.

But when it comes to ebooks, particularly the Holocaust Handbooks, we offer those as free ebooks on the Holocaust Handbooks website. And, because they are in theory free, how do we justify taking money for the same thing, bundled up, when we sell it in our shop? Now it’s kind of a feature. Yeah, there’s so much effort in it and we expect people, this is worth some money and they should be paying that.

But in that case we have actually switched it freely, so that people can lower the price.

“I don’t want to pay $70 for the series, I want to download it in one swoop and not pay anything!”

Then you go on the down button and click it all the way down to zero! And get it for free! That works. Only for the ebook versions of the Holocaust Handbooks.

On the other hand, if you buy just one, it costs just five dollars. And you think:

“This book should be worth much more. It’s such intense research, it’s so valuable! I think it’s worth twenty dollars!”

What you can do is press on the up button and increase the price! Which nobody has ever done [chuckling]! Ever since we introduced that feature [chuckling]!

Anyway, most people also don’t understand that they can lower the price. Because that’s just an unexpected features that doesn’t exist anywhere else in the world. But legally speaking, since we give them already away for free on our Holocaust Handbooks website, we thought charging money for them on our shop is not quite “kosher”. At least we should have the option there for people to reduce it down to zero. So that’s why we introduced a custom shopping cart, you can do these gimmicks.

So that’s the ebook version. Just seventy dollars list price.

Then we have the paperback version, which you see in your background. They are all lined up there with their cover art, or a spine art in that case.

And now, released a week ago, we have also a hardcover version. All of these books in hardcover. And the reason for that is twofold. One of them is this is an encyclopedic style series of research on the “Holocaust” that is unparalleled in the entire world!

The mainstream doesn’t have anything coming close to it! They have an encyclopedia that has three volumes, but each entry about the topics are very superficial. And there’s not much information in it. There’s no critical information! No information that really does some independent research. It’s mainstream stuff. And it just regurgitates the war propaganda, uncritically.

So there is nothing similar anywhere else in the world, mainstream, or not, like this one.

And a lot of people are willing to buy it. But then normally if you have an encyclopedic massive series like that, people would like to put it in some central shelf of their living room and say:

“I have all these books. And I’m a really well-read, knowledgeable person who has all this stuff, read.”

But then again, who seriously wants to “out themselves” by putting books like that centrally in their living room with any visitor, or even family member coming in and seeing that you have 44 “Holocaust denial” books sitting in your living room! Gets you in a lot of trouble!

[21:47]

Jim Rizoli: I don’t know I’m happy to have them on my shelf. I got them down in my basement, and I got them all, I love them!

Germar Rudolf: In your basement! You were hiding them in your basement [chuckling]!

Jim Rizoli: I know, because you haven’t seen my house, okay. My brother, Joe, has all his books upstairs. I get no place to put them! I can do my videos upstairs, and downstairs. And downstairs is another place where I can do videos with all the books behind me, you know, without the green kind of screen behind me. I don’t have a green screen but my brother Joe has a lot of books! Okay. He’s got hundreds and hundreds of books! And I mean, my whole living room is all books! It looks like a library.

But my basement, like I said, if you saw how I do my videos downstairs, all the books are on the shelves behind me. It looks really nice and your books are all there.

Now you said they’re on hard cover. What do they cost in hardcover?

Germar Rudolf: The production cost for the hardcover is not quite ten dollars more than for the paperback. It’s five dollars more for the hardcover, and we use a little bit higher quality paper for it. So we increased the price for each paperback edition by just ten dollars to cover the additional production cost, because we didn’t want to make more profit on it, just because it’s hardcover. Plus a little bit of a margin setting up those books cost us thousands, [words unclear], or so, not counting the time I’ve put in to produce the new imprint.

Jim Rizoli: You don’t have a hardcover one with you, do you?

Germar Rudolf: I just sent you an email, an image showing how they look like, how they line up in the similar fashion as you have the paperback in the background. If you look it up you could perhaps replace it while I’m talking. And then people can look at it.

Jim Rizoli: Okay.

Germar Rudolf: So what we have done is not do any fancy cover art with those, for the simple reason covers for hardbacks have to be completely differently layouted then paperbacks. Because the hardcover exceeds the trim size by an eighth, or a quarter of an inch. And then you have to wrap the artwork around it. So the artwork has to be completely redone. Also the spine is completely different. And having to completely redo all the artworks for the cover would have consumed a lot of time! And that would have been untenable, because we don’t expect to sell those like hot cakes.And therefore we need to keep the costs down.

So what we did our printer offered an option that is called a “digital print blue cloth”. So it looks like a patterned blue cloth hardcover, even though it’s actually printed.

Jim Rizoli: Did you say you just sent it?

Germar Rudolf: Yeah I sent you an email with it. Let me see if it’s, …

Jim Rizoli: Oh yeah, all right, cool! Let me see if I can grab that. All right, cool.

Germar Rudolf: Now when it comes to the cost of the series, as I mentioned, the e-books right now are $70. Paperback sits at $875. And that includes actually already upcoming volumes that will appear later this year. We have two more in the pipeline that I’m working on.

Jim Rizoli: Wow!

Germar Rudolf: And they will be included in that price. That’s for the paperback.

And the hardcover is a whopping $1,170, right now. This is a 35% discount over what you would pay if you bought every single book individually. And actually includes free shipping anywhere in the world!

So if you’re on Micronesia, or you’re in Japan, or in Russia, or in Timbuktu, or wherever you are, it doesn’t matter! We can get it there and your shipping is included. Because, as UPS brags, they go anywhere! I don’t know whether they go to Antarctica. Maybe they do [chuckling]! Some researcher there wants the series.

[26:14]

Jim Rizoli: I’m looking at the set. I mean, it’s really nice. I mean, that’s great!

Germar Rudolf: Right. This now really looks like a series of one big set of books. They all belong together. We have this one sticking out on the paperback that’s large size. That’s the Air Photo book, because there’s so many big photos in here that we wanted to have in big size. We couldn’t do that with a hard cover, because that kind of hardcover, our printer doesn’t do in letter size format. So we had to reduce the size. But it’s also neat to have them all have the same size, so they really fit together.

Then you have the volume numbers, they’re going from 1 to 44, at the top. So it really looks like an encyclopedia, which kind of it is. And we’re working on it to trim it, adjust it in a way that repetitions are taken out.

We have one book, Volume 22, was published in two, the Italian original edition in 2008, or 2009. And at that point the later Volume 24 hadn’t appeared, which is about the cremation furnaces at Auschwitz. That was a book that Carlo Mattogno has been working on since the early 1990s. It finally appeared in the Italian edition in 2012. The English edition, the first edition, in 2015. The second edition I’m just wrapping up. So we have a new edition coming up that will replace the old one.

But when he issued the Volume 22 on the gas chambers of Auschwitz, he wanted to address the issue of cremation furnaces. He normally would have referred to his [word unclear] but it wasn’t out yet. So he included a long chapter on summarizing what was to be published in Volume 24. This is now redundant, because 24 is out, has been for a while.

And also he has large chapters on critiquing Rudolf Höss as a witness. We have a separate monograph, that’s Volume 35, on critiquing Henryk Tauber, one of the Sonderkommando witnesses.

We will have a separate book, Volume 54, which I have already on my hard drive, that is Henryk Tauber and another witness. A critique of their testament. So these chapters will be a little bit redundant. So we’re working on trimming down Volume 22, making summaries on these topics only, otherwise referring to these monographs.

And by so doing we can actually reduce some of the massive volume of some of these volumes. The reader doesn’t have all these repetitions.

Jim Rizoli: If you had to pick one book that, let’s say someone couldn’t afford all the books, they wanted one book out of your series that would really kind of like give you the whole nine yards in one book, which one would you say?

Germar Rudolf: My preferred one are the “Lectures on the Holocaust” [Holocaust Handbooks, Volume 15: Lectures on the Holocaust—Controversial Issues Cross-Examined 3rd, revised and expanded edition]. Not because I wrote it, …

Jim Rizoli: I believe the same thing. I think that out of all of them, I think that one there, it covers almost everything. I mean, in a good way, you know?

Germar Rudolf: Right. I mean, it’s not a short book. It depends on how much you want to read. We have, I would say, four books in the series that tries to give you an overview.

The volume first [Vol 1] actually, I started that, because at that point, when I had the original German edition, working on that in the early 90s, I was a complete newcomer to the field. And I started that project, because I myself wanted to have an overview of what’s going on. What’s the state of art in that field? And I get all those revisionist scholars from all over the world together, bring their knowledge to the project, and make it an anthology on this. And that’s how Volume 1 came to be in the early 90s.

Now the last edition is from 2019. We keep updating it. But it’s chopped up in topics, and dealt with by separate authors. So it’s not a story that you can read in one go. You have different chapters on different topics, which some may like.

The “Lectures on the Holocaust” are based on actual lectures I have done in the early 90s. While I was doing this research I was giving lectures to some academic audiences in two cases, in the second half of 1992. Presenting in multimedia form the research that revisionists were doing. And that book is along the same line. It starts with what the mainstream is claiming, what the issue, is there controversy? It goes to through a history of scandals of people doubting, refuting, running afoul of the thought police. And showing how many people there are, academics, reputable persons in the academic and technical world who also voiced doubts and got in trouble. And all the censorship and the pressure that’s going on to keep a lid on this topic.

And then it goes into covering the topic from various aspects. And it’s an exchange, it’s in a dialogue style.

So it engages the reader by feeling that this is actually a lecture, where the lecturer engages the audience, and the audience engages the lecturer back with critical questions, hostile questions, and [word unclear] questions, whatever the case may be. And this exchange goes on through the whole book, and it covers a large swath.

And I keep that updated, too. I mean, it’s now four years that I had the last edition. It’s slated for a new one next year at some point. And this book has 500 pages of text. So, it’s not quite as big as “Dissecting”, which is 600. But you kind of have to read it in one go, because it all belongs together, and it comes all together.

But then again the reading style is so entertaining, I heard, that people keep going. It’s flows, and flows, and you don’t even notice how you’re getting fast through it.

Jim Rizoli: Excellent book! I love it! I actually read it over, and over, again.

[32:41]

Germar Rudolf: And then, if you want less, we have by two different authors.

We have by the former professor of the history of science, Nick Kollerstrom, from London College. He used to teach, then got thrown out when he outed himself as a revisionist. He was a lecturer there. And he wrote that book “Breaking the Spell”, which is Volume 31 of the series. And this is probably the shortest book giving an overview of the topic. And it’s a completely different style and is shorter. So if you just want to have it in a nutshell, or 240 pages, or so, that’s probably the one you would want to go to. It has a different angle of approaching things.

And then you have “Debating the Holocaust”, which is the next volume, Volume 32, by a professor of philosophy. I won’t reveal his name here. But his pen name is Thomas Dalton. So he comes from the philosophical angle. And he’s actually a major critic of modern technology. That’s what his approach is to philosophy. Thinking that modern technology is ruining mankind. Not so much talking about the environment, that’s a different issue. But if you look at all the, …

Jim Rizoli: I got a question for you Germar. In all the books, like I know you revise them, what things have you revised in the books that have been very critical to revise? Because again, remember, that this goes over a long period of time. So from the beginning when you started getting these books going to now, what have you had to go back on to say:

“Wait a second here! We have to change something here that we said that we have to revise.”

Can you can pick anything out?

[34:56]

Germar Rudolf: Over the decades much more material has become accessible. So you broaden your bases, your source bases basically. You don’t want to be accused of when you’re in that business saying that you’re overlooking major sources. And so we have to broaden that. And that doesn’t really change anything when it comes to the result of the research as a matter of fact the more sources we get there are two kinds of sources:

Original wartime documents that show what happened on the official level – documents produced by the Germans, but also documents produced by the Allied powers. And by the underground movements that were fighting against the Germans.

And then you have as a second group; eyewitness accounts.

And as I mentioned just before, a lot of those hidden in archives have been recently made accessible on various camps; Auschwitz, Treblinka, Sobibor. And Belzec, there’s nothing really new. So it’s limited to these three camps that major new material became accessible.

And then we analyzed that too. Broaden the basis and see it fully supports our conclusions and our the results we get from this support. So it’s not changing anything when it comes to our conclusions. But it under undergirds it much more firmly and makes it less accessible to attack from the other side, because we show we really master the source material. We know it all. And we include it and discuss it all.

