Germar Rudolf: Thank you. I need to get my instruments ready here. Now they fall apart. There was a cap to it and somehow that fell off. I apologize for this. All right.

 

I have something positive to say about this country to just attach right to the speech you just heard. And that is the fact that we can do what we do right now in this country. Because in many countries where our ancestors came from, we would not be able to do this! So there’s freedom of speech and freedom of assembly in this country. So there’s something good to say.

 

Also, what I wanted to mention is when it comes to the war against Iran, the Iranians are an Indo-European people. The language is closer to English and German than it is to Arabic. And when we should talk about the victims that this war causes, we should talk about the thousands and thousands of people of Indo-Europeans of Iranian ancestry that are being murdered.

 

Now, my topic today, as you would probably guess, is on Holocaust, because that’s what I’m known for and that’s what I’m good at. Before I do it, I give a little bit of an introduction of who I am. I would assume most of you know, but probably not all.

 

I am a German citizen. I grew up, born in the mid-1960s, grew up in West Germany, had a normal lower middle class upbringing, went to a normal public school, eventually studied chemistry, graduated. And in the process of graduating, I stumbled over that topic, research that had been done here in the United States by an expert in execution technologies who was looking into the gas chamber question and had some chemical arguments which caught my attention. And as a chemist, I couldn’t look away down the rabbit hole I went and never came back.

 

Now, the persecution that has resulted from my activity, because Germany is not a country where free speech and freedom of science, freedom of assembly has led me ultimately to this country. And there’s another good thing. The government has tried hard to keep me out. They actually arrested me. I was married to a US citizen. I had a granted immigrant visa. They arrested and deported me anyhow, with the reason given “no criminal case”. So in violation of that, I ended up in Germany. And Germany, I was put on trial for the research that I had published over the past five years while in exile. And they sentenced me to 44 months in total. And I had to spend that time.

 

Now, I’m not a singular case and I’m not the worst case of what’s going on in Europe.

 

Anyway. I fought my way back. I won in court. What they’d done to me was wrong. It was remedied as much as you can remedy losing five years of your life in prison. Was reunited with my family and I got the status of a permanent legal resident now in this country.

 

So 35 years of research on that topic have a number of years ago raised the question to me, how do I get the message out to the masses? The first 30 years, I would say I was looking for answers myself. I wasn’t sure whether I understood everything and whether I really got this story straight.

 

And then at the end of the 30 year mark, I was pretty sure. And then the idea came up of how do I get the message out now? One way is of course writing something that makes the information accessible. A lot of you actually bought it today from me. So I wrote an encyclopedia because that’s what scholars do all the time.

 

Actually, no, they don’t!

 

But I was in the unique situation that I had this knowledge. 35 years of sitting at the helm at the core of this skeptical, scrutinizing research. And I decided it needs to be done. And in lack of support from others and due to a cataclysmic development in my private life, I had the time to do it and I pulled it off.

 

So we have the knowledge published, we have it concisely presented and made accessible. There is still a step of how do I get people to listen? Because we’re talking about a taboo topic and people don’t want to hear it.

 

You, most of you probably are open minded. Some of you are, almost many I don’t know are convinced already that the mainstream narrative is phony. But we want to reach those who sit on the fence or even on the other side of it. How do we do that? And I want to give you a little bit of a instruction by example of the best approach.

 

[05:23]

 

 

And the best approach you already have seen. Some of you coming by our book stand there seeing those signs here and marveling over these graphics and the information that’s on there.

 

The best approach for the normies into this topic is not talking about lies that they’ve made up like jewish soap. They all have admitted it didn’t happen or lampshades or what. No! What you want to talk to them about is massive violation of civil rights! It’s free speech, is freedom of assembly that doesn’t exist over there. And make them see in concrete examples what that means!

 

When we’re talking about this topic here, people need to realize, every person needs to realize that every historian on this planet to one degree or another, if he wants to write Holocaust historiography or talk about it or write about it, he is doing history at gunpoint.!

 

That’s the only topic in the world right now, more or less on a global scale, where historians are threatened with at least destruction of their career, if not outright prosecution and imprisonment.

 

 

Scholars, not just historians, scholars you can do physics, you can do psychology, you can do any science and you will not get in trouble if you say something that’s controversial. It’s only this one! This particular part in history that gets people in trouble! Even in this country we have free speech. But any historian who touches that is a third rail topic, he will find his career ended.

 

 

This is the map of Europe. You see in red the countries that have outlawed Holocaust skepticism, that have outlawed doubt! Doubt is the core feature of us human beings, that sets us apart from animals who cannot doubt their central input. We can doubt what we see. We can systematically look for the truth and communicate with our fellow humans what the truth is or what we think the truth is, and can even make it independent of ourselves by putting it down encoded so that everyone can see it. That is what sets us apart!

 

And a government that outlaws doubt, outlaws search for truth, outlaws communicating the truth with others, is outlawing humanity! These countries have outlawed humanity! Stalinist Russia, as bad as it was, had no laws that would proscribe the result of any scholarly research in any field by penal law. This is the first in mankind history that we have that the European Union forces members who have not yet passed laws in the European Union to do it or they are threatened with sanctions. Finland just passed earlier this year, the last one, because they said we’re threatened by the EU by some kind of sanctions or measures. And that’s why we introduced that law.

 

 

Now what does that mean? I’ve told you about my 44 months for the research. You can see that there are two books, Chemistry for Auschwitz, if you want to look at it. It’s my original forensic research and lectures on the Holocaust.

 

 

 

Having done what I’m doing right now here to academic audiences in Germany, talking about my research in the calm and academic style led to being sentenced. There were worse cases.

 

 

I want to focus here on Austria. Some of you have looked through a list of all the countries and some are not on this map. Actually, of course, Canada has introduced a law north of us and Australia uses a backdoor way of doing it. And Israel, of course, is the first country that has outlawed skepticism. And there are other countries who use other laws. They twist and tweak in order to send people to prison.

 

[09:23]

 

And in the Arabic world, unfortunately, we should think there should be an open mind there. A lot of governments in the Arabic world are bought by Europe and America and they prosecute dissidents on that topic with extra legal means. They are not democracies under the rule of law, whatever that means. Because in some aspects we are not anymore either. But for them it’s pure arbitrariness.

 

So this is a global thing, a global problem. We just had a censorship hit us, a company in China. We wanted to have merchandise produced with certain slogans on it on Holocaust skepticism. And they pulled a plug. Not even in China they want to do it anymore!

 

 

Austria, the worst case, 20 years! You can go up to 20 years in prison. If you combine it, the skepticism, quote, unquote, “denial” with statements that they interpret as re-engaging in National Socialist activities. If you were, for instance, to argue that the Austrians are just one tribe of the Germans and they should live together with other Germans in Germany, which was a normal thought up to 1945. In the 17th century, 18th century, 19th century, in the 20th century, as the people of Austria always felt. And they were for the longest time the core in the center of Germany. And they got kind of pushed out with Prussia taken over in the late 19th century. And then after the collapse of Prussian Germany and Austria, the Austrian Empire after the First World War, they said:

 

“Okay, we had it, now let’s get reunified.”

 

That was the idea of the Wilson 14 points for the truce to have everyone self-determination. And the Austrians got it denied. And after the war, Second World War, they had special laws enacted if you violate them, up to 20 years. Denial combined with demands for self-determination.

 

 

To put a face to it, Austrian engineer Wolfgang Fröhlich was arrested in the early 2000s for a paper he had written. He’s an expert for disinfestation technology and disinfestation gas chambers. So he knows the technique and compared it to what was said to have been going on in German extermination camp during the war. And said:

 

“That’s technical nonsense, it can’t be!”

 

And he got eventually indicted and put in prison. And he was upset about what they did to him. And he kept writing letters and arguments from within prison, got more and more indictments and got sentenced over and over again! At the end of the day, he spent 16 years in prison for his engineering arguments. And he came out just around Covid, caught Covid and died shortly afterwards.

 

Western politicians complain about Iran or China putting dissidents for four, five, seven years in prison. At the same time they put them for 16 years in prison! That’s the worst case.

 

 

This graph here shows you the initiation of criminal investigation for thought crimes in Germany. Since 1994 some 4, 500, up to the most recent data for, … The year 2025 comes out maybe next month. Getting a little bit of a feedback here. [humming sound] The blue one is Right-wing thought crimes. That’s what we are committing here right now! Okay? Then you have the Left-wing ones. These are usually Antifa communists who make some radical statements about blowing up Parliament or having a communist revolution. And then you have the green ones, foreign religious, that usually means Muslim, Muslim radicals who want to introduce Sharia law or something like that. So for these two cases you really have to make aggressive statements that are not peaceful anymore.

 

Whereas in these cases if you’re just against mass immigration, you say anything critical about the jews, any dissent on the Holocaust, or more recently anything critical about Israel’s policy in Gaza. This is the Gaza escalation that you see.

 

 

Germany has extended their law that they outlaw more and more both by case law and by actually written code. And now this past data we were up to 40,000, 35,000 of them. Stuff that people like we do, like what we argue and talk about. 35,000 initiated criminal investigations does not result in 35,000 people sitting in prison. I want to make that clear. Most people never get caught for the slogan they have sprayed on some wall or sticker they left somewhere. And if for first time offenders, usually it ends up with slap on the wrist. It may just be a summary offense with a fine that has to be paid. And for first time offenders it rarely ends with prison. But then you have the 1 or 2% of these cases that end up actually with prison cases.

 

[14:50]

 

Only minority of that is Holocaust skepticism. And I have no numbers, they don’t in their paperwork. This is data based actually on what the German government releases. And they are put proud of it! Because they call themselves a combative, defensive democracy! Okay?

 

So they defend themselves in combating anyone they consider to be an enemy. But they are actually the biggest enemy of democracy. I wouldn’t even call it democracy, but a state under the rule of law that respects human rights that they never get a mirror held against them to look into it because that’s the enemy that caused this kind of persecution.

 

Back to history. This kind of an atmosphere that you have in Europe, in most countries and even in this country where historians don’t go to prison, but immigrants like me, I’m currently constantly on an ejector seat and I can get thrown out any minute if the Trump government so decides, because they don’t respect the law either.

 

 

What effect does it have, actually concrete, on historians? Here you see the lovely face of Wacław Długoborski, Auschwitz survivor who was put in charge, as I say, the Billy goat that was put in charge of the garden. He was put in charge of the Auschwitz Museum’s historical research center. And for many decades he has been that boss. And under his auspices, the lie that 4 million people died at Auschwitz was maintained until the Soviet Union collapsed.

 

Then it did collapse, and they suddenly reduced the number from 4 million to 1 million and said:

 

“Well, we have known it all along.”

 

And then in an interview in 1998, this historian was asked:

 

“Well, why did you lie? Why did you make that up if you knew all along that it was wrong? Why didn’t you correct the number earlier when you knew that it was wrong?”

 

And he basically said:

 

“Well, there was a prohibition in place in the Eastern Bloc in the communist countries that historians who would not toe the party line could be facing.”

 

How he expressed it, “disciplinary measures”.

 

 

What does that mean? You lose your job, you’re getting demoted, you have to become a street sweeper, or a janitor. That’s what that means in these communist planned economies.

 

Ironically, 1998, that’s when he gave the interview. That was the same year Poland, pressured by the European Union, in particular Germany, introduced a law, 1998, that made Holocaust skepticism a crime punishable with up to three years in prison.

 

 

So from communist “disciplinary measures” to Democratic “three years in prison”. What’s worse? I’d take disciplinary measures anytime over prison term. So he said that:

 

“Now we can tell the truth! Back then we couldn’t because we had disciplinary measures. We’ve corrected. Now it’s 1 million. Because you need to believe us, because now we are only threatened with three years!”

 

Any mainstream person who thinks everything is kosher with the Holocaust narrative that we fed now must realize:

 

“Yeah, kosher it may be, it means the jews like it!”

 

But it most certainly doesn’t mean authentic and reliable, because historians who are threatened at gunpoint to write history cannot be trusted! He admits:

 

“We couldn’t be trusted! We have been lying. We knew we were lying. We did it intentionally, but we did so because we were threatened with getting demoted or losing our job!”

 

And now we should believe you when you are threatened with three years, with five years, with six years, with, 20 years! How much more do you need to teach people, to tell people, to realize you can’t trust these people! History at gunpoint does not give you the truth in no section of society!

 

 

So once you have opened up people’s mind and that they realize the dimension of persecution, of suppression, of oppression and the unique nature the Holocaust is unique in terms of the length governments go to and societies go to suppress dissent, to keep complete control over the narrative! Nowhere else in society will you find it. That shows you who is the main beneficiary usually is also the one who pushes most. And it shows you that this is for them the most important topic to keep total control over!

 

Once you have opened people mind:

 

“Something is fishy here! You can’t trust those historians because they have admitted they have lied when they were threatened even less than they are threatened today!”

 

Then we go to the pith, the center of the story. Now I handed it out to you guys, free of charge, a little brochure and I want to go through a few things here that you find actually in the brochure. If this thing is too far away from you, I apologize. But you’ll find some of this in this brochure.

 

[20:08]

 

 

And the first one I’m going to is actually on the last page, the back cover if you wish. You know that thing technically speaking has no back cover. You see a graph there, a bar chart that shows claims of death tolls for the Majdanek camp. Now I would assume that most of you, at least most of normal populace have not heard about the Majdanek! Camp. It’s not anymore a major player in the bigger picture of the Holocaust in terms of mass extermination. It used to be completely different. The Majdanek camp actually was officially called the Lublin camp in central Poland was overrun by the Red Army in July of 1944.

 

So it was first major camp that the Soviets overran. And in a press conference right after the conquest of the camp, and I say “conquest”, the Red Army never liberated anyone! So you will not hear the word “liberation” when it even comes to camps, when it comes to the Red Army.

 

 

So they conquered the camp. In the press conference they claimed 2 million people were murdered there. It was the first big, still doing the war propaganda campaign on extermination, claim that started in August 1944. Big show! With all the world media, invited journalists from everywhere and cameras rolling.

 

 

Now in subsequent events, the Poles later that year still during the war, by the way, December ’44 had a show trial. They claimed 1.7 million. That’s a little bit of a reduction, but they weren’t generous. It’s kind of the same order of magnitude.

 

 

The Soviets then during the International Military Tribunal introduced an expert report. They claimed 1.5 million. Still again, 500,000 difference is not immaterial. But in the bigger picture, looking at it scientifically, it’s kind of the same order of magnitude. We don’t want to be nitpicking here.

 

However, the frenzy of immediate end of the war or post-war propaganda comes to an end and things cool down a little bit. And a Polish investigative judge reduces the number down to 360,000. And this is a considerable drop!

 

 

We’re down to 80%! Now, as I just showed you, there is a rule in communist countries you have to toe the party line and the new party line was 360,000. Couldn’t really go underneath that, even though they knew again, they knew in this case too, it is wrong! I think the number of prisoners sent to the camp was around that order of magnitude. And that assumes that every single one of them was murdered. And there’s plenty of documentation shown that was absolutely not the case!

 

The Soviet Union collapses and the number gets reduced again by a new historian in charge of the museum. 235,000. Not all that extreme a drop if you compare it with Auschwitz, compared to these two. But here we have already almost only 10%.

 

 

But that wasn’t the end of it. We Holocaust skeptics went into the archives after the Soviet Union collapsed, 1994, 95, 96. And researched the whole material, published a investigation on it. And it was so devastatingly demasking the propaganda of the homicidal gas chamber story, that pressure on the Majdaneck museum became so big that eventually in 2005, a new generation, a new historian dropped the death toll to 76,000. And that is only not even 4% of the initial 2 million claim.