Jim Rizoli: Well I know the books get attacked all the time. I mean, I are you familiar with the Quora site? Have you ever heard of that, Quora? It’s like a blog site. It’s called q-u-o-r-a. And people like yourself you could go on there. And you could actually put your books up for comment on that site. Yourself, I suppose.

But people criticize the “Holocaust” books, you know. I mean, revisionist books. And they say that they’re not written by scholars. The people that write them don’t know what they’re talking about, and blah, blah, blah. I mean, …

Germar Rudolf: That is not criticizing the books, it’s ad hominem attacks which, …

Jim Rizoli: I know, I know!

Germar Rudolf: , … Is not scientific behaviour because so many scholars on the mainstream, they are not formally educated in history, either. So this is not what counts.

You have to go to the actual source material and claim we quoted it wrongly, we missed sources, we misinterpreted them, or whatever it is.

There are a number of websites by mainstream people – not all of them scholars – picking up on whatever we have published, and then trying to refute it. And these websites are more, or less, active and stuff getting posted there all the time and revised.

The problem with that approach is that if you want to do serious scientific research, you need to back up what you’re saying. And what you’re quoting with sources that are reliably discoverable by whoever is going to want to check what you’re saying!

One main feature of today’s scientific and academic world is that you cannot quote stuff that’s on the internet, on some blog, because tomorrow it may be changed. Tomorrow it may be gone.

There are two kinds of sources; quotable sources and non-quotable sources! Non-quotable sources, anything of the day day-to-day media. You can’t quote them. Because journalists make stuff up! They have no idea what they’re talking about. You cannot ever quote media!

Jim Rizoli: Right.

Germar Rudolf: You can quote them as proof as that they’re talking nonsense. That’s all you can use them [chuckling] for! You cannot use them to prove anything being correct, because journalists are hardly ever correct. And tomorrow a paper that may be posted online may be gone tomorrow.

And the same is with those blogs where people just throw in their mental diarrhea! Tomorrow it may be rewritten, tomorrow may be gone! There is no peer review process, there is no academic control.

Like a lot of academic publications nowadays are already published online before they ever get printed. Some of them are only online. But they have peer review processes. They have proper archiving procedures, referencing procedures. So if somebody posts something it’s there. It will be there. It will stay there. And you can’t make revisions. You can submit errata sheets or so they get added to it. But you can’t actually change stuff around. Publish is published! And it stays there.

That’s not true for all these blogs. So if you want to pay attention and take seriously every single one of these mental diarrhea sites, you have nothing else to do in the world anymore.

I realized that in the 1960s [?90s] when I was getting engaged in these bulletin boards and these discussion groups on the internet that were just popping up as the internet was evolving. And people were engaging each other in revisionist discussions, or “Holocaust” denial, or revisionism, whatever site you’re on.

And I realized that if you refute one person in any discussion it may, or may not, get deleted. But then as somebody else starts a new thread and the same false claims are being published again by someone else. So you can’t win in any of these. It’s a wack-a-mole game! You can never win that!

And if you get start getting engaged in it you have no time and no energy left to do actually what needs to be done! To go to the archives, to do the footwork, to actually get this stuff together and publish it in a serious form, in printed books, as it needs to be.

[41:20]

Now if these people start actually putting their critique together, peer review it, get it published as a book so that we know it’s there! It stays! It’s in archives! It’s in libraries! People can access it and it won’t run away, then we can talk about discussing these things.

But as long as it is in the format as it is, it’s impossible to handle. I mean, potentially there could be millions of people who hate revisionism, want to refute it, they all get into these bulletin boards, and discussion groups, and blogs, and whatever you call them, the name for these things have changed over time, you know what used to be just a bulletin board is now a blog.

How many people are we on the revisionist side that do serious research? We are so resource constrained by time, by money, by anything, that we really have to focus on what we can do. We cannot engage all these people! We cannot even read all this stuff!

Jim Rizoli: Yeah, I know.

Germar Rudolf: Put it in a proper form? Yes. But unless that happens and I can’t see that happening, because no publisher takes books that takes revisionist content series and tries to refute it, because by so doing you first acknowledge revisionist stuff exists!

Second, you acknowledge that it is so serious that it needs addressing and refutation. And so the reader gets pointed to the revisionist content. Ninety nine point nine per cent of people out there believe the mainstream story, anyhow. Once they get a book in their hand that says:

“Oh there are revisionists. And they have arguments and we need to refute them.”

Ten percent of them bail out and are suddenly with us! So bad news about revisionism by these blogs and books turns out to be advertising for us. No matter what news it is, it’s going to be advertising! Therefore these things will not be published as books, because publishers will not touch it!

Jim Rizoli: Do you get a chance to go out and speak anywhere? Like to people, or, …

Germar Rudolf: No. The current social atmosphere makes it an activity that I would consider too dangerous.

Jim Rizoli: Yeah.

Germar Rudolf: The things I’m doing are already dangerous. I still have three school-aged kids, and we try to live a normal family life. If I stick my head too far out the window that may change.

Jim Rizoli: Yeah.

Germar Rudolf: Right now, you go to the website of the town I live in, it’s not a secret, it’s Red lion. You go on Wikipedia look up Red Lion [York, Pennsylvania] and you look up which prominent persons live in Red Lion. There are three people on there. Two of which don’t even live here. And there’s one person who actually does live there, and that’s me. And this is as much as a high profile as I want. [chuckling] I’m the only prominent person living in this town, and the media, of course, see that as a negative, just as does Wikipedia has a negative prominence as an infamous person. And getting in much higher profile than that, … Already having the interview as I have it now with you.

Jim Rizoli: Right.

Germar Rudolf: It’s probably engaging in public speech in some regard. And this is already a risk I’m taking here on a personal level, because my wife doesn’t like it.

Now that is the other part of the family. And not, because of the contents we’re discussing. There’s nothing that they have to quibble about that. But it’s because of the exposure I get and the possible negative repercussions it could have for the family. And I’m not going to make it worse by going out and speak to actual audiences where on top of it you have the risk of some people attacking you physically.

[45:13]

Jim Rizoli: Yeah. I know, because that’s another thing they use against a revisionist. They say:

“Well revisionists, they don’t go out and debate people, or this, or that.”

And then, like you just say. Well, if we go out there doing this, we run into problems, because people want to kill us! Or burn our, … You know, do something bad to us. And I understand that. I can see that happening.

It’s like Ball, John Ball, I know you have one of the books of him the photo evidence of the camps and this. And he kind of like disappeared in life, right?

Germar Rudolf: Well, I’m in touch with him. We’re still friends. So yeah, he changed his name and moved away, and changed his career completely. So unless, you know, where to look for him and under what name you wouldn’t know where he is. But for a good reason, because he completely ruined his career!

He was a mineral exploration geologist. And after that book had come out he had become unemployable! He lost his job and he couldn’t find a job anywhere, anymore. And so he’s now independent, he’s his own boss, he does his own thing. So that was the only way out.

Like for me. I mean, I’m independent. I’m unemployable in the normal market. I wouldn’t have to apply for anything, anyway! [chuckling] Any googling of my name and people just won’t touch me. And he had the same problem. So for me it’s not a problem anymore of employability, of material safety, which a proper job gives you, because I have made revisionism my job. And my career. And my life, and earn the living I need to earn to live.

I mean, I’m not, you’re not, getting rich with a revisionism, ever! And 20, 30, 40 years ago when there were still wartime generation people who would bestow big inheritances on some individuals. But that doesn’t happen anymore. Ernst Zundel managed to get several millions that way. But then again he had expenses of several millions with all the stuff he was doing, too! [chuckling]

So, at the end of the day, no matter how you look at it, revision is not going to be materially profitable to anyone. It’s dangerous, …

Jim Rizoli: All right, finish what you’re going to say, because I have another question I want to ask you. Kind of unrelated, but go ahead.

The question I want to ask you has to do with Eric Hunt, if you don’t mind me asking, okay? Because what the hell happened with him? I mean, I look at the stuff on the internet, I read, and here’s a guy that was doing tremendous work in the revisionist movement. And then he just completely went off, out of sight here! I don’t know what, I mean, … Can you talk about it, or if you don’t want to, you don’t have to.

Germar Rudolf: I would exaggerate if I say that I know him well enough to make make 100% accurate assessment of what happened there. There are several aspects to the issue. And two of them are what I would like to discuss here.

The first one is his mental and emotional stability. He was on some medication to keep his emotions in check. Which shows already that he sometimes emotionally overreacted to things that required that medication.

So, when you get into, … Let’s call it a fight like that, it’s not like that you want to fight for something, but the social environment will fight you! So you inevitably get into nasty social situations that isolate you. And, of course, he had a bad experience when he had this little encounter, a nasty encounter with Ellie Wiesel which got him sentenced for assault and spent jail time, actually.

That was before he got deeper involved in revisionism. But that kind of ruined his social situation for good in this country. After that he was living in a car out on the road, because he was unemployable. The situation was really bad. And it got better only when he left the country and moved over to Europe, to Eastern Europe.

Jim Rizoli: So that’s where he is now? He’s in Europe?

Germar Rudolf: Most of the good work that you’ve seen him doing, some of them he did still while living in a car here in the US, after he was released from prison. And some of that he did then when he was in Eastern Europe. And that’s where he is right now. And he has a girlfriend there.

And I actually talked to him, and it’s the second aspect. He was in it not for the revisionist part, you know. I came in primarily, because a feeling of injustice, suppressing something like that evidently has a lot of impact, a lot of importance. Suppressing it by the government is just unjust! And anything that’s profoundly unjust, there’s something that drives me up, and I get pick up the fight for justice.

However, his approach was White Nationalism. And to, to a large degree, an anti-jewish stance. And he saw revisionism as a tool to further these causes. And this is a tricky, slippery road to go on. Because, if you look into revisionism, it is nothing isolated for White nationalists. You find black people interested in it. You find Latinos interested in it. You find Arab Muslim communities interested in it particularly. So there is no racial purity in the revisionist movement. The whole concept is just alien to revisionism.

And the other thing is the anti-jewish angle, revisionism by itself is not against any group of people, or any creed, or whatever you want to say. Of course, it is critical about eyewitnesses, a large portion of which happen to have some kind of jewish background. But that’s where it stops. We’re not getting into the discussion of jews as a social group, or as a religious group, even though some revisionists do that in other parts of the world.

Like, if you look at Thomas Dalton, he has these two books on “Holocaust” revisionism. And lately, over the past two, or three years, he’s published numerous books on the so-called jewish question. So there is a relationship between the two. But it’s not one-on-one.

And you can’t solve any jewish question, whatever you want to define it, by just going after revisionism, making it succeed. That is not a panacea for nationalist, White nationalist, supremacist, racialist – whatever you want to call it – issue that people may have, ….

[52:58]

Jim Rizoli: Even David Cole and even David Irving and Mark Webb, … I mean, a lot of them have kind of capitulated in some of their views now. But to now saying like, for instance, like:

“Oh, Treblinka was an execution camp! They murdered millions of people in these camps!”

And [words unclear] his great Treblinka video he did. And then go completely the opposite, to say:

“Oh now the big problem is, well, where did the jews go if they weren’t exterminated? Where did they go? And blah, blah, blah!”

Germar Rudolf: For me, it’s two issues. I advised him, you need to take your emotional investment in it hoping that it will resolve the White racist problems, and the jewish question, out of it, because it’s probably not gonna happen.

It’s a fight by itself. It’s for truth! It’s for justice more than anything else. And his heart was not in that kind of stuff. He realized this is not leading to success. Not short term, not midterm, if ever. And therefore he lost an interest in it.

And then I advised him, before he flipped, I advised him he needs to have the basics of his life sorted out. He was in the process of ruining his life with revisionism, by getting in this tussle with Ellie Wiesel, getting himself imprisoned, because of it. And I said:

“The most important issue of life, is procreation! That’s how life maintains itself! It’s also the solution to the White racial problem! You don’t have kids, it’s not going to be a White race. There’s not going to be anything to fight for! So love family, having children, raising new life in love. That is the essence of life! This is the essence of the human experience! And you need to focus on that. You have a girlfriend there, she’s a good girl. Get your life back together in Eastern Europe. Marry her, have children, have a family, have a reason for life that is very profound deep and makes sense in the bigger context, too. And once you have that, all the rest comes after that it’s secondary.”

And I think that fed then into it him realizing:

“If I want to have a normal family life, I need to stop ruffling feathers on a level where I’m getting constantly in trouble, and where I have problems maintaining a family, or even establishing one.”

And so he decided to bail out! To not have the struggle anymore, since it’s not leading to the immediate success he hoped for on the aspects on the topics he was most interested in. And to settle down have a family and bailout.

Anything else is post facto rationalization of his decision!

As you say, we can’t comprehend he makes this hard-heading videos on Majdanek and Treblinka showing how absurd the story is, how easily it can be refuted. And then he flips suddenly 180 degrees, coming up with these superficial, mainstream, propaganda slogans, that he just refuted a year ago! It makes no sense.

And the reason why it makes no sense is he rationalized his decision to bail out this way, to get out of the hard fight, because he realized it’s not really his fight. And he needs to justify it without feeling himself a coward, or whatever it is.

Jim Rizoli: It almost sounds like it was done in a spiteful way, you know what I mean? Like you’re not doing it, because you’re leaving it, you’re doing it, …

[56:52]

Germar Rudolf: Go back to the first part when I talked about his emotional problems.

Jim Rizoli: Right.

Germar Rudolf: You see how he does it that’s in his, in the fabric of his behavioral patterns.

Jim Rizoli: Yeah. What do you think about David Irving, because he believes now that a couple million people were killed in Treblinka too! The Reinhardt camps. I mean even Mark Weber! Mark Weber even has a belief system that he believes that people were killed, either the Einsatzgruppen would kill them, or they were killed in gas chambers, or whatever, in these camps.

David Cole, he’s done the same thing. I mean, what do you think about that today?

Germar Rudolf: David Irving has never been a “Holocaust” revisionist, as such, as we would describe, in that he researched the matter, argued the matter, and came to conclusions based on the evidence he found, and the arguments he has assessed.

If you look at what he has published over the years, he has published stuff about the war, about war heroes, or central war figures. And he has never published anything serious about revisionism. And when I visited him back in London, back in the years, he said:

“He doesn’t read the revisionist books.”

You know, he always brags, he doesn’t read mainstream historians books! He goes to the archives. He goes to the source material itself and does the research. And he doesn’t care about what other people write, because it’s irrelevant. The only thing he’s interested in is:

“What sources do they quote? Have I covered that? Did I find them? And if not, where do I find them? Then I use them.”

I’m not saying that the approach is wrong, quite to the contrary. At the end of the day, the evidence matters, not somebody’s published opinion about it.

So it’s always good to go to the evidence and make up your own mind. But that’s exactly the issue! He has never done that in the issue of the extermination of the jews. He hasn’t done it about Auschwitz! About Treblinka! About Belzec! About Sobibor! Majdanek, or any other camp. He has done no footwork whatsoever! Archival, forensic, whatever you want to call it, to even assemble some amount of evidence to base his opinion upon! Therefore his opinion is as relevant as anyone’s!

Jim Rizoli: Right.

Germar Rudolf: Just because he’s David Irving and has published books on historical aspects of this and that, doesn’t mean he’s an expert, and needs to be taken seriously when it comes to these things. No, it’s not!

When we’re talking about David Cole, it’s similar in this regard. He has done some footwork when it comes to Auschwitz. And I have been over the years, until not too long ago, actually been in touch with him. And sometimes he’s preparing something. And then he asked me for an update of what the research situation about Auschwitz is. Asks me a few questions. What are the primary sources, that I pointed to him. Because he doesn’t want to do the footwork of even reading the revisionist books, or going to the archives! He then asks someone:

“Where’s that stuff?”

And I point him to it. And he always asks only about Auschwitz, none of the other stuff!

[60:02]

And he has maintained – to some degree Irving the same thing, because his trial was mainly about it, he was forced to go into the evidence a little bit there, but not too much.

He maintains his stance about Auschwitz, David Cole that is, saying:

“It didn’t happen! There were no gas chambers there.”

Because he has done a little bit of footwork there and he knows that the evidence clearly points to:

“No, it didn’t happen.”

He hasn’t done the same thing with the other camps. So then he falls back to:

“What makes life bearable and easy for me? Well, go with the mainstream. Because I have to make life bearable to some degree, and don’t want to get involved in a battle that just drags me deeper, and deeper, and deeper, into the rabbit hole!”

And when it comes to Mark Weber, … Mark Weber I’ve seen him interact with David Irving and he’s very basically parroting what David Irving has been saying.

[Image] Mark Weber.

Jim Rizoli: Yeah. It seems like they’re kind of together, David Cole, Weber, and Irving, are kind of like:

“Birds of a feather, flock together.”

And the limited gassings, people were killed in the camps. The Einsatzgruppen killed, you know, a million people, …

Germar Rudolf: David David Irving is an extremely dominant person, socially speaking.

Jim Rizoli: Yeah.

Germar Rudolf: To the point where he can get really unpleasant.

Mark Weber is a shifty person, who tries to arrange his professional environment in a way where he stays on top, and everybody that maybe a threat, gets out of the way. And he keeps control over everything. So he’s a control freak when it comes to his IHR [Institute of Historical Review] thing, and with minimal efforts trying to make a living. Because basically when you look what he’s producing and the quality of work, there’s nothing left!

Jim Rizoli: Nothing! Yeah.

Germar Rudolf: He’s pushed everyone out. They wanted to do work and he has repelled everyone. And he is basically in this relationship, Irving-Weber. He’s the submissive party.

Jim Rizoli: Yeah.

Germar Rudolf: I’ve seen them interact when they are one-on-one, or sitting in a restaurant with a few people, the way he panders to David Irving, sycophantic behavior that made me sick to watch! It was appalling! And I walked out of it. I said:

“Oh! This is just awful!”

Having seen this kind of dynamic between the two that’s all there is to it! He’s just creeping us up David Irving’s ass, because that’s a comfortable position to be in for him! Because this big David Irving then gives him a little bit of a share of the reputation, and recognition, and stabilizes his situation of having control over the IHR. And that’s all there is to it.

Jim Rizoli: ,You know what bothers me? I heard that he’s actually sitting on a bunch, a lot of books that should be republished, or could be republished. Really good revisionist books. He’s not doing it! He’s just holding them and not publishing them! And that really bothers me, you know?

Germar Rudolf: Arthur Butz told me, … You know, we are getting off on a tangent, which I shouldn’t get off on. But then I’m going there anyway [chuckling]! Arthur Butz tells me:

“Stop kicking a dead horse!”

And with that, he means Mark Weber and the IHR.

But since you brought it up, look, everyone look behind Jim Rizoli, you see those 44 books there. Hard hitting, top-notch research results published through my outlet over the past 20 some odd years!

If you try to find any of those books; hardcover, softcover, whatever it is, offered by the IHR, you will find out that they offer nothing! I have offered to Mark Weber repeatedly, special deals that he can even sell the books on his website. He offers them, he sells them, but he doesn’t have to keep any stock, he doesn’t have to buy any books from me. He just forwards the incoming orders to me. I fulfill them and he gets cut. A very generous cut! Twice the amount of industry standard! I do that with other publishers, with other outlets. It works just fine.

He refuses to do it! Initially when I said:

“Well I’ll give you a special discount, you buy the book.”

“No, I don’t have storage space to put them in.”

“Well, then I just send them to you as you need them.”

“Well no, we don’t have the money to put up front to buy these books.”

“Well, I mean, do it on commission.”

“Well no, this is inconvenient.”

“Well then I do order fulfillment for you. You will not have anything to do. You can automatize it. You see this book is published by Castle Hill Publishers. Somebody orders it, the system sends the email to me, I fulfill it. You get the money! You have no effort whatsoever! No expense whatsoever! You just rake in money! What’s the problem?”

Will not do it!

Jim Rizoli: Yeah.

Germar Rudolf: Why will he not do it? Answer that question to yourself. There are a number of answers to it, but none of them are positive.

Jim Rizoli: Yeah, well I mean, yeah. Germar, right now you’re probably the top man in regards to the revisionist movement, in regards to getting things done, published, and out there.

And, of course, I’m close with Fred Leuchter. And we have a good relationship with him. Because he obviously agrees with you and is on your side 100%. And I mean, it’s good to see people that are standing up and standing firm with this, because you have loose, back revisionist, like Mark Weber. I don’t even really consider him a revisionist. David Irving, I don’t consider a revisionist. And the other ones I talked about.

But you’ve been doing this for years and you’ve been hanging in there. And I mean, you’re not making a million dollars. But you’re hanging in there. I mean, I’m happy to see that you’re doing this.

And I wish more people would buy your books. I hope people watching this will hopefully, if they have some money to spend, if you have a $500,000, you want to buy the whole set, you know, invest your money in something that’s positive! That’s good! That’s gonna give you some information., you know what I’m saying?

People can waste their money on all this other garbage. And I look at books as very valuable, especially with the internet now banning everything. I mean, eventually these books won’t be available anywhere. I mean, if you have them, then you have them! That’s the way I look at it. I mean, if you’re interested in the topic, you know what I’m saying?

[67:26]

Germar Rudolf: Very soon, hopefully within the next week, or two, we will have a special deal on the Holocaust Handbooks. That is a library edition. And as I mentioned we’ll offer them for a cheaper price. So right now the hardcover edition is over a thousand dollars. And we will probably offer it roughly half the price, which will be just a little bit over production costs, plus shipping.

But, if anyone orders that library set of books it will go to a library. So they have to tell us which library is supposed to get it. So this is a way for people to donate the whole set, hardcover. Libraries don’t take paperbacks of that kind of books, because they don’t last. They use that as an excuse to reject them. Hard covers last, so that’s what they want to have.

And then people can actually make a donation to a public, or an academic library – include the information, which one they prefer. If they don’t enter any, we pick one, we communicate with the customer who makes a donation. And then we make sure that we have someone, somewhere, who tracks down whether the library accepts them, stores them, catalogs them, and makes them accessible.

And a story may develop out of that, that they actually reject them, or they hide them in the archive, or they don’t catalog them, or they put them in a poison cabinet, not giving anyone access!

Jim Rizoli: I think that’s a great idea! Because isn’t it true that books like that you can’t check out, right? You can’t take out a book like that, can you?

Germar Rudolf: There are unique, particular of historical value, if you have of anything that is considered an antique, or of any kind, that you can only take them into the reading room. Sometimes even under supervision.

Jim Rizoli: That’s why I said that in the beginning, because, well the books that I’ve gotten in the libraries in the past people have stolen them. I think that’s a great idea for people watching this video. If you want to see if you can do something positive to get this message out with these books. Like you say, say you’re going to donate, you’re going to buy the books, or how it works, you buy the books and donate them to the library. The library puts them in. And then they got the books. I mean, that’s really good. I think that’s a great idea!

[70:07]

Germar Rudolf: Yeah. Because any academic researcher that will then go to a library and look what’s there. You think nowadays a lot of research is through the internet. Through the internet we are already present. If somebody looks for them, they find them “Holocaust Handbooks”. All available for free.

But when it comes down to some serious researchers I earlier mentioned, at the end, it is still going to the archives, it’s still going to the libraries. And once the books are, they will stumble over them. And if you have this massive set you can’t just, … I mean, a lot of scholars will still turn a blind eye to it! But the younger ones, the less prejudiced ones, take note anyhow and that’s seeding doubts in young minds that actually do some serious research in libraries.

And also it’s about anyone else. I went to the library when I was young researching that topic and all I found was mainstream stuff, very little revisionist stuff. Had I ever stumbled over something like that treasure trove opening up your mind, wow! What is this! It would have been an explosion of knowledge!

Jim Rizoli: Yeah.

Germar Rudolf: So we want to have people get that opportunity by chance stumbling over it. If you already know what you’re looking for you always find it, because we have it out there. But for the people who don’t look for it, they should still stumble over it.

Jim Rizoli: Yeah. I mean, that’s a great idea. I hope people watching this will think about that. Maybe, if you want to contribute to the cause, this would be a good cause to contribute to and helping other people in a library to see the information. I think that’s great.

And again, you mentioned too, all the PDFs. I got all the PDFs on my phone. I can read all the time. And I put them on my phone, and I read them on my tablets. And you can download those free if you want.