 

 

And actually from the beginning they had claimed seven homicidal gas chambers. They maintained that number until the end. But five of them were so ridiculously, obviously, technically impossible to have ever been used for what they claim to have been used that to throw propaganda ballast overboard.

 

 

 

Thomas Kranz, the new Polish historian, threw five of them overboard. So what we have is an admission:

 

“That okay, we exaggerated, we lied, we lied, we fix, we fix, we keep fixing, we drop more and more of these lies!”

 

And then that’s what the situation is here today. They keep shifting the goalposts, they keep reducing the claim. You see, something is fishy with their attitude in general. But now:

 

“They got it right!”

 

Really, when you’re threatened with three years in prison? Why would I believe you?

 

[24:48]

 

Now we could say:

 

“Okay, one camp. What does one camp prove? That’s the most extreme downward revision by the mainstream.”

 

I haven’t shown our number that would here in 98, we published the book.

 

 

We find in the historical record 42, 200 death cases and no homicidal death chambers at all! They were all fumigation chambers!

 

So I’m just showing you what the mainstream itself has admitted to have been wrong over and over again! Is it a singular case? People make mistakes. Corrections for other camps? If you go in the brochure, if you want to go on page six, you see the table there now the same table here, the major camps that played a role in Allied war as well as immediate post-war propaganda as claimed extermination camps.

 

 

You see the initial death toll here on the left numbers column. And the death toll that is claimed by the mainstream.

 

 

Again, I say in the mainstream, Holocaust skeptical numbers? What really can be documented and what is forensically possible is an entirely different story.

 

So I want to show you that if you just use their own arguments and their shifty way of moving goalposts, you should make every believer see something isn’t right. And you see it here, mistakes stray statistically from the true value. If I make a mistake, I may under or overestimate, but they should stray to both sides. Here you see only one tendency, extreme exaggeration!

 

 

That’s not called a mistake, that’s called a lie! Truth is always the first victim of every war. And why should it be any different with the Second World War? The victors write the history and they never write it objectively. And why should it be any different for the worst war ever fought that ended for the losing side in a major disaster that mankind has not seen all that often in history? Cathage and the Punic wars probably had a worse fate than Germany because they got completely wiped. But other than that, Germany was in pretty bad shape after the Second World War.

 

So you see here, these are lies! They have been lying systematically! They have been correcting and admitting in Auschwitz, I showed you here in Majdanek again and again they lied. They knew they’re lying. And now they are threatened even worse than they were before. The question.

 

 

So for my Majdanek, 96% of the victims were invented. 70% of the homicidal gas chambers were invented. They got it wrong repeatedly acting under coercion, still under coercion even worse so today! Why believe them uncritically now? You wouldn’t!

 

 

And it doesn’t stop with numbers. If you go on the second table of the page six here, we’re talking about invented methods. What the mainstream, again, what the mainstream has admitted, we’re looking in the second column here, of all the stuff that is actually has been invented.

 

 

And I actually added a few more here on this one. And here you see for Auschwitz, war gases, high voltage electrocution, gas showers, gas bombs, pneumatic hammer, conveyor belt.

 

 

Treblinka, you have machine guns, mobile gas chambers, stunning gas, unslaked lime, hot steam, high voltage, chlorine, ether, a death bridge, burning alive.

 

 

So it goes on and on for the other camps. Suffocation with human excrements as a mass murder method is claimed for Bełzec by one witness. It gets absurd at times. But of course, all this stuff, sometimes based on only one witness, sometimes based on tens of witnesses on all kinds of wartime reports, got dumped! Interestingly, the stories that prevailed during the war, hot steam for Treblinkaa, high voltage for Belzec, chlorine gas for Sobibor, all got dumped! You won’t find a word of it today anymore, even though they were the ones that were most commonly claimed during the war, and even during the International Military Tribunal, by the way. It’s all gone!

 

 

What we have left now is this. Zyklon B, and engine exhaust gases. For a long time they even claimed they were diesel exhaust gases, which are technically impossible because they’re not toxic enough.

 

 

Just recently, well, not too recently, 15 years ago, a mainstream toxicologist tried to move the goalpost there again:

 

“Okay, diesel doesn’t work. Why don’t we say it was engine exhaust?”

 

 

So murder methods claimed during and right after the war were highly contradictory. Even once claimed main murder methods were all abandoned! Polish Stalinist officials streamline the narrative against facts! And mainstream historians hide these extreme revisions and manipulations from you! Because they are writing history on gunpoint!

 

[29:58]

 

How was it done? To give you one example, and unfortunately I don’t think I have that in this brochure. You would actually have to go, because that goes a little bit more into detail for which this brochure doesn’t have room. I have that detailed example in this book here. Nazi Gas Chambers, which you can either buy there as a hard copy or you can find it on holocausthandbooks.com free of charge as an ebook.

 

 

The one case that shows everyone, and should show every normie that the story was faked, is the case of Sobibor! Now again, Auschwitz, everyone knows, Treblinka, some of you may have heard. Bełzec, maybe. Majdanek, unlikely. Sobibor also, not very often. Sobibor is one of the three so-called “pure extermination camps”. Actually four. Chelmno is a special camp. It’s a separate issue.

 

 

Treblinkaa, Belzec and Sobibor are the three big ones that were jews were shipped to be murdered and nothing else. That’s the claim of the mainstream. Sobibor was the smallest of them. Treblinka. The other here started out with 3 million. Belzec, 3 million claim and Sobibor with, 20 million. It’s down to 200,000 now, plus, minus. There’s always this kind of an average of the mainstream claim because they can’t really agree exactly on how much. But the other ones are way higher.

 

 

Sobibor is an interesting case. The same judge who after the war downgraded massively the death toll from Majdanek to 360,000 also investigated the Sobibor camp and the Treblinkaa camp and wrote the story for it for the Polish Commission for German War Crimes. He investigated a number of witnesses. They are listed here by name.

 

 

Right after the war, the inmates that were alive in summer of 1943 had a revolt in the Sobibor camp. There’s actually a movie about that. Not very historically accurate, but the revolt did take place and many witnesses, survivors or inmates, ran away and they ended up testifying in front of that investigative judge. This is Zdzislaw Tukaszkiewicz. Now the interesting thing is of what they told him. Right now for Sobibor, they claim engine exhaust gas as the murder method.

 

 

And they are supposed to have been murdered in just a normal chamber. One door. They walk in, they get killed with gas, the other door at the other end opens out and they get carried out to mass graves or pyres to be burned. That’s the mainstream narrative right now! However, if you look at what these witnesses testified, if they describe the alleged murder method, many of them said chlorine. Nobody said engine exhaust. Not a single witness!

 

 

What they claimed of the mechanics of the gas chamber is very interesting because they kind of agreed, with a few exceptions of witnesses who didn’t say anything about that.

 

 

That the floors in those chambers were hydraulically opened up, they collapsed downward, discharge the dead victims into two carts running on tracks below in some kind of basement area, and would then be driven out to mass graves or to cremation pyres. And they agreed on that you will not hear a single thing about that in the mainstream narrative! What Zdzislaw Tukaszkiewicz did when he wrote, based on his interrogations, that’s the only evidence he had, he said:

 

“Well, they were killed with engine exhaust and with just a normal gas chamber with doors.”

 

Invented out of the blue! With no basis in fact of any of the evidence! He threw out all the witnesses!

 

 

Now where did he get that narrative from? He actually copied it over. I just mentioned he had also investigated the Treblinka camp. He had copied it over from the narrative he had developed from the Treblinka camp!

 

 

And if you were to go there. I don’t want to go do that now again, you can find the list of witnesses and what they said on Treblinka in here. You find in Treblinka this chaos here! Electrocution, engine exhaust, gas, vacuum, steam, all kinds of claims. He cleaned that up, threw everything out, kept the engine exhaust and wrote the narrative according to that.

 

 

And then he copied it over to Sobibor. That is invented history with no basis in fact, none whatsoever in the case of Sobibor! The clearest case where you can absolutely pinpoint what happened.