But I really would love to see more people, even if they don’t want your books, contribute to the cause! I mean, right Germar, people can at least contribute to the cause to help you keep the work going. I mean, this is what bothers me. The “Holocaust” lobby has millions and millions of dollars supporting them and all their efforts.

Germar Rudolf: That is an understatement! They have billions, that’s more like it.

Jim Rizoli: Billions, I mean. And here you are working hard to keep the most important information and the truth about this topic. And it’s like you have to go from week to week, month to month, just getting by. I mean, people put your money where your mouth is! Support the cause! I love to see people support the cause more. So even if you don’t read, support the cause! Do something! Get the information out! Get them into the libraries, if you have money to spend, then do that. I don’t know people always say.:

“Well, what can I do to help you?”

Well, look, I don’t want your money. Just get this information out there, that’s the most important thing.

Well anyway, how would you like to conclude? Anything you want to say Germar? I know going about an hour.

Germar Rudolf: I guess in the video description below when you post we can put some links on where to get the “Holocaust” handbook series, and whatever form you want them. And also a link to where you can actually donate.

Jim Rizoli: Okay. You send me whatever you have. And I’ll put it in the description of the video. You know, I have probably, Diane, we have about maybe 350 people on our email list. Which is a pretty good email list. And then I have my BitChute site. And I have my other video sites. And this is going to go on all the sites.

And we have a movement here that’s very important I think. People have to see it. And you have the fake revisionist movement, okay! We already talked about [chuckling]! And then you got the movement that you’re taking care of, and you’re spearheading. And I think that’s the moment we got to support and get behind, however we can do it, okay. Leave Germar money in your will! Anything! Give him something so he can continue on with the cause. Very important information I think people have to see.

Well Germar look, you did a great job with all this information. And again, like I said, you’re probably the top man doing it today. And we look to you in the future to get more information out there to even Whittle it down to get it even more concise, so that people can actually see more information.

Germar Rudolf: Video production. You know, images tell more than a thousand words and getting it presented in good documentaries is a challenge now. Because I had to switch on getting the book series, all our ducks in a row for releasing the hard covers. I had to put video production on halt.

And finding people who actually can chip in there is very difficult. Volunteering is a challenge on several levels. Because, if we want to have anyone help us, we need to be able to trust people on several levels. Because helping us with anything requires us giving them access to something. And there’s so much hostility and false friends out there, who just want to get the foot in the door in order to do damage! We need to be very careful with who we actually accept.

And then there’s the problem of reliability. Anyone volunteering, but then bailing out of project halfway down. This is happening, I would say, 80% of the time. Somebody volunteers and it ends up falling flat.

So this is a real problem. Right now it’s not so much that we have lack of manpower than we have a lack of financial resources to actually finance the people we already have that help us.

Because the end of the day, you get what you pay for. And a million volunteers that are unpaid sometimes do more damage than they do good [chuckling]! So at the end you need to pay people.

And that’s the switch that we had in CODOH also, the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust. When Bradley Smith did it, almost everything was done on a volunteer basis. And we switched that model over. We’re trying to run it as a company. And so keep strict quality control, and security, and profitability, up there, because otherwise the money just goes away without doing much. And that works much better.

But we have to, at the end of the day, we need to pay bills. And that’s where the biggest constraint is.

Jim Rizoli: Yeah, well you’re doing a great job Germar! I always enjoy talking with you. And again hopefully people will react and get more involved in some way here. And that’s my hope that this will happen.

Okay Germar. Thank you for being on my show today, and update us if you have something that we should know about, let me know. Because then I can send it out, or we could do another interview, or talk to you some more about it, or whatever.

But, whatever information you have that you think is important for us to know, … Because we get this out every week. Diane and I, she puts the newsletter together and gets our videos out, and gets the information out. So people see it every week. So it’s important for people to see that.

Okay everyone. I want to thank you for watching our video. I’m Jim Rizoli with Germar Rudolf, and we appreciate you watching. And again we’ll talk to you another time. Bye now.

[78:31]

[Outro information, music and links]

[78:55]

END

If you would like to help with this, and other transcripts, please leave a note in the Comment section. If you spot any errors, typos, etc., also let me know.

___________________________

BitChute Comments

top

• 4 days ago

  rambetter

  Jim you have all the best guests on your show.  Fred Leuchter and Germar Rudolf.  Major credit to you.  <3

  Reply·16·Flag

• 4 days ago

  Uptake

  Thank you very much for this upload. The Holocaust Handbook series are gold. I hope he would carry on publishing more and more until he leaves no stone unturned in this topic, even if that takes a thousand volumes!  In some cultures, very niche topics are covered in hundreds of volumes, each volume composed of over a thousand pages. It is only in Western culture that people are disinclined to write too much, sadly because we live in a part of the world where reading for the purpose of education is not ingrained in culture. People simply cannot read except in pursuit of entertainment and so publishers and authors often keep their educational books and their volumes short.  This man clearly does what he does not in pursuit of money but the truth, people such as this deserve investment. They deserve platforming. They deserve empowerment, but you often find them ostracised and marginalised, exploited and abused. This part of the world that we live in is undeserving of people such as this. This is why it is in the continuous decline that it is in.  I have not been researching the holocaust for a long time. In fact, I am new to this journey in history and in politics. I am so happy to have come across these handbooks today. I will be investing in them and I encourage others to do the same, if they haven’t already of course, because I know many in this field know this man and unlike me are already acquainted with his series of books.  [show less]

  Edited 4 days ago

  Reply·4·Flag

• 4 days ago

  Fakenukes

  ABX is conspicuously missing from this discussion….she’s scrolling through Wikipedia to find a way to discredit Germar, LOL

  Reply·1·Flag

  • View all 7 replies
  • 4 days ago

    Marcus CeltOrwell’s Daughter

    LOL Im gonna have nightmares tonight

    Reply·1·Flag

  • 4 days ago

    Orwell’s DaughterMarcus Celt

    You’ve been Stockholm Syndromed by Babs

    Reply·0·Flag

• 4 days ago

  Fakenukes

  Leave the ones where she makes death threats….keep em up for everyone to see

  Reply·3·Flag

• 4 days ago

  @abx0018b50b

  Jim, please stop telling the truth and giving a platform to knowledgeable guests. You are making our job of deceiving the masses very difficult. You types should just stop.

  Reply·1·Flag

  • Hide replies
  • 4 days ago

    drumbum

    LOL

    Reply·2·Flag

  • 4 days ago

    Marcus Celt

    https://i.imgur.com/pV1MQvy.gif

    

    Reply·4·Flag

  • 4 days ago

    SafariSam USA

    I like your 1st Statement, at least your being Honest now.  I respect that.  But Jim Should NOT “stop”.

    Edited 4 days ago

    Reply·1·Flag

  • 4 days ago

    SafariSam USAMarcus Celt

    Did they Not have Bagels back then?

    Reply·0·Flag

  • 4 days ago

    @abx0018b50cSafariSam USA

    Mr not so bright that isn’t my username

    Reply·0·Flag

  • 2 days ago

    papasha408@abx0018b50c

    You are an incorrigible liar and a jerk with no sense of proportion.  Do everyone a favor and ef off!

    Reply·0·Flag

• 4 days ago

  Orwell’s Daughter

  Germar’s material has helped me open the eyes of several people. As a doctor, I have a few colleagues who aren’t total lemmings. I sent them to Germar’s website & they were amazed. Thanks Germar. You are one of the only White men left.

  Reply·8·Flag

  • 4 days ago

    Jim Rizoli

    Germar is a brilliant person anybody that does not see that I don’t know what to tell you he knows his stuff.

    Reply·4·Flag

• 4 days ago

  SafariSam USA

  I talked to a guy the other day who had a German last name, and he said he didnt understand how “Everyone wants to be like Hitler”.  So I told him some of the Holocaust Revisionists story.  He didnt seem mad, and actually I think I gave him something to think about and Research.  Amazing, the More I follow this subject,  the more Ridiculous the “Official Jooz’s” Story becomes.  And I’m a Recovering “Holocaust Believer”, Rehabilitated.  Well I Never verbally assaulted a Holocaust Denier because I’m a Very Open Minded Person.  Actually I thought it was a Joke at first, but the more i listened and Read the Books the More it made sense. [show less]

  Edited 4 days ago

  Reply·2·Flag

  • Hide replies
  • 4 days ago

    @abx0018b50c

    Did you spew a series of lies like you usually do??

    Reply·0·Flag

  • 4 days ago

    Jochen88@abx0018b50c

    Here comes the flood of filth…..

    Reply·1·Flag

  • 2 days ago

    papasha408@abx0018b50c

    Why don’t you bugger off and bother some other site?  This guy is a Hasbara Troll!!!

    Reply·0·Flag

• 4 days ago

  SafariSam USA

  You know what, the Bible does say the Antichrist will turn on the Jews during the Tribulation period.  So its possible.  And the Antichrist will be a Jew.  1 John 2:22“Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.”

  Edited 4 days ago

  Reply·0·Flag

• 4 days ago

  Fredziffle108

  do they take credit card?

  Reply·1·Flag

  • 2 days ago

    papasha408

    Yes, they do!!

    Reply·0·Flag

• 4 days ago

  Regensordo

  The handbooks are a massive achievement.

  Reply·3·Flag

• 4 days ago

  Fredziffle108

  Hunt’s work on Majdanek was sooo good

  Reply·0·Flag

• 4 days ago

  RebellischerCherub

  fred Leuchter is art professor?

  Reply·1·Flag

• 4 days ago

  TrueHistory

  Excellent interview with Germar, these books are great I have them all, look forward to the hard cover Hand books, keep up the good work. The truth will always come through.

  Reply·1·Flag

• 4 days ago

  Revision

  THIS IS WHAT WE WANT. NOT SOME CONSPIRACY BS.

  Reply·1·Flag

• 4 days ago

  4thAmendment

  inclusive Arabs/Palestinians Semite GOYim exclusion A Discussion on the Evil Liability Talmud barf sQuad of faKe Enron’s/vanGUARD/blac rocK on & on a disEASE Religion of god of FORCEs – Charles Guliani target=”_blank”>https://www.goyimtv.tv/v/3770109016/A-Discussion-on-the-Evil-Talmud—Charles-Guliani [show less]

  Reply·0·Flag

• 4 days ago

  niemsong

  Two heroes of mine JIM and GERMAR! Everyone needs to hear this!

  Reply·4·Flag

• 4 days ago

  SafariSam USA

  Galileo likewise defied the Pope by Stating the Earth Revolved/orbited around the Sun by using Science and Mathematics.  Here’s an article from the Hitler Channel, I mean History Channel.  https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/galileo-is-accused-of-heresy ;; If we dont learn from True History, we are doomed to repeat it.  And today we know the Pope was a Bigoted, Close Minded Fool.[show less]

  Edited 4 days ago

  Reply·1·Flag

  • 18 hours ago

    BolshevikSlayer

    the heliocentric model is a complete farce. Sir George Biddell Airy demonstrated this fact with an experiment that has been called Aire’s failure. It was a failure because he set out to show that the earth revolved around the sun. His experiment proved the opposite. Michaelson and [show more]

    Reply·0·Flag

• 2 days ago

  papasha408

  Hello Germar.  I’m a big fan.  You are so needed in this ridiculous world we live in today!

  Reply·1·Flag

John Friend: All right folks welcome back to another edition of the Realist Report. This is your host, John Friend. Today is Thursday, October [November] 5th, 2020.

Of course my website is therealistreport dot com, where you will find an extensive archive of these podcasts as well as other programs I’ve participated in. You will also find all of my blog posts and articles, a contact page, my twitter feed, which is embedded in the right hand sidebar of the website, and many other useful and important links.

I am a regular reporter for American Free Press, America’s last real newspaper. And I also contribute to the Barnes Review, the bi-monthly revisionist history magazine. Please do subscribe to these fine print publications. Check out American Free Press dot net and Barnes Review dot org for all the details.

All right with that said let me introduce our special guest today. The one and only Germar Rudolf is joining us for the very first time! Germar, welcome to the program! How are you this morning, sir?

Germar Rudolf: Well, thank you for having me. I’m doing fine. And yourself?

John Friend: I’m doing good! I’m doing good! The past couple of days have been crazy with this election going on. This still unresolved election. I think it’s pretty clear that there are trying to steal this thing from Trump. So we will have to kind of wait and see what happens with that.