 

So that is what you find if you go into the historical record, which became accessible to us only after the collapse of the Soviet Union, in the archives in the east became accessible. And we could actually go to these interrogation protocols and then see what narrative they made of it.

 

There is an interesting question that arises. Why was that done? I mean, it’s an obvious question. You want to look, make your enemy look as bad as possible. So whatever comes after the war, you can manipulate and destroy them as much as possible. Psychological warfare is just a continuation of warfare with other means. And ethnically speaking, the whole Second World War broke out because the actual tinderbox that blew it up, there were many more conflicts around the globe was the ethnic conflicts between Poles and Germans, mainly over the city of Danzig.

 

 

And after the war, as you may know, Poland gained huge territories from Germany and expelled the population. My paternal ancestry was expelled from Silesia, so they were part of the victims of that. And Germany was not willing after the First World War to accept the loss of Danzig, which was a 95% German city. How would you make them expect to accept the loss of a quarter of its entire territory and the expulsion of 7 million civilians from their homeland, where they had lived for centuries. And were not just a majority in large parts of the world, just only Germans, all gone! How do you accept Germany to this time accept it?

 

If you break the German spine with a guilt complex, you can make them accept anything as justified punishment. And that’s what the homicidal gas chambers are good for!

 

[36:49]

 

 

Now I’ve looked into all of the people who have done the investigation on those camps and who have written the history. We’re actually talking about only four individuals that were doing the investigation. I’ve mentioned Zdzislaw Lukaszkiewicz for Treblinka, for Majdanek and for Sobibor. Jan Sehn was investigative judge for Auschwitz. For Belzec we have an historian. There was no trial on Belzec. That was Eugeniusz Szrojt. And for Chelmno, which isn’t even on here, it’s a special case. There it is actually. It was Wladyslaw Bednarz.

 

So we have four Polish individuals all working for the Polish commission for the investigation of war crimes and Stalinist organization set up by Stalin to stick it to the Germans and to use all kinds of fishy methods, as I just said, and with the aim of destroying Germany psychologically and make them accept all that was coming their way. And it worked “beautifully”, quote, unquote.

 

If you present these things that way, I have found you can get people to understand first of all that it’s not some lunatic idea, but that there’s something profoundly wrong in a society that proscribes the writing of any scholarly field under the threat of punishment. And what that must lead to is untruthfulness of scholars. And then showing them, yeah, they have admitted over and over again to have lied, to have shifted the goalpost to hide facts from us, to completely change their story.

 

And then psychologically, very important, it’s not the jews who did it in a great conspiracy theory! That’s what I’m getting here. I’m not saying I want to win the jews over seeing how they were duped, they were. But you know, all those witnesses at the end of it, most of them are jews. They had an axe to grind. I can’t blame them. They were treated horribly. And in the frenzy of post-war propaganda, they were making stuff up!

 

And this is completely made up stuff here! And they even co-ordinated these witnesses. Coordinated, as they couldn’t have come up all with the same story. But the investigative judge couldn’t do anything with it. In other cases, they were so contradictory, they weren’t coordinating any of these witnesses. They were just inventing whatever came!

 

And in the complete frenzy of post-war anti-German hysteria, you can understand where they are coming from. It would have been the judge’s job to say:

 

“This is all nonsense! We can’t make head or tail out of it. And therefore, we need to say that!”

 

They didn’t do that. These judges were put in by the new Stalinist government. It was a Stalinist agenda. I couldn’t find any jewish backgrounds in any of those four individuals. I don’t know the chain of command. They did what they did on orders. Nothing of that kind of propagandistic political nature was left to chance.

 

So you can bet that there were orders coming from Warsaw and from Moscow. What type they were, this is the kind of investigation we have yet to do. Whether in that chain of command jews were sitting, I don’t know. But they are not needed. You can see here the Stalinist will to completely destroy psychologically Germany and to pit Poland against Germany. That is an important point.

 

Hitler had tried until 39, until the very last moment, to win the Poles over for an anti-communist pact against Stalinist Russia. And Stalinist Russia tried to conquer all of Europe. That was the declared concept of world revolution from 1918 onward. It wasn’t a secret! And Hitler tried to make a bulwark, a European fortress against Stalin’s plan to conquer all of Europe. Poland refused and went their way of poking the German eagle to the point where they lashed out. And the rest is history.

 

[40:46]

 

Pitting Poland against Germany.

Any other normal nation, if you imagine Mexico in a World War that breaks out between Russia, China and the United States, United States loses and then Mexico gets everything that they used to own and more. You name the States of Texas, New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona, California. Give everything to the Mexicans and drive out every White American. Would America put up with it if they gain strength again? How do you get the Germans to accept that kind of calamity? It worked. What did not work, and I want to make that sure, even though my parents were expelled, my parental ancestors were expelled from that region is that today Germany and Poland are not pitted against each other anymore.

 

I’ve gone with my father to our Poles who had expelled him and his family in the 1980s and 90s. German expellees went back to Poland to party with our Poles in the house it used to belong to my grandfather! There’s no frontier, no border between Germany and Poland anymore. If I wanted, the German government not sticking me in prison for other reasons, I could go back and settle where my parental ancestors came from. That story is over in Europe! We don’t kill each other. We don’t kill White people over territory. That should be the case. Unfortunately, the Russians and the Ukrainians have yet to learn that lesson. That is over. Stalin did not succeed in pitting us against each other, we work together now.

 

I am saying these things in order to make you understand where this come from, how it was done, who did it, why they did it! Not in order to, say, give Germany its territories, they can’t even populate their current territory, nor can the Poles. The real biggest challenge for all of us in Europe is population collapse, which is something I will talk about tonight, by the way, and how this ties in to all these issues that I’ve been talking about historically.

 

So now we are not talking territories here. We’re talking about historical understanding and to make the jews understand, and the Zionists, we’re not coming after you. We’re not blaming you for having constructed this narrative in order to whatever. Sure, they took advantage of it, particularly since 1961 when the gravy train was already running with the Eichmann trial big time, and ever since have been profited from that.

 

But if you look in the first decades of the state of Israel and of the jewish community, particularly in this country, they were not riding the Holocaust train! It wasn’t even called that, way back then. The partial identity between Soviet spies in the United States and a religious jewish background was troublesome truth for the jewish community. They kept their head low in the early years of the Cold War and were not rocking the boat.

 

So this way you can make even the jews see we’re not out for revenge for what you did to us, psychologically. The story came from a different angle. And I think that is because people assume we are spreading these Holocaust “denial theories”, as they call them, in order to get at the jews, in order to say the jews have made this big conspiracy in order to get us and destroy us. Yeah, it’s being used now as such. This is what happens now with them manipulating us with this and saying in order to prevent anything like that happening again, we must allow and support them to pre-emptively kill everyone that even looks askance at them! Which is what’s happening in Gaza and what the conflict with many of these nations in the Middle East with Israel is about. That’s a separate story where we are today.

 

Historically seen as it started differently and it has taken on its own life. And we need to break that vicious circle we are in, using this presumed genocide, say what happens to the jews as we define genocide by the United Nations and in law, actually it was a genocide. You don’t need gas chambers to commit genocide. If you separate people so that they can’t reproduce, it’s already called genocide. And that’s what the National Socialists did in the camps, separating genders and putting them under living conditions that inevitably had to lead to many of them dying of disease and so forth. So technically speaking, legally speaking, how it is defined today, it was genocide. Now, that law didn’t exist back then. That’s a legal fine print.

 

So this genocide in its downgraded fashion without homicidal gas chambers, which didn’t exist, but the homicidal gas chambers being the foremost psychological weapon to traumatize the jews, young jews of new generation today and every one of us, we have gone through this education and know how shocking it is to see these bulldozers shoving corpses into mass graves at Bergen-Belsen and being told that’s what the Germans did to the jews. That was force majeure* of epidemics breaking out in camps that the Germans had no control over. They didn’t plan that. But you’re not being told that.

 

And the effect of it is that America for the most part is willing to go along, and Europe, to go along with what the jews and Zionists do in the Middle East. To break that vicious circle, to get a correct understanding, we can learn the correct lessons of history only if we get first the facts straight. And no matter what the facts are, morally speaking, you are never allowed to use past catastrophes of whatever nature to justify or foment current and future catastrophes! And that’s what’s happening. In order to prevent a new “Holocaust”, Israel is committing genocide.

 

[46:54]

 

So in order to prevent genocide, they commit genocide! There’s something wrong with this! And to see how we are manipulated with historical accounts being exaggerated and invented, to see it in this old example, the most extreme example, makes us see that happens all the time. What was it October 7, 2023, what happened there. Israel has a law outlawing, as I just mentioned, it was the first one outlawing Holocaust skepticism. And they have now introduced a law outlawing Gaza skepticism in terms of just what happened on the 7th of October. And they are probably in the process of making it a crime to accuse Israel of genocide.

 

All right, I’m having, as I mentioned, a second presentation tonight. We are talking about demographic collapse and where that leaves us, which options we have and what the various drivers are, which Holocaust propaganda actually is one of them. And I’ll explain that tonight. I hope I’ll get a chance to talk to you and maybe even discuss that with you guys.

 

 

If you want to look into this book, if you don’t have it yet, about how this core of the Holocaust, the homicide, gas chamber story, was created. As I mentioned there you can have it.

 

 

The encyclopedia also. I still have six copies floating around. Please keep the brochure. It is a short description and summary of Holocaust revisionist arguments with reference of all the books. You can find them all free of charge at holocausthandbooks.com. But you can also buy them from us on these websites and you’ll find links to purchase them.

 

And if you don’t want to keep it, leave it on the table and we’ll collect it later because this is advertising for our products, for our knowledge, for our insight, and we liked it to get spread.

 

So thank you for your attention.

 

[49:00]

 

[loud applause]

 

[Outro message]

 

 

If you want to learn more, here are a few suggested websites. At our Holocaust Encyclopedia you can find concise information on almost 600 related topics with references to further reading.

 

 

 

The results of 35 years of archival and forensic research into the Holocaust can be accessed free of charge at our Holocaust Handbooks website, where you can also access several documentaries as well as our Mini Series Holocaust Pocketbooks, which give easy to read introductions into various topics.

 

 

 

Printed copies of these and many other books can be purchased on our websites armreg.us and armreg.co.uk.

 

 

At our Holocaust Academy, we teach the ropes of skeptical Holocaust research.

 

 

 

It also features our growing podcast series named “Holocast”.

 

 

At the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust, we lobby for free speech where it is threatened the most.

 

 

Most prominently with our periodical Inconvenient History.

 

And last but not least, Germar Rudolf’s personal website where you can learn more about him.

 

 

[50:22]

 

 

END

top

 

 

 

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

 

Rumble Comments

top

(Comments as of 6/23/2026 = 3)

Unlocking_Freedom
5 days ago
This video is so important. Discussing with a normie has many challenges, layers of brain washing, mind control by legacy media. https://www.printernational.co.uk/timmann2/history.htm#holocaust Approaching such a sensitive subject, especially with relatives is so hard. Yes the method of just sciences : Biology : Cholera, Tuberculosis (TB), Famine, Dysentery and Typhoid (Typhus) were at epidemic levels of disease Engineering : Wooden Doors, Floor Drains in a “gas chamber” Architecture : Swinging Doors Chemistry : Residue in the walls This video is a better beginning because the banning is a serious question for thought control. Exaggeration to Reduction in numbers comes from the authorities, which normies only will accept. Changing method of executions. There is no consistency.
1
0

Lueger
1 week ago
https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/GeltendeFassung.wxe?Abfrage=Bundesnormen&Gesetzesnummer=10000207&FassungVom=2023-01-08 interesting history of the modifications of this “Verbotsgesetz 1947” in Austria

‹ Hide 1 reply
Lueger
1 week ago
The AI could not identify a legislative or political donor impetus for the 1992 amendment, but that the “1992 Verbotsgesetz amendment was adopted by the Austrian Parliament with broad cross‑party support; it was driven by government and parliamentary lawmakers (major parties including the SPÖ and ÖVP), backed publicly by Jewish organizations and civil‑society groups concerned about rising neo‑Nazi activity and legal inconsistency. Major identifiable supporters were: Parliamentary sponsors and supporters: members of the governing parties at the time (Social Democratic Party — SPÖ — and Austrian People’s Party — ÖVP) who voted for the amendment in Parliament. Wikipedia Civil-society and community backers: Austrian Jewish organizations and international Jewish groups, prosecutors and legal scholars who urged a clear statutory prohibition to close court inconsistencies and enable prosecutions.” I asked it to enumerate and identify the neo-nazi events, which it indicated would take 30 minutes. Bin gespannt.
0
0

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

See Also

top

 

 

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

Kenny Ko: What is up, guys? Welcome back to Kenny Cancelled. I have a very special guest today. It is Germar Rudolf, who many of you may know, and many of you may yet to know, but I’m sure you will be happy to hear his story for a like-minded cause. Germar, thank you once again for taking the time to join the podcast and chat with me. I’ve been looking forward to this just because I’ve wanted to pick your brains on some of the stuff that I believe happened during the “Holocaust” and other certain events throughout history.

 

I’ll allow you to take the mic, introduce yourself for maybe the people who don’t know much about you as of yet.

 

Germar Rudolf: Yeah, well, thank you first of all for having me. A little bit about my background. I’m a German citizen. I grew up in West Germany. I had a kind of normal lower middle-class upbringing and ended up going to university studying chemistry, graduated from Bonn University, then moved on for postgrad studies for a PhD, got a position at a Max Planck Institute for Solid State Research to work on a PhD there.

 

And while I was doing that research, I became curious and interested in applying my knowledge as a forensic chemist, which I had developed during my graduate studies, to a field that is a little bit exotic—that is to say, history. I stumbled over an expert report that had been submitted in 1988 during a Canadian trial against a German immigrant who had been quote, unquote, “denying the Holocaust”. That expert report was written by the—back then—the only existing expert in execution technologies in the United States. Since we have the death penalty here in several states, there need to be people who can design and equip and maintain that kind of equipment.

 

So he was asked in that trial to come up with his expert opinion of whether or not the homicidal gas chambers that are said to have existed at the Auschwitz and Majdanek camps could have existed. He did that and he came to the conclusion:

 

“No, that wouldn’t have worked!”

 

Caused quite a brouhaha. I learned about it a year later. At the time when I was just graduating and then doing my fledgling PhD studies. I dipped my feet into that field and tried to find out a little bit more because I got a copy of that expert report from Fred Leuchter, from that American expert, and I was not satisfied. It didn’t live up to my expectations and I wanted to do a better job. And then I found actually a legal team who would finance that. So I got expenses paid—didn’t get anything paid but reimbursement for my expenses.

 

But that was good enough for me. I was personally curious about what was going on. And I eventually submitted an expert report that was introduced—or, I should say, the defense lawyers in seven or eight defense cases in Germany, Switzerland, Austria, more so than Germany actually—tried to introduce it. The courts turned it down in these cases. German courts don’t accept any evidence that challenges the mainstream narrative.

 

But anyway, that was my introduction into the topic. My conclusions basically were: Leuchter had it basically right, even though he jumped a little bit to conclusions that were not well founded. But I managed to do a lot of research and back it up.

 

And while this all was going on—doing my PhD studies, doing this forensic work, investigations and appearing in court as an expert witness who was always turned down—I realized, well, Auschwitz, the question of whether or not there were homicidal gas chambers and whether forensic chemistry can elucidate any of the questions of whether it happened or not and if there are any traces, is only a very minor aspect of the Holocaust, which is a big issue. It’s three years, a whole continent, hundreds if not thousands of crime locations. And what can you deduct from thinking to have resolved one tiny issue about one alleged murder location in this context?