But we have a number of other important topics to discuss here this morning, so it’s really an honor to have you here. I’ve been very much influenced by your writing and your work over the years. I’ve heard you interviewed on other programs. And I’ve always wanted to have you as a guest here. So I’m glad that you are able to join me this morning, and I thank you for taking the time.

To get started could you maybe just introduce yourself a little bit? Give us a little bit of background and explain your experience in the revisionist movement and what lead you into critically investigating the World War Two narrative and specifically the alleged Jewish “Holocaust” of six million Jews during this monumental period of history.

Germar’s Background and His Start in Revisionism

top

Germar Rudolf: Yes! Well, that’s a question that the answer to which could take an hour already! [chuckling] I’ll make it shorter than that.

I’m a native German. So I grew up in Germany and I got my school and university education in Germany. I finished with a Masters degree, or an equivalent of that in Chemistry, back in 1989. And then started a year later after doing my compulsory military service, I started working on a PhD in Chemistry.

And it was around that time that the Leuchter Report was issued. That was in 1988. I found out about it in 1989. And was curious about it. I had a keen interest in German history for years, but I never touched upon the “Holocaust”. That was too hot a topic, too unpleasant a topic for Germans, I would say. Maybe a number of them would make a career out of it, of doing the “mea culpa” thing. There are a lot of them actually in Germany. But that wasn’t my thing.

So I stayed away from it. German history, for me it was, of interest, was the Kaiser time, First World War, the run up to the Second World War, and how the Second World War got started, and the aftermath. So I kind of stayed out of the war itself. Because it’s just too bloody a topic, and of course in particular the “Holocaust”.

Paul Rassiner, the French Founder of Holocaust Revisionism

top

What changed it was a book that I read just a few months before I found out about the Leuchter Report. And that was a book by French historian Paul Rassiner, who is considered the founder of historical revisionism.

He himself had been in a concentration camp because he had helped Jews get illegal papers to get out of occupied France. And he ended up in the Buchenwald camp, and after the war wrote about it. And was not pleased by the exaggerations and lies that was spread by his fellow inmates. And that was his starting point.

And when I obtained the book of his in, I think it was spring 1988, 1989, I was amazed! Up to that point anyone who was questioning the orthodox “Holocaust” narrative for me was just a Nazi, a Right-wing extremist, an anti-semite, and all the kind of labels that are put on people who question the “Holocaust”. And I was among those mainstream people who automatically, in a Pavlovian reflex, threw these words at people who would dare to doubt.

[05:03]

But this guy, I couldn’t do that with him because he was a victim of National Socialism! He had been inside a concentration camp as a prisoner. He had suffered terribly. And yet there he was doubting the whole narrative and bringing up arguments against the gas chamber claims, which opened up my mind. Allowed me to have doubts, to question the thing itself. I did not yet do it, but the preparation of my mind, the opening up of my mind was there.

[Image] Fred Leuchter holding up his copy of the original Leuchter Report for the second Zundel Trial in Canada, in 1988.

Discovering the Leuchter Report

top

And then a few months later I happened to stumble over the Leuchter Report. Which of course in one of its sections talks about taking wall samples and analyzing them chemically.

Now of course I had just graduated in chemistry a year before, roughly a year before. And that was my field of expertise. History had been a hobby, a field of interest, but I never felt like I could contribute in any way to it because I’m not an historian by any stretch of the imagination. I was just a consumer, an aficionado, if you wish.

But there was a topic where I thought:

“Well, I can understand it, I can verify that, I can actually maybe even contribute to it.”

And that is how I got going on that.

Starting My PhD at Max Planck Institute in Stuttgart

top

And while I was doing that, a year later starting my PhD at Max Planck Institute for Solid State Research in Stuttgart, I realized that they have a fine research library, and they had an online research.

Back then in 1990, 1991, there wasn’t no such thing as the internet yet. But there was intranet of libraries that were already connected and communicating in a similar fashion, as it was then expanded to encompass everyone in the world wide web.

So there was a pre-existing web, and it was fantastic! I could use it without getting charged. I could do all the research that I wanted.

And in my spare time when I was not working on my PhD, I went there and had the librarians work for me on that topic of, well, what chemicals are being formed, how are they being formed, and what kind of chemistry is going on, and what conditions had been prevalent and would be needed. And all these questions that were raised, I started to answer.

The Leuchter Report — Jumping the Gun

top

Not because I was planning on doing anything with it. I was just curious. It was just pure curiosity. Because in my mind it was too important a topic to ignore it, and to leave it half done! Because that was my impression when I read the Leuchter Report. He just took those sample, had them analyzed, got the results and then said:

“Well, because the results are not as I expect them, that proves that there was not any mass gassings going on in Auschwitz.”

But my opinion back then and still today, he kind of jumped the gun. Because there were so many questions the were not properly answered.

Like the chemical compound that he had been looking for in his analysis. Could they be long-term stable enough to survive forty years? Because between the end of the war and the time he took the samples — we’re talking about roughly forty years — would they be able to survive? Unless you can give a definitive answer to that, it makes little sense to take samples.

And then the next question is; well of course if we have established — and I did that then by doing a lot of research — that they do survive forty years or more, so that it makes sense to look for them analytically, could they form in the first place? What were the conditions that are claimed to have been present during those mass gassings? The physical conditions, the chemical conditions, the actual conditions of what happened exactly, what concentrations were used, how quickly was it ventilated? Could it have been ventilated?

All these questions that came up to my mind and I think had to be answered. And I couldn’t find the answer in the Leuchter Report. So he left me high and dry, and thirsting for more. And that was what I was doing for my own curiosity sake.

Zyklon B — How Stable over Time?

top

But I knew that a lot of people out there who would be interested in these findings. And as soon as I had my first findings, in early 1991, that showed that the chemical which was analyzed, which was detected by those analyses, called, … There’s an umbrella term term called “iron blue”, and there is some subsets of it called “Prussian blue”, and “Turnbull blue” and all kinds of other names are used for it. But it’s a blue pigment essentially that is a combination of iron and cyanide.

[10:08]

And cyanide is the part which comes from Zyklon B, which is the infamous product said to have been used to mass murder jews in Auschwitz.

So I found out with a number of peer-reviewed papers that had been published in the fifties, sixties and seventies, that this pigment is indeed is extremely stable and should survive with ease those forty years between World War Two and the time that Leuchter had taken his samples.

And I sent those papers, I made copies of the papers and sent them to a list of people and institutions that I had received from a friend of mine who told me that they might be interested. I didn’t know any of these people. I just sent it out. It was some twenty people, or so.

A Trip to Auschwitz for Samples

top

And one of them must have become interested in me expanding that research, because he contacted me, and invited me, and then asked me whether I would be willing to myself go to Auschwitz, take samples and do a similar analysis. And I happily agreed to do that.

I took a few days off from my employment as a PhD student to go on an extended weekend to Auschwitz. And we did our research there and took samples and had them analyzed.

Fortunately at Max Plank Institute also had a nice engineering department where you could get, as a PhD student, you could get your own machinery built. So if you were doing some experiment, or were planning on doing some novel experience [experiment?] you needed some novel machine, some novel setup to do your experiment, they would actually construct it for you.

Having Max Planck Institute Build a Little Gas Chamber

top

So I had an engineer friend of mine make construction drawings of an experimental little gas chamber that we could use to expose building material to hydrogen cyanide, to Zyklon B fumes, essentially. To see how they react to verify that my chemical findings were accurate.

And Max Plank Institute actually built it for me, at their expense. As a matter of fact it sounds a little bit spurious that I did that, but I had a contract with the Max Plank Institute, the Max Plank Society. Actually the full name is “Max Plank Society for the Furthering of Science”. So what they do, their mission is to further science in any which way possible. And the contract I had with them allowed me to do my PhD, but allowed me also, expressively [explicitly] in a chapter it says:

“That any student who wants to do his own research on his own initiative is encouraged and invited to do so and use the Institute’s resources for it.”

Bingo! [chuckling]

John Friend: Wow!

Germar Rudolf: At the end of the day they didn’t like what I did with it, and then they eventually wanted to fire me because I had done that. And it went to court because I thought:

“You can’t do this, because I have the contract here that says explicitly I’m allowed to do it.”

And we settled then out of court and the contract with them was resolved [?] two or three months before it would come to a normal end. Anyhow it was only a limited contract of three years.

So anyway that was the setup. And the guy who actually contacted me and asked me whether I wanted to do that research and take my own samples, he was in contact with a lawyer who had clients who were on trial, or were prosecuted and soon to be on trial for quote, unquote, “holocaust denial”. And they then asked me to get all my results together, write an expert report that could be presented in court in Germany. Which I did.

And then I appeared in some seven or eight court cases as an expert witness. However I was never heard by the court because they basically violated German penal code. Because it said that:

“If an expert witness is already in the court room.”

So to say, there’s no expense and no time wasted for the court to get this witness. The witness is already there. He is an expert by his education, which I was. You don’t need a PhD degree to be an expert. Already if you have a diploma degree, which is somewhere between a Master’s degree and a PhD degree in the US. If you have that already you are considered an expert in chemistry and you can testify. And if you are in control of your mind, so you are not under the influence of some drugs or so, or unconscious, then you can’t testify of course.

[15:14]

And if what you have to say is relevant to the case, which it is, because those people were on trial for denying that there were gassings in Auschwitz, and I could prove, or explain, to the court what could and could not happen according to the material evidence that I had found. So what I would testify was relevant.

German Court Breaks the Law and Denies Expert Testimony

top

Under these circumstances the German penal code forces a court to hear the evidence. They cannot reject it! It’s already there, it’s relevant, it’s possible, do it! But no! They broke the law and denied me to testify anyway. And in one case the judge actually threatened me!

Now this is a crime under German penal law to threaten a witness in the witness stand, or in the courtroom, that if he testifies to his best knowledge that he would get prosecuted for it. And that is exactly what that judge did. He said:

“Witness, are you really going to testify along the line as the motion of the defense suggests?”

I said:

“Well you will hear, when I’m in the stand.”

So I didn’t even answer to that. But then he said:

“Well if you do testify along those lines, you are making yourself liable to prosecution because it’s going to be a crime!”

[chuckling] So he was threatening me as a witness that if I testify in a certain way that I would be prosecuted! But that is standard procedure in Germany. Back then actually you could still file a motion as a lawyer to have evidence like that introduced.

That changed in the mean time because of me. Because of my appearances they wanted to put a stop to it, so they changed the case law by a supreme court decision. That a lawyer who files a motion to introduce evidence which by its content denies the “Holocaust”, the lawyer actually commits a crime, and will be prosecuted. Merely for filing the motion! That does not even include the evidentiary statement itself, but only suggests that the statement would go along this line, and then this is already considered a crime.

German Lawyers Prosecuted for Filing “Holocaust Denial” Motion

top

And several lawyers were prosecuted and sentenced in Germany for having done exactly that. And the first case that set the precedent was when a lawyer filed a motion to have me testify.

John Friend: Yeah, it’s pretty unbelievable where literally in Germany if you present evidence that questions, or criticizes the official “Holocaust” story, it’s literally a crime. For presenting authentic, legitimate, evidence. It’s totally tyrannical and Orwellian to a degree that I can’t even express!

Germar Rudolf: Right. It is the step before. They don’t even get to present it! They just file a motion:

“I would like to present this evidence.”

That is already a crime! You don’t even get to present the evidence! Yeah, it’s ridiculous!

So initially the first couple of years I was doing that, I was chasing the system ahead of me, they were panicking, judges were panicking. It was a big upheaval, and they were trying to stop me. They would do anything to stop me.

Fleeing Germany and Starting a Publishing Enterprise

top

And they did eventually. They dragged me in court for my expert report and sentenced me. I left the country before it actually became valid, because an appeal was pending and I had not been arrested for it, because they thought there was no danger that I might flee because I was married, I had children, I had a job, I had a home. So they thought:

“No, I’m not going to run.”

And I did.

And I lived abroad for a number of years, expanding my activities in this regard. Turning what was initially only a research on a small level into a publishing enterprise that was focusing on this issue. Expanding more, and more the research horizons. Not just Auschwitz, but all the camps. Not just the camps, but the whole topic of the “Holocaust”.