 

So I figured the area is bigger. I want to know more. I want to wrap my head around everything. And I was reaching out to other people. I was planning on doing an anthology, a collection of—I think it was initially—15 contributions by various authors from all over the world who were looking into other aspects of the Holocaust. And we eventually published that book. While that was being prepared, German authorities also…

 

Kenny Ko: Sorry to interrupt, just for the people that are watching, what was the name of the book?

 

[04:12]

 

Germar Rudolf: Well, it appeared in an English translation in 2,000 for the first time. And it’s called Dissecting the Holocaust. Now all the books and the research that I have pursued and published ever since, over the past 35 years, can all be accessed free of charge as ebooks on the website called Holocausthandbooks.com. So if anyone’s interested in actually following up and finding out what this is all about, you can go there and find it out.

 

So that was volume one of the Holocaust Handbooks, Dissecting the Holocaust. This anthology has more contributions now. The updated last edition is just two years old, I think. And volume two of it was actually— is now—an updated, expanded edition of my original forensic research into the question of whether or not there were homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz. That’s volume two.

 

And as I mentioned, there are now 54 volumes, plus we have a range of documentaries and some other, more summary books—they’re called Holocaust Pocketbooks. All of this stuff is available free of charge on HolocaustHandbooks.com. You’ll find links there where you can also purchase hard copies which are not free of charge, of course; they cost to produce and mail.

 

So the authorities were going after me. I had by 1990, I think, five court cases pending, five criminal investigations pending, in addition to my original trial for my forensic research. As I mentioned, introducing that evidence gets impossible in German court cases.

 

And then they went a step further, actually putting me on trial for it, for my forensic research, and denied me then the right to defend myself by proving that I’m correct. Because that is “contesting the mainstream narrative” again; you’re not allowed to commit that crime in a courtroom, so you’re not allowed to defend your views. They actually later turned it into an actual crime to even file a motion to introduce evidence proving that my dissenting views—or anyone’s dissenting views for that matter—are correct, declared that a crime, and they would prosecute defendants or primarily defense lawyers who would file such motions, and convicted them.

 

So defense in Germany in these cases is illegal! It’s kind of absurd—a Kafkaesque situation. I had to go through this in my own trial. Eventually I decided I’m not putting up with this. I was sentenced to 14 months for my forensic research, but I didn’t have to serve time immediately because the appeal was pending. And when more and more criminal investigations were filed by the prosecutors for the various books and journal articles that I was working on, I had published, I decided to leave.

 

So I went into exile and in 1996 lived in England for three years, until a journalist there published a hit piece on me demanding that I be extradited to Germany. And then British Parliament even had a session where I was discussed. And so the situation got tricky there.

 

I had used the three years in England to expand my publishing activities. At that point I was a little bit hemmed in, couldn’t do active research anymore because I was kind of living under an assumed identity and couldn’t travel. But I was giving other researchers a platform; they could submit stuff to me, I would publish it online and in print, initially only in the German language.

 

But then I slowly started to get into doing stuff in English, which of course—if something in this modern world, with the lingua franca being English, does not exist in English—it basically doesn’t exist at all! You have to do stuff in English for it to be recognized and noticed by the world. Now my English initially when I came to England was pretty bad. But the three years helped me to get up to speed. And when things were heating up in England, I decided to leave. In late 1999 I came to this country and after a while applied for political asylum here.

 

Now I expanded then in this country to do what I had done before only in German, also in English, which down the road ended up with these 54 volumes plus all the other stuff.

 

However, there was a little bit of a bump in the road because America has waged two wars against Germany to make them do what they do—suppress historical dissent. So they were not willing to give me political asylum, even though the immigration judge who reviewed my case said multiple times during the hearing that:

 

“This is the best documented asylum case he’s ever seen!”

 

But the immigration judge is not a judge in the legal sense. He’s actually an employee of, back then, the State Department, and later it was the Department of Homeland Security. And he has to follow orders given by the administration, and they said:

 

“Deport him!”

 

And eventually that’s what happened. By that time, however, I had married a US citizen. The marriage had been recognized and I had been granted an immigrant visa. I had the documents that:

 

“Your immigrant visa for a Green Card is granted.”

 

And at that moment—when that certificate, this confirmation, was issued—I was arrested and deported. So just before getting to the counter to get my actual Green Card, they arrested me and deported me back to Germany.

 

Now Germany had an axe to grind because by that time I had published a further 20 books in the German language. And they had an arrest warrant out not only for the 14 months that I had to spend from before, but also for the 21 books that I had published and been selling in the time ever since I had left Germany.

 

Kenny Ko: So my question, and I’m sure the audience too, what’s the crime that they charged you with?

 

Germar Rudolf: Incitement to hate.

 

Kenny Ko: Exposing the truth?

 

[09:40]

 

Germar Rudolf: No, the crimes—they didn’t invent these new laws. They had been on the books, similar laws, ever since Frederick the Great! Believe it or not, Frederick the Great had a massive immigration policy because after the Thirty Years’ War, Prussia/Brandenburg was devastated and was depopulated to a large degree. And he wanted French Huguenots and Protestants who were persecuted in France to come to Prussia. So he invited them by the tens and hundreds of thousands. I don’t know the exact figures, but the Prussian subjects of Frederick the Great were not happy about this massive influx of immigrants from a different culture. So no different situation than today—people being not happy about mass immigration. And there was a lot of polemics going on. Frederick the Great issued a law: You can’t stir up the people against minorities—particularly non-German, non-Prussian minorities back then.

 

So that law has developed over time. It became part of Germany in 1871, when Prussia kind of merged into Germany and Germany took over the Prussian laws more or less. And that’s been on the books ever since. As a matter of fact, in 1936, I think, under National Socialism, a German Catholic priest by the name of Rupert Mayer was indicted by the Third Reich judiciary for inciting the masses and stirring up the masses, because he was preaching in his church against National Socialist policies. He was sent to a concentration camp for a few months. So he was kind of persecuted for the same—and prosecuted for the same—offense that I have been prosecuted for.

 

The group that is protected by this law depends on whatever the zeitgeist demands as a specially protected group. Under Frederick the Great, it was the French immigrants; under the National Socialists, it was the government and the National Socialists that wanted special protection. And nowadays it’s immigrants and jews and Zionists that have this special protection. So it’s a vaster, or more numerous, group of special interest groups that have special protection nowadays.

 

So that was stirring up the people—inciting to hatred—back then. They still have “inciting to racial hatred.” They have taken that term out because “races” don’t exist, as you know. It’s politically incorrect to assume that.

 

And then also “disparaging the commemoration of the dead” and “insults.” Insult is on still-living jewish witnesses—insult them by insinuating that they could not have told the truth! And disparaging the commemoration of the dead is just all the victims that died—you deny that they even existed as victims, and so on. So there are four laws I was actually tried under back then. They did not yet have a special law for, quote-unquote, “denying the Holocaust”. They introduced that in 1994, kind of as a result also of my activities that unfolded back in the years, and all the rest of it.

 

Anyway, I ended up being deported to Germany, put on trial there, got another 30 months for only two of the nine books I was indicted for. Twenty-one were in the arrest, 19 were in the indictment. And for two of them I got convicted to 30 months. Had it been 21, that could have gotten nasty. If you get one year or so for each one of them, you do the math. Because eventually I got 50 months for the two books—the two publications—they booked me for eventually.

 

So 44 months later, I was out. And the US authorities said—they eventually denied my political asylum. The case had still not been resolved by the time I was deported. So I was whisked away, not only in violation because I was rightfully married to a US citizen. And US law says you can adjust status if you have a clean record.

 

And what I was convicted for in Germany was not recognized as a crime here in the United States. It’s First Amendment stuff. So from the US perspective, I had a clean record, should have been allowed to adjust status to permanent legal residence, but they deported me. Plus, it’s a violation of the Fifth Amendment, the right of anyone physically present in the United States to have due process.

 

Now, if in the middle of a hearing and procedure in front of a federal court, you arrest a defendant and throw him out of the country— which is exactly the reason why the case is pending; you want to prevent being deported—that’s the whole reason of the case, whether it’s political asylum or just withholding from deportation. Both of these cases we had filed for. Deporting me in the middle of it is a violation of the Fifth Amendment. Supreme Court didn’t take the case. That’s the way how they prevent not adjudicating a case that is unpleasant to them.

 

So I was back in Germany and then had to fight my way back to get my immigrant visa, even though I had already been granted it; it wasn’t issued physically yet. And then I was outside of the country already, so I needed one to be able to get back. The US authorities weren’t adjudicating the application. They just said:

 

“It’s too complicated. We can’t decide whether we’ll ever be able to adjudicate it.”

 

In other words, they were stonewalling. I had to litigate against them, force them to a decision. Fortunately, I got a judge in the Chicago federal court who kind of sided with me. For once, something went my way. He is an immigrant judge from Syria. No, I think from Syria. Not quite sure. Anyway, from the Middle East. So he evidently saw through what’s going on here, and he rubber-stamped every motion that we filed in kind of lightning speed. For legal considerations, federal courts take months for things to be decided, but he was taking days.

 

And then in August, 2011, after two years of waiting and litigating after having gotten out of prison in Germany, I was back in the United States. So I’ve been in the country ever since. The Germans keep doing what they’re doing, issuing arrest warrants or Europe-wide arrest warrants. And they stopped issuing me a passport because they want to catch me, but I don’t need a passport.

 

So I have no intention of leaving the country.

 

[15:21]

 

Kenny Ko: I was going to say, do you ever plan on leaving the United States now?

 

Germar Rudolf: No, I can’t. I have no passport. I’ve tried to adjust to become a citizen. But no matter what your background is, you have no right to become a US citizen. That’s a discretionary act of the people of the United States, represented by the government. And I applied for it, but they were stonewalling that case too, not adjudicating it.

 

And then eventually a cop framed me for something that didn’t happen. Early in the morning—talking about fitness—I was doing triathlons early in the morning for four years. Some neighbor in the neighborhood didn’t like that I was working out in the park there, doing calisthenics, and going in the river to swim, and ride a bicycle.

 

Kenny Ko: Were they jewish?

 

Germar Rudolf: No, it’s just—I don’t know the neighbor. It’s just a riverfront property. And he went to work every morning and he saw me once in a while, and he was calling the cops for years! Cops were checking on me for years! I didn’t realize what was going on really, but I couldn’t do anything. They got pissed. They got called for years and years—six years or so—every other morning in the summertime when this guy saw me. He wasn’t happy about me working out in the park area there.

 

Kenny Ko: Wait, why did he dislike you so much, or what was his issue? Did he know your work or something?

 

Germar Rudolf: No, no, I don’t know.

 

Kenny Ko: Interesting!

 

Germar Rudolf: I have never contacted the guy. I don’t know anything. I know from a cop that eventually talked to me about this, that there is, they say:

 

“A man in the neighborhood, he calls anonymously.”

 

Nobody can call the police anonymously! So that was just a claim made up in order not to have to reveal to me who that is because they think some people may take revenge for the perpetrator. I know where he lives. I know his daily routine because I was there for 10 years, every morning from April to September/October, and I know his daily routine—what time he gets up, where his bedroom is, what he does next, when he goes to the kitchen, does his breakfast, and which TV channels he watches, until he gets in his car and leaves for work. That’s the routine. I’ve been there for 10 years. I know the routine of that neighborhood.

 

Anyway, the cops realized they can’t get the guy to stop complaining and they can’t do anything against me because it’s legal to be there! That’s a famous fishing, motor-boat, recreational area.

 

And so the guy just said he was going to make up a claim that I was doing indecent exposure there, which wasn’t true. But you have only a cop and yourself at four o’clock, at a dark, vacated park, nobody there. And the guy makes up a story and then he contradicts himself. That’s interesting. Because in the preliminary hearing he makes up a completely wild story. And I couldn’t believe it, what he was telling. And then by the time the trial came, the prosecution had realized that the case was physically impossible. The claims he made couldn’t have been. It was not visible what he was claiming. It was just physically impossible. So they completely changed the story.

 

And if you have that situation that a witness—and that’s only one witness—completely changes the story, that’s automatic proof of perjury.

 

So I have that actually published, both transcripts, and everyone can look at it. You see that a cop’s committing perjury on the behest and on instruction, I would assume, of the prosecution. Because the prosecutor doing the trial showed a photo of the scene, taken from the place where the cop said he saw things. And you could see the things he described in the preliminary time were impossible. The prosecutor must have realized that. And then they told the cop that and he changed his story.

 

I requested after that from three law firms, three lawyers: :

 

“What do we do about it? I want to file a criminal complaint against the cop for perjury.”

 

And the answer is:

 

“They framed you the first time—if you are right that they framed you—and the prosecutor actually was the one working with the cop to get that accomplished. Your criminal complaint against the cop for perjury would come on the desk of the very prosecutor that has framed you in the first place. What do you think is going to happen? You get a second framing so fast you can’t blink an eye! And if you have two of these cases hanging, as an immigrant, you get deported from this country automatically!”

 

And that’s what’s going on. So my attempt to get citizenship was stonewalled. They weren’t deciding it, but the moment I was convicted and the conviction was upheld in the appeal—which was kind of absurd too—they instantly denied my citizenship application because I have a criminal record. Now you see what’s going on. And the appeal, the argument was:

 

“Wait a minute. If a guy with a searchlight goes in a park at night, completely black, and looks around and then happens to find a person with pants down, as he claims, what do you call a person who’s doing that?”

 

Kenny Ko: A streaker, I guess, or flasher.

 

Germar Rudolf: Peeping Tom!

 

Kenny Ko: Yeah.

 

[20:03]

 

Germar Rudolf: Yeah. So if you give that guy a police badge, what do you call that? Still a peeping Tom!

 

So the argument wasn’t made that way. But basically, a crime of indecent exposure requires that somebody has been indecently exposed to someone of the public. A police officer who is going around with searchlights is not a person of the public. It doesn’t count. So therefore, the crime has not been committed, because as we all know, it was completely dark and it was vacated. Even if it were true—which it isn’t—but if it were true that I was there with my pants down, it cannot have been a crime because nobody was around. And the Appeals Court said:

 

“Well, it doesn’t matter. From now on, we say anyone who has the pants down anywhere in public, whether anyone is around or not, commits indecent exposure.”

 

Which means that every person in the world that ever lived has committed indecent exposure! If you were ever in nature and had a pee or did your business—which happens to us sometimes—it’s automatic indecent exposure.

 

Kenny Ko: They might be looking for me. I probably have over 50 charges against me here!

 

Germar Rudolf: Right! So legal professionals after that appeal decision said:

 

“This is impossible! This is completely untenable case law you’ve created here. Now, everyone has committed indecent exposure. Indecent exposure requires the intentional act to expose your genitals to someone in public who does not consent!”

 

If you’re in a nudist area, that’s not, because you have consent there, right? But if it’s not in a nudist area, you don’t get consent, then that’s a crime. But if there’s no one around, there’s no exposure. So later they actually reverted that by simply ignoring the case law. And every case that’s been adjudicated in Pennsylvania ever since still goes after the old law because the new case law is complete bullshit! But it shows you what was going on—trying to prevent me from getting citizenship, to have something, and to go to extreme lengths, to ridiculous lengths!

 

And I suspect that they got to my defense lawyer, because my defense lawyer threw me under the bus. I had all the evidence showing that this thing cannot happen. And of course we had him nailed when he contradicted himself—perjury. And my defense lawyer refused to defend me, refused to introduce any evidence.

 

So this is the curious thing about America. You have the First Amendment when you are outside the courtroom, you can speak your mind. If you’re inside the courtroom in a penal case and you’re the defendant, you don’t have First Amendment rights. You depend—you can speak out only if you go—if you’re defended by a lawyer, of course—you can speak about the case only if you go into the witness stand and then you can only answer to specific questions that you are asked. My defense lawyer, I had given him 10 questions I wanted him to ask me, and then develop the case and introduce all the evidence. And then I get into the witness stand and he doesn’t ask any of the questions! Only one:

 

“What did happen that morning?”

 

Which was complete bullshit because that didn’t allow me to introduce any of the evidence showing that I was working out, that I have a history of working out, and introduce images of my clothing, and so forth.

 

Anyway, the issue is, of course, now I don’t have citizenship and I have this criminal conviction. And the lawyers then said:

 

“Get the hell out of there! The best is to remove yourself from Pennsylvania—not just from this county—most certainly stay away from that county because they have you on their list there, and move!”

 

So that’s what I eventually did.

 

Kenny Ko: So where’d you move to from there?

 

Germar Rudolf: I’m in upstate New York now.

 

Kenny Ko: Okay. And you’ve been there since?

 

Germar Rudolf: Well, you know, it was my marriage that fell apart. That’s been in decline ever since. You know, if you have been forcibly separated for six years, that doesn’t bode well for any marriage. And my wife suffered more than I during that time of separation because it wasn’t her battle and she had to be a single mother raising our daughter all by herself. She was stressed out and not happy.

 

And then of course, I wouldn’t stop doing what I was doing. Coming back, slowly getting my feet back into things—that is not conducive to marital bliss. Plus, which I found later, the family and friends evidently were undermining the marriage from behind the scenes, unbeknownst to me, to one degree or another. So that wasn’t a good situation.

 

Anyway, eventually, when all this unraveled, I left and lived with friends first until my marriage issues were resolved—getting through divorce and splitting up assets and so forth. Until you know what you have, you don’t want to make any moves. So when that was settled, I could actually get my own life back. And that happened a couple of years ago.

 

Now I’ve used that time well. Fifty-four volumes of hard-hitting research accessible at HolocaustHandbooks.com, unparalleled in the world when it comes to the depth and the scale and scope. For instance, if we look at Auschwitz, which is the most iconic crime scene of the Holocaust—whatever happened there—I mean, it was nasty even from a revisionist perspective, from a skeptical perspective: 135, 500 documented cases of deceased inmates. That’s a huge number.

 

[25:04]

 

Kenny Ko: Because I do want to pick your brain heavily on your research and what you found. One question I wanted, and I’m sure a lot of people have it: How’d you go from your PhD field—what you thought you were going to pursue—into so passionately looking into the events surrounding the Holocaust and the World War II time frame? What kind of sparked your interest, I guess, to want to navigate that?

 

Germar Rudolf: I had an interest in German history, just not that topic because it’s an unpleasant topic—modern German history, kind of circumnavigating the Holocaust, ever since, I would say, ever since I started studying at university, it was a kind of a private hobby. I knew about the importance of the topic when it comes to the German psyche, if you want to put it that way, because it weighs heavily on Germans, on their self-confidence as a nation, as an identity. But you kind of take it for granted. It’s cast in stone. It’s inevitable to have to deal with it. So it never crossed my mind to challenge the narrative, let’s say it that way.

 

But I refuse to accept that two wrongs make a right, that one evil can balance out another one. So using what happened in the past—whatever it is—as justification to commit other injustices, whether it’s against my own people and country after the Second World War or in subsequent issues that have come up more recently. Like we look at what’s going on in Gaza or the various wars that Israel is waging—that made me aware that it has relevance, political relevance; still not a way of challenging it.

 

But once I did stumble over arguments that I could verify—or refute, for that matter—the toxicological and forensic research that Fred Leuchter in the United States had done, I said:

 

“Well, I have to look into this is a question, a topic that has huge implications politically.”

 

Back then I thought only in German dimensions. I was kind of still in the German box. In the meantime, I’m more cosmopolitan, I see the larger picture. But it was enough for me to say:

 

“I want to find out!”

 

And the real motivator that got me going is to realize during my time as an expert witness how the system breaks all the rules it claims to defend. It claims to be at the core of its values—be it free speech, be it freedom of science, be it the rule of law. As an expert witness in court—when you are in Germany—the German procedural rules say if an expert witness is already in court, he is an expert at what he is supposed to testify for, he is able to testify, and the testimony is relevant to the case that’s being handled by the court, then he has to be heard. There’s no way of turning them down because there’s no effort for the court to get the expert—he’s already in the court—yet still they violated that law, in every one of the seven or eight cases I was summoned to testify!

 

And the panic that I saw in some cases in the eyes of the judges—because they knew they needed to violate the law; they are the criminals in that case. One of them ran out, called some superior—there is no superior of a judge—but evidently called probably the capital or whatever, some higher court to find out:

 

“Do I get backing from the higher courts if I violate the procedural rules here?”

 

And evidently the decision later on by the German Supreme Court:

 

“Yes, we’ve always done it, we will always keep doing it. That’s the way we have to do it!”

 

Bunch of horseshit! Excuse my English.

 

Kenny Ko: Hey, you can use whatever language you want. They put you through absolute hell! And first, I wanted to say too, thank you for all you have done, by the way. And also, sorry that you’ve been put through so much. But it just shows that the truth will always prevail. And we need people like you. Honestly, from the bottom of my heart, thank you for doing what you did, sacrificing what you have in order to get this information out to the masses.

 

[28:49]

 

 

 

 

Germar Rudolf: Yeah, that is the stage I’m in right now, actually. I was getting to that. Fifty-four volumes of hard-hitting archival and forensic research—too much to wrap your head around. If you want to read it all, it takes you years and by the time you get to the end, you have already forgotten the beginning. And the same was for me.

 

I mean, I’ve published all this stuff in German, in English, I’ve republished it in many, many editions. So I’m the one who actually has that stuff on his fingertips and should have the best knowledge of where to find what. But I couldn’t! I was forgetting stuff. And I had a hard time finding arguments, finding evidence, finding sources. So I decided eventually we need to write an encyclopedia.

 

And that’s what I’ve done. After my marriage fell apart—the depression, it put me into separation from my kids, from my home—I used that time, work therapy, to sit down. Within five months, I wrote an entire encyclopedia. Normally that’s a collective work of many scholars. Now I’ve been in the unique situation of having assembled this research for 35 years, having published it in several languages and republished it over and over again! I also was in charge for many years of the periodicals that were publishing papers on it.

 

So I have it all on my hard drive, kind of in my head. If not I, who else could do it? And I’ve worked with one additional scholar, a Professor of the humanities who helped me. I had some experience in contributing to scholarly works like that, encyclopedias. It’s not something you do every day. I’m most certainly not writing one cover to cover.

 

But I know that having, say, 200 scholars contributing—each several, or one contribution, one entry—to an encyclopedia is actually a much bigger challenge to get because it’s not economically viable. You don’t make money with this. It’s an honor for a scholar to be listed as a contributor to an encyclopedia because then he’s the top of the field in this particular entry that he is writing about, and to get people actually to do it.

 

And then you have a problem of synchronizing things because there’s overlap between entries and cross-referencing. And if you have everyone writing their own style, writing their own opinion, they sometimes don’t even agree on things. It’s a nightmare to co-ordinate that and to get that actually to go together—to have, first of all, everyone submitting their stuff, and then coordinating, synchronizing, streamlining it. And then the ego gets in the way where nobody wants to budge and they have different points of view. It can be a nightmare!

 

 

Now if you have just one guy writing it with one supporting it was actually a much faster job. But I required these 35 years of background in the entire field. And having published—covered—the entire field. HolocaustEncyclopedia.com is freely accessible for everyone. We update it, we expand it as it is needed. You can also get hard copies there in various languages. By now we have it in German, French and Spanish on top of it. And I’m currently working—and that’s what you interrupted me with, …

 

Kenny Ko: Sorry about that!

 

Germar Rudolf: Arabic translation