Italian Scholar Carlo Mattogno World’s Foremost Expert

top

Not just me. I mean, I’m a minor contributor at this point. I’m primarily editing and publishing other authors, particularly the Italian scholar Carlo Mattogno. Who I consider to be the world’s foremost expert in matters of “Holocaust” in general.

[Image] Jurgen Graf, Carlo Mattogno and Germar-Rudolf.

He has published monographs on pretty much anything you can imagine of — with a few exceptions maybe. But he’s covered the whole territory and he has a knowledge that is rivaled by no one! Not even mainstream historians! They cannot touch him with anything with the depth and intensity of knowledge that he has. He would blow any orthodox historian out of the water with ease!

[20:17]

John Friend: Yeah.

Germar Rudolf: And I have the pleasure and the honor to publish his material.

And actually right now I’m working on getting another one of his books translated from Italian to English. I’ve turned into a translator and editor mainly. I’m doing translations, and I have been doing for the past 2, or 3 years, from Italian on some regular basis. So I have passive knowledge of Italian [words unclear]. That is what I’m doing now days!

John Friend: Very good! You are doing a great job! You have been doing a great job for a number of years. So I wanted to ask you. So your main forensic and chemical investigations into the alleged “Holocaust” really focuses on Auschwitz, correct? That was the main camp that you kind of focused on?

Why the Focus on Auschwitz?

top

Germar Rudolf: Yes. I exclusively focused on Auschwitz simply because back then I was a student that didn’t have the means of travelling to other camps and doing research on them as well. Auschwitz is kind of the big elephant in the room anyhow, if we are talking about the “Holocaust” in terms of propagandistic importance from the orthodox side in terms of number of victims, in terms of the documentation that has been left. Because pretty much most of the camp archives from the Construction Office, as well as from the Headquarters has survived.

Also when it comes to the number of witness statement we have, because there are so many Auschwitz survivors. They go into the hundreds of thousands after the war, which already tells you a lot about how successful an extermination could have been, said to have happened there. If hundreds of thousands are left after the war, allowed to survive and tell their story to the world.

Gas Chamber Stories from a Tiny Number of Survivors

top

As a matter of fact, had the things that are claimed happened, you would have hundreds of thousands, or even two hundred thousand, testimonies pretty much saying the same thing. But we don’t have that! We have maybe 50 that are relevant in terms someone claiming he actually saw something in person. We have a lot more that repeat rumours and that regurgitate what has been published in the media. But actual people who claim:

“I was there! I did that and I saw that!”

There’s maybe 50, maybe a 100. But if you consider you have 200,000 survivors and a 100 of them come up with a story, and the other 199,900 don’t! Then you have a pretty good statistical idea of where the truth is.

Under 200,000 people you find a 100 pathetic liars! And they are!

Your Main Conclusions About Auschwitz?

top

John Friend: Yeah, exactly! Well, I wanted to ask you, and it’s kind of a broad question, but what are the main conclusions that you have come to regarding Auschwitz and how it fits in to the overall “Holocaust” story.

Germar Rudolf: Well, pretty much the same as Leuchter’s.

They are based on a much broader basis of evidence. And I’m not blaming Leuchter for not having been able to do that, because he was asked, in the middle of a trial [Zundel Trial II] to do, within a few days, which normally you wouldn’t do because the topic is so complex, you couldn’t have done the preparatory research on any level to actually allow him to come to these conclusions. So I think he was pushing it a little bit.

[Image] Fred Leuchter (second from left) with the Zundel team for the second Zundel Trial (1988).

But basically I’m saying the same thing. If we look at the facilities where it is claimed to have happened, we look at the technical, the engineering, the architectural design, and capabilities, you can say that already from that point of view these facilities would not have been able to do what is claimed to have happened in them.

And then you come to the chemical part, and I prove with a lot of research. That first of all, the components that we analyze are so stable that we need to find them to this day. And they actually would have formed, because there are numerous factors, chemical and physical in nature, which I can back up with a lot of expert literature from normal chemical and physical peer-reviewed journals — you know, mainstream journals that publish that kind of research — showing that this stuff would have formed under the circumstances. And actually the homicidal gas chambers would have been the primary place where we should expect them, because of their chemical and physical makeup.

[24:58]

So, basically coming to the same conclusion on a much wider evidentiary basis.

Also because I happened to revise my report, getting more and more access to material that is in the archives of the Auschwitz Museum, in the Moscow archives, because the Red Army came and took most of the documents they found in Auschwitz and took them to Moscow. And they revealed them only in the mid 1990s.

And we got a hold of them. And Carlo Mattogno has done analysis of a lot of this material from all these archives. And I have a good working relation with him, so I get a lot of the material that is interesting and have used them for newer editions of my report, to further substantiate the conclusions that I had already come to in my first edition of 1992.

The Facilities and the Chemical Evidence Shows That It Didn’t Happen

top

Basically, the facilities couldn’t have done it, and the chemical evidence shows that it didn’t happen.

Auschwitz was a Death Camp, but Not a Murder Camp

top

John Friend: Right. So Auschwitz is presented as this like mass extermination centre, right, at least by the mainstream court historians. So what was going on at Auschwitz then? If it wasn’t this death camp what was really going on there?

Germar Rudolf: It was a “death camp“. But not a “murder camp“! They’re different!

History of the Camp — Planned as a POW Camp for Russians

top

Auschwitz initially was just a normal concentration camp where primarily Polish political prisoners and resistance fighters were incarcerated. And that changed after the start of the Soviet-German war in the summer of 1941. At which point they wanted to build in the vicinity of Auschwitz a huge POW camp. Where they planned on housing 100,000, or even 200,000 Soviet prisoners of war.

Now if you look into the history of war the Germans had millions of Soviet POWs, but they were all grounded somewhere in Russia. And there was no logistical means for them to actually get millions of people back west. Because their transport infrastructure to get soldiers, munitions, and supplies to the front and back, were so strained that they just didn’t have the capacity to get any of the Soviet people, Soviet prisoners out of there, or very few.

And of course then winter broke, it broke out relatively early that year in October and November already, things were completely shut down. And then those Soviet prisoners of war in those, they were not really prisoner of war camps, they just put them in a spot, put some barbed wire around them and some people with machine guns and guarded them that way, because they were just not prepared for this sudden huge amount of prisoners. And they started dying like flies.

So the plans to have that POW camp near Auschwitz, which was then called Birkenau [Auschwitz II] filled with Soviet POWs didn’t work out. They wanted to use those POWs to work in the chemical factories that were being constructed at that time, nearby. Which was absolutely crucial for the German war effort, because basically Germany manufactured the most important things for conducting war, there’s fuel, ammunition, and all kinds of basic chemicals that are used to run any kind of machinery, rubber, lubricants, everything. They were synthesizing it out of air and coal.

So they had plans on using the coal mines in Upper Silesia to get the coal, get them into coal liquidfication and gasification plants near Auschwitz, which they were building there. Because there is a lot of process water [needed]. The rivers Vistula, the Sola. There’s a lot of water, for the processes you need water. And they wanted to build these huge factories which would then produce fuel, lubricants, and other chemicals to fuel the machinery. And they needed workers for them. So they planned on using the POWs for working in those factories. And they didn’t come!

[Image] Map of the Auschwitz complex. (click image to enlarge)

Plan B — Use Jews as Forced Labour

top

The Plan B was, which they switched to early 1942 when they knew they can’t get the Russian POWs out of Russia, to use the jews. The jews of Europe. They started deporting from Czechoslovakia, and then from France. Jews and put them in the POW camp, instead. It took them two years actually to rename the camp from “POW” to “concentration camp“. So initially they kept the name even though it never really was a POW camp. It was filled with jews.

[30:12]

And when they started filling it up with jews in early 1942, there wasn’t much of a camp. It was pretty much similar like with all the other camps. Initially they put a barbed wire fence around an area, threw the people in there and gave them some boards and some hammers, and some nails, and told them:

“Build your own barrack. Build your own huts. Build your own bed, and that’s it!”

Lack of Sanitary Facilities Leads to Typhus and Catastrophe

top

Not a nice situation for anyone. So up to the end of 1942, the first three quarter years basically no sanitary facilities worth mentioning. No proper toilets, no showers at all, no de-lousing facilities. And you can imagine if you cram people together in an area that is only developing housing, that is only developing sanitary installations, the hygienic conditions are going to be catastrophic! Which they were.

And right from the beginning they were infested with lice and fleas. Inevitably, if you cram people together and they can’t wash and shower, and then their clothes don’t get de-loused, then you have these vermin spread like crazy! And it’s only a matter of time, during wartime, that diseases are spread by these pests.

You know fleas spread the plague, lice spread typhus! The plague, fortunately, did not break out in those years, even though we can see from the documents that the German authorities were afraid it might.

Hundreds Die Each Day

top

But the lice did introduce typhus. And right from the beginning people started dying like flies in that camp, because of hygienic situation, because of typhus spreading like crazy. It reached it’s peak in August and September of 1942. So just not even half a year they started shipping jews into that camp. And the peak, I think, was that 500 inmates died on one day! I think it was in late August or September. I can’t remember exactly. But it stayed around several hundreds from July into October, when it subsided a little bit, but it re-surged again in early 1943.

They got it under control only towards the end of 43, early 1944. So during that time for large stretches, hundreds of people died every day from this typhus epidemic.

[33:04]

SS Personel Succumb to Typhus

top

It was so bad that actually the SS guards and SS officials, they were supposed to run the camp, at least remotely, getting some inmates in charge inside who would run it for them inside. But of course there had to be some interaction between the SS and the inmates. And the SS people succumbed to typhus as well.

It was the very first garrison physician of Auschwitz, Dr Schwela who got sick of it in April, or May of 42. And he died in May. And the next one put in charge, Dr Uhlenbroock got sick of it too in September, and he barely survived. He was incapacitated for a month.

And the next physician they put in charge, he came from the Dachau concentration camp, was put in charge in September. He took over. And he described in letters that he wrote after the war, what situation he found when he came to Auschwitz. That there was no sanitary facilities, people were filthy, they were covered in lice, and fleas were everywhere. He could see everything crawling in the huts. He said that:

“It looks like the wood everywhere is moving because there just are lice and fleas everywhere! It was absolutely horrific! Dead inmates lying in bunks, not being removed for sometimes days, because there was no organization, no structure.”

Dr Wirths

top

Dr Wirths was the third garrison position who then moved heaven and earth to get things improved. It took him two years to get it under control. When you consider the completely chaotic conditions were completely out of control! They had so many people die there. They had only one crematoria, an old one in the main camp, the original concentration camp [Auschwitz I]. And they couldn’t burn it [the bodies] because they just didn’t have the capacity, and then they overloaded that and it broke down anyhow.

High Ground Water Levels Require Bodies to Be Burnt

top

So they had to bury most of these victims for a period of time in the second half of 1942 in mass graves. And as I mentioned this is an area where the rivers Vistula and Sola flow together, so it’s a low lying meadow land, and it’s swampy. And if you dig up mass graves there and throw thousands of people in there, they are going to be in the ground water, they are going to rot, and they are going to poison the ground water.

And that was the danger that the ground water in the entire area would get poisoned and that other diseases caused by, that get transferred through drinking water, typhoid fever, and cholera, and whatever else that can get into it. You have not only typhus, but typhoid fever, which is a different thing. And then you have cholera, all things can happen! So they were freaking out. And then they had inmates actually excavate those mass graves again and try to incinerate the rotting left overs of those typhus victims, to make sure they wouldn’t poison the ground water.

So it’s a complete nightmarish scenario that I’m describing to you here. And it’s allegedly also the same time when mass gassings are supposed to have happened. Now if you imagine how completely out of control the situation was for the SS, where the SS men themselves are dying, and have no means of getting a hand and a control of the situation!

It is unfathomable that on top of all this they would start mass murdering jews that were being shipped to Auschwitz! As a matter of fact we know from the documentation that all the jews up to July 1942 that were ever shipped to Auschwitz, and can be proved to have been shipped there, were properly registered there and entered the camp as normal inmates. So they were not mass murdered. So mass murder claims for the first half of 1942 are completely bogus! There’s no documentary evidence for it.

[37:20]

But considering how completely out of control the situation was, the SS could not possibly have had the logistical means to organize, to implement, and then to clean up such a mass murder program, because they were completely unable to handle the quote, unquote “natural death” cases they had on hand.

Introduction of Delousing Facilities Including Microwave Devices

top

So you can see that, yes, Auschwitz during that phase was a death camp, but not because of murder, but because of mass dying due to the absolutely outrageous conditions that prevailed in the camp during the first year. It got better only, as I said, when Dr. Wirths came. He had showers built, delousing facilities built. He actually saw to it that the most modern delousing device ever created was installed at Auschwitz. It was a microwave delousing facility.

The Germans had discovered microwaves during the Olympics in 1936 with their strong TV emitters that had a broadband spectrum that went into the microwave, and they were frying flies that were getting near to the emitters. And they suddenly realized:

“Oh! Look at this! At that frequency range radiation actually does something that radio waves don’t do. It heats up water and kills every bug.”

So they started developing — it was Siemens — started developing delousing devices based on microwave radiation. And the first one was ready in 1943 and eventually got sent to Auschwitz. And then Auschwitz got a stationary installation in 1944.

Roughly a month, the same time they also got the first DTT, which as you know, was invented by a Swiss chemical company. And they licensed it out to German companies, to American companies. And they all started using it in 1943, 1944.

Auschwitz got it’s first tons of DTT in May of 1944. And at that point things were under control. Not talking about DTT being a good thing. As we know, down the road, it has very detrimental environmental effects, but at that point it saved the lives of thousands of people, if not tens of thousands of people. And got all the epidemics that were raging in Europe under control.

John Friend: Wow!

Germar Rudolf: And among them also the ones in Auschwitz. In addition to the microwave systems they had built there.

John Friend: Very interesting! That’s probably the best explanation of Auschwitz that I’ve heard, ever! So thank you for explaining all of that.

And it really kind of shows you that the Germans did not, absolutely did not have this State sanctioned policy of murdering jews. They were just dealing with very chaotic situation with all these people in their control, right? I mean I think that’s what it really boils down to. They weren’t prepared, they didn’t have the resources.

[40:33]

Germar Rudolf: Yeah.

John Friend: Is that what you were getting at?

Responsibility for the Deaths Lies with the Reich

top

Germar Rudolf: When we are talking about the local people at Auschwitz they have at numerous times, both Dr. Wirths and the camp command said:

“Stop shipping jews to us. We can’t handle the situation!”

The responsibility for what evolved there lies clearly with the Reich government [words unclear] The main office in charge of [word unclear], basically Nazi Germany’s “Department of Homeland Security”, who decided that we have to have people working in our factories, all our men are at the front, we have no workforce anymore, and now we’ve tried to get volunteers from foreign countries and they are not enough.

So jews were the primary scapegoat of the National Socialists. So they picked those:

“You are going to be our slave laborers.”

And then they ship them to Auschwitz, even though they were informed sooner. There’s some responsibility of the SS at Auschwitz. They tried to cover it up, the disastrous situation, they were not screaming “bloody murder” loud enough, if at all, earlier on. They should have done it. It was only Dr Wirths who started doing that.

But still then, the Reich government wouldn’t stop shipping jews down there!

Starting July 1942 Most Jews Were Not Admitted to the Camp but Sent Elsewhere in the Region

top

Starting in July and August of 1942, most jews that were deported to the Auschwitz region were not admitted to the camp anymore. And that’s where the mainstream narrative comes from, that says:

“Okay, we have this train. We know it left Compiègne, let’s say, in France, with 1,000 jews. And we see them in the camp records that say only 150 had been admitted to the camp. So, we conclude that 850 of them were killed on arrival in gas chambers.”

That’s not true. We have found document that shows very clearly in July the typhus epidemic was completely out of control, and it was decided then to not send the jews into the camp anymore, but to but to take them off trains in other places and let them work in factories. And let the factories set up little workers’ camps in their vicinity. So there were a lot of them in the vicinity of Auschwitz where the inmates were temporarily housed, because the Auschwitz camp was completely out of control and it would be just irresponsible to send people there.

Still they did admit a lot of people. If you look at the people, the French jews who sent to Auschwitz in 1942, all of them who were sent there until early July were properly registered. We have their names.

Death Book Records vs Four Million

top

And we see also in the Death Books where all inmates that died are recorded as one after one of these people died. So most of these French jews, indeed, were shipped en mass to Auschwitz, even though the conditions there were terrible! The Reich government just didn’t care. They wanted them there. They wanted them to work. If there were bad conditions, too bad! Just see to it that it gets better. We need to get this done. And then they died like flies.

And at the end you can see all the names. Not a single one of these 70,000 jews who were deported were killed in a gas chamber. We can see it! They died of typhus and all the other bad things that happened there, because of the conditions.

But most of the them did die, and within a year.

John Friend: I’m curious, because most people are aware that Auschwitz originally, I think up until the early 90s, if I’m not mistaken, I mean the official narrative was that 3 million people were murdered!

Germar Rudolf: Four.

John Friend: Oh was it four? OK, I’m sorry.

Germar Rudolf: Yeah.

John Friend: And then they reduced it down to one million, I think now is the official narrative. So how many people in total? I mean, do you have any idea of how many people actually died during the war at Auschwitz? It certainly wasn’t four million! It probably wasn’t even one million! How many people do you think actually died there?

Germar Rudolf: The Death Books, which officially recorded every death case in the camp of inmates that were registered in the camp, have, … Let me rephrase that.

The volumes of the Death Books that have been released to the public have recorded around 68,000 death cases. Roughly half of them are jews. And the rest of mainly Poles, Christian Poles who were there.

Now this set is incomplete. We know from an accompanying letter of the Russian archives that they do have more. But it seems like they have not released those, and they keep them hidden. Or they have been destroyed in the meantime. So there is a set missing that goes, if I’m not mistaken, from the end of 43 to the end of 1944. And there are a few volumes, here and there, missing at the beginning, too.

Now from the conditions that prevailed we can see that probably the death rate shrank dramatically towards the end of 43 and into 1944. And that is maybe one reason why they are hiding them and not releasing them, because they clearly show that Auschwitz camp got the situation under control and they were relatively little death cases during that time.

But we can set an upper limit of what is possible by a number of logistical factors that if we extrapolate things, if we look at the conditions. If we look at what would have been possible to destroy when we come to talking about cremation.

Because evidently Auschwitz with the situation there, they couldn’t bury people in mass graves, so they had to cremate them.

And they built crematoria. And we know what capacity they have. We know for good stretches what fuel they got delivered. We know how much fuel you need. And we can make calculations what is the maximum number of people that could have been cremated there. And we know that there aren’t huge mass graves. And the narrative doesn’t even claim that after the initial typhus victims that there were any people buried in mass graves.

Total Auschwitz Deaths About 100,000

top

So they all need to have been cremated in those crematoria. But there are technical limits of what they could have achieved in that time, with that fuel, with the equipment they had.

And so the upper limit is is maybe roughly double the amount that is recorded in those Death Books. So we are talking 140,000 as an upper limit.

But this is definitely really an upper limit. It’s probably a little less. We’re talking about an order of magnitude of 100,000, plus or minus a few 10,000 up or down.

If you consider this in comparison to what has been claimed, one million, or even four million, it sounds like little, it sounds like a minimization, a trivialization of what happened in Auschwitz.

But give me a break! We have one camp that existed basically only during a few years during the war, and roughly 100,000 people die there, because of prevailing catastrophic conditions. For which the SS and the Reich government is responsible. And if they can’t provide proper amenities for the inmates to be able to survive, they ship them there anyway, it’s their responsibility.

A 100,000 people, is a huge number! And I find it shocking that people don’t find such a number shocking, but consider that it is a trivialization and a mockery! No it’s not! It’s a 100,000 individual fates of death!

In the realm of the concentration camps that existed in Germany. You know Buchenwald, you know, Mauthausen, Dachau, and all the other ones. They all had their their death talk. None of them are claimed to have had mass gassings going on there. Some minor claims of test gassings, here and there, but not numerically significant.

None of these come anywhere close to the death toll that Auschwitz has. So, even if we take the revisionist narrative of it, this camp’s still has been the main location of loss of life, of catastrophic, of tragic loss, of tragic loss of life in the concentration camp system.

So that’s why I’m saying, it was a “death camp” in that term. Not because of murder. Not because of gas chambers.

Genocide Does Not Require Gas Chambers

top

Just the other day I mentioned to an acquaintance of mine, who was not familiar with my views on that. And we got to talk about it. And I said:

“Genocide does not require gas chambers.”

In fact the whole history of mankind is riddled with genocide! And not a single one of them included mass gassings in gas chambers! So why do you insist on this one, of having had gas chambers?

[50:20]

The Genocide Charge Doesn’t Go Away

top

If you look at the definition of genocide:

“When you persecute a defined group in a way that its numbers, its population numbers, shrinks due to your measures of preventing births, of preventing families to form, of putting them under conditions where they die in masses.”

This is today’s definition. And today’s definition still applies even if you take out gas chambers. So the genocide charge, ethically speaking, not legally speaking, because the law didn’t exist back then, but today it does. But ethically it’s always been there, the genocide charge doesn’t go away.

John Friend: Right. Yeah, and I mean even a 100,000, as you mentioned, is itself a tragedy. A 100,000 people, that is a small city just dying in one camp in these horrible conditions. And that really is important to understand and to consider that it really was a horrific situation.

Not a State sanctioned policy by the Germans, but just given the environment and given the conditions, given the war, and just how strained the German government was, it probably was a pretty irresponsible thing to do. And it did lead to a lot of deaths.

Germar Rudolf: Right. And of course now days Germany has to deal with it morally, but they of course pile up stuff on top of it which is inaccurate and is just exaggeration, or outright lying. This is just not right either.

John Friend: Yes, exactly. Well we could probably spend another two hours discussing this, or even more.

Your Current Legal Problems

top

I know you are going to have to run here in just a minute. I wanted you to briefly kind of just promote your website and also your fundraiser. I know you have had a, … Well you have had a number of legal challenges and legal issues over the years, both here in the United States and of course in Germany. And I know recently you’re sort of facing a legal situation that I wanted you to talk about briefly, if you have just a couple more minutes?

Germar Rudolf: Sure. Well, I actually don’t want to spend too much on it. I have my own personal website where you can find a brief introduction to it, and then a short video I did, I posted on YouTube. You can find the link there.

Personal Website and Holocaust Handbooks Website

top

And my website is just my name, germarrudolf dot com. And right on the home page there you will find a little attention catcher, paragraph, that explains the trials and tribulations that I’ve been going through. And a video where it explains it gets you also to a GoFundMe page, and gives you other options there on the website to donate if you feel so inclined.

But also, what I also want to point out that is more to the topic is that there are other websites that are of more interest to those that are curious about the topic we’ve been talking about. And the main one is probably Holocaust Handbooks dot com, where we have posted for free download as e-books, PDFs, Kindle and epub, almost all of the volumes of the Holocaust Handbook series, which comprises 40 volumes by now. And it keeps growing. [Now 41, with “Carlo Mattogno: The Making of the Auschwitz Myth”]

And it also has some documentary movies there that you can watch in case moving pictures are more your thing, rather than reading. And you’ll find links there to purchase hard copies of them. And the shop that I’m actually operating is connected with CODOH, the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust. The website is shop dot codoh dot com.

But, you’ll find the link on Holocaust Handbook dot com website. That’s probably  the best point to start at. It has recommendations on what to read if you want an introduction, starting with simple leaflets, to brochures, to booklets, going to lengthier books, and actually thick tomes, depending on what you are looking for.

And then we have the documentaries there and links too, if you want to buy something. And you can go from there. That is probably the best starting point.

John Friend: Very good! I will definitely have that link. And I will also have your personal website link, and your GoFundMe pages as well. And I would encourage people to support you, whether that is by donating directly to the GoFundMe, or purchasing books from your website.

So yeah! Thanks a lot man! I appreciate you taking the time. We’ll have to do this again, and maybe spend a little bit more time discussing the “Holocaust”. There’s no shortage of information to discuss, that is for sure!

Germar Rudolf: I’m already on the call that I was expecting now. So I have to run.

John Friend: Okay! Thanks Germar! Have a good one. I’ll talk to you soon!

Germar Rudolf: Yep. Bye!

[55:25]

END

___________________________

Comments at the Realist Report

top

22 COMMENTS

• Jim Rizoli

  November 5, 2020 1:34 pm

  Just to add to the discussion…..not all the inmates in the camps were Jews of the 70k or more who died in the camp half were Jews. Auschwitz was a major transit camp for all over the German Reich for camp labor.
  Birkenau was the biggest camp mainly a camp for older people and children who didn’t work.
  Germar blames the Germans for something that they had no control over. It All was the collateral damage of war. Auschwitz was not a planned genocide, the deaths happened sorry to say because of the trials and tribulations of war.

  Reply

• Monika Schaefer

  November 5, 2020 4:46 pm

  Great interview! I want to say a big big “thank you” to Germar Rudolf for years and years of hard work, in order to get the truth out there.
  Thanks for having him on your show John.

  Reply

• AJ

  November 5, 2020 5:18 pm

  Great job, John. Always good to hear from Germar.

  Reply

• Jim Rizoli

  November 6, 2020 8:08 am

  Monika
  You should be very concerned on how Germar is blaming the Germans for something that was out of their control. No amount of Jew appeasement is going to make him look any better to the Jews. By the way the Germans suffered way more then the Jews when the final results were tallied up. Where is the outcry against the allies for what they did. The Jews actually were saved by being in the camps because the camps were for the most part no bombed by the allies. The Germans were open targets in all their so called peaceful cities. Germar might want to think about what he is doing by his careless statements. If you want to criticize the Germans for their lack of care of people in the camps you might want to look at the Allies for their wanton destruction and “Genocide” of the Germans that lasted for several years AFTER the war. Having a cold floor to sleep on doesn’t match the incendiary burning the Germans had to put up with by the Allies.

  Reply

• Diane K King

  November 6, 2020 8:11 am

  It seems Germar attempts to AGAIN denigrate the Germans, specifically the NS Germans, criticize them which is clearly JEW-SPEAK. Fails the Hitler test. Which means, he fails to TRULY understand what occurred in the THIRD REICH and also by consequence, the events of today.

  It WON’T ingratiate him to the jews since he already came against their GOD (the holohoax)

  THE HOLOCAUST IS THE JEWS’ GOD
  https://www.bitchute.com/video/rjQWR16XdjIX/
  with his chemical findings.

  Germar ALSO spoke against the Germans in his interview with Jim in 2017 like he’s on a campaign to redeem himself with the jews!!!! (AIN’T GOING TO HAPPEN as I stated above)

  JIM INTERVIEWS GERMAR RUDOLF, 2017
  https://www.bitchute.com/video/SMEHvBvGPQy2/

  We need to police ourselves, take each other to task when we egregiously erroneously assault the Germans.

  Can’t wait for your interview with JIM RIZOLI

  Reply

  • Realist Report

    November 7, 2020 5:45 pm

    I think Germar’s main point was that the German government was not prepared to handle the sheer amount of people that ended up at Auschwitz and that the camp itself was not equipped or established for such large numbers. I don’t want to speak for him, but that was my big take away.

    Perhaps it was irresponsible or dangerous for them to do such a thing? That’s for people to decide for themselves. The Jews openly declared war against Germany and made known their intentions, so I could care less about their suffering (real, imagined, or exaggerated), frankly. Everyone suffered and experienced tremendous hardships and tragedies during WWII, including the Jews. The Jews have just made their tragedies (again, real and imagined) the focus of our entire understanding of the war.

    I think Germar’s nuanced explanation was very insightful and made a lot of sense. I don’t think he was being too hard on the Germans, he was just explaining the reality of the situation, and I certainly don’t think he’s trying to ingratiate himself to the Jews.

    Reply

    • Thaddeus Noble

      November 7, 2020 7:07 pm

      Well stated !

      Jews started the Second World War by their goods boycott. This is indisputable fact.

      Up until supply of vital supplies begin being interrupted camp inmates received adequate nutrition, medical care, delousing was scrupulously maintained and deceased inmates were properly disposed of. This is empirical record. The Red Cross records affirm this.

      When supply lines to camp facilities were severely interrupted vital supplies were stopped. Medicine and food are essential to a highly concentrated group of humans.

      When supply lines to camp facilities were severely interrupted vital support products were stopped. This included chemicals necessary for Delousing function and coal for proper sanitary operations of Cremation services.

      Immune impaired camp population + lack of adequate nutrition and medication + cessation of proper delousing ability + inability to properly dispose of deceased bodies = rampant spread of life threatening diseases resulting in the unnecessary loss of inmate lives.

      Note here: The Allies were WELL AWARE of the conditions in these camps as a result of their intentional disruption of needed supplies BUT DID NOTHING to intervene even though they were well aware that it was causing unneeded deaths of inmates.

      Germans were NOT to blame here, but allied guilt is unequivocal.

      Reply

      • michael

        November 8, 2020 8:26 pm

        “Jews started the Second World War by their goods boycott. This is indisputable fact.”

        The boycott that lasted 1 day?

        The fable of the sensationalistic headline, “Judea Declares War on Germany” that no one has even bothered to read was a 2-page article made in response to attacks on Jewish businesses starting in January 1933 that eventually led to this March 24, 1933 appeal being raised against Germany, 2 days ironically after the Dachau concentration camp was opened. Some of the first political prisoner just happened to be Jewish store owners.

        “Continued anti-Semitism in Germany is likely to react seriously against her. A move is on foot on the part of Jewish financiers to exert pressure to force anti-Jewish action to stop. ” — The Daily Express, “Judea Declares War On Germany” (March 24, 1933), page 2.

        How did “the Jews” influence Hitler to keep breaking his own treaties throughout the 1930s leading into his then broken 1938 Munich Pact to breaking his 1934 Non-Aggression Pact with Poland with his invasion in 1939, that then caused Hitler to ignore Chamberlain’s last appeal for peace and for Hitler to leave Poland which being ignored on the eve caused War on Germany to be then declared against Germany?

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wh2X1dTMFsY

        Reply

        • DM

          November 13, 2020 7:05 pm

          Ha!

          It’s nice to you kvetch here with bullshit.

          We have endured 70 years of a “boycott”.

          Not just “one day”.

          Piss off anti-christ.

  • michael

    November 8, 2020 8:36 pm

    “Germar ALSO spoke against the Germans in his interview with Jim in 2017 like he’s on a campaign to redeem himself with the jews!!!! (AIN’T GOING TO HAPPEN as I stated above)

    JIM INTERVIEWS GERMAR RUDOLF, 2017
    https://www.bitchute.com/video/SMEHvBvGPQy2/”

    Unfortunately this is the same interview and reason why you and Jim censored Germar’s remarks that caused him to instead be interviewed a week later by Brian Ruhe. see, “The Mistakes of Adolf Hitler” https://www.bitchute.com/video/h2bgkBxqlrIU/

    “In early July 2017, Jim Rizoli and Diane King [editor’s note: “Free Speech campaigners”] interviewed me, but they cut out a 20-minute section where I touched briefly upon the mistakes of Adolf Hitler. I wasn’t happy about that censorship, so my next interview partner, Brian Ruhe, a confessing National Socialist, got to feel the heat of my wrath.” -Germar Rudolf

    Reply

• Monika Schaefer

  November 6, 2020 10:00 am

  I totally agree with you, Jim, that the conditions which led to the death (by disease) of many people in the camps was “collateral damage of war”, and also, that many inmates were non-jews. Those are things which were left out of the discussion unfortunately.

  However, I want to give Germar Rudolf his due for publishing, translating, and distributing many excellent books in the Holocaust Handbook series, as well as his work on the codoh.com website, not to mention his own legal battles, incarceration and persecutions that he has endured.

  Reply

  • BrendanO

    November 10, 2020 8:57 pm

    A huge number of jews were saved by being in Auschwitz rather than in German civilian centers which, if they had 50 thousand or more inhabitants were all fire-bombed incinerating most of the people in them .

    Reply

• Fred Leuchter

  November 6, 2020 2:10 pm

  Dear John,

  I would like the opportunity to discuss several points in Germar’s interview in which he does not understand the Job I had to do in the preparation of my report. He corroborates my report but discusses short comings that do not exist. Further, I do not believe his understanding of the History of the Auschwitz complex is correct and he has a complex as a German that causes a self-flagellation issue for him and the German People. I am an American who should be biased against Germany since I had family involved in the war. I review the historical facts and, even with this bias, have a clearer understanding of what happened medically at Auschwitz. I think the blame for these issues lay equally with the Allies and the Red Cross. Therefore, I request equal opportunity in an interview to speak of these matters.

  Thank you

  Fred Leuchter

  Reply

  • Realist Report

    November 7, 2020 9:50 am

    I would love to have you on! I’ll be in touch via email soon!

    Reply

• Alison Chabloz

  November 7, 2020 11:16 am

  Thanks for the interview.

  It’s more than a little disheartening to read criticism towards Germar Rudolf, not from the “usual suspects”, but rather from fellow travellers on the rocky road of historical revisionism.

  Those ready to counter-signal might remember Germar’s unfortunate encounter earlier this year with a creature of the forest, which sprang shortly after his recent legal battles, with all the implications of eventual extradition.

  Germar is first and foremost a scientist. When asked precise questions, he will answer precisely, yet comprehensively. This was not a discussion on the reasons for the war, on Allied war crimes, or on state-sponsored persecution of revisionists. The fact that Germar did not want to dwell on his own persecution, yet provided his expert opinion on the reasons for so many deaths at Auschwitz in particular, sheds light on his unassuming seriousness and dedication to the revisionist cause. He has my utmost respect.

  I look forward to listening to Fred Leuchter.

  Reply

• Jim Rizoli

  November 7, 2020 11:58 am

  Fred and I will respond shortly with a video. Part of true revisionism is NOT denigrating and blaming the Germans, Germar has to be re-educated on this point.
  Fred and I will not hold back on our video, stay tuned.

  Reply

  • Jim Rizoli

    November 7, 2020 12:38 pm

    Here is our reply
    https://www.bitchute.com/video/Rt2cOdOZsgVJ/

    Reply

    • A Reader

      November 7, 2020 7:59 pm

      How are German readers/listeners supposed to watch the video of Jim Rizoli? Why doesn’t Jim Rizoli publish his videos on his own site or on US server-based video platforms?

      Jim Rizoli’s Bitchute channel can no longer be viewed from Germany since September 01, 2020, when the following message appeared: “CHANNEL UNAVAILABLE[,] This channel is unavailable as the contents have been deemed illegal by the authorities within your country.”

      I think the company Bitchute is located in England, so it was obvious
      from the beginning that sooner or later the censorship would strike.

      Bitchute has become useless as an alternative to Youtube: Countless of the films and channels published there can no longer be viewed from Germany. Bitchute is in any case no longer an alternative.

      Reply

      • Saggy

        November 16, 2020 8:00 pm

        I just got a VPN so I’m new to this, but won’t a VPN allow German’s to view whatever vids they want? Proton VPN has a free option !!!

        For my money, BitChute rules.

        Reply

• Thaddeus Noble

  November 7, 2020 6:41 pm

  Firstly, I want to commend Germar for his past contributions. He has provided much clarity to the complexities of the “Hoax”.

  I see many famous contributors here such as Fred Leuchter who’s Leuchter Report is undoubtedly the Gold Standard in empirical evidence debunking the outright lies, deceit and mass fabrications connected to the Holahoax scam.

  Jim and Diane, Monika and Alison, all truth seekers with outstanding credentials and many more lesser known, but just as commendable, truth seeking Revisionist who plow ahead regardless of the screeching Jews.

  Jews LOVE to create dissension in the ranks. This is a tool they employ to encourage in-fighting therefore weakening an opponent. DON’T FALL FOR IT !!
  Germar has been under constant assault from the Elves Of Satan for his failure to heel and role over. He needs our support, not condemnation.

  Keep up the fact finding, expose what you find, support each other, NEVER STOP ! We are making more than just a dent or the rabid Piglets would not be oinking so loudly.

  Reply

• katana

  November 8, 2020 5:24 pm

  I’ve started a transcript of the interview here:

  https://katana17.com/wp/2020/11/09/the-realist-report-john-friend-with-germar-rudolf-nov-5-2020-transcript/

  Thanks John and Germar.

  Reply

  • Realist Report

    November 8, 2020 5:35 pm

    Thank you!

Fred Leuchter

His Story, His Way

Interviewed by

Jim Rizoli

September 29, 2015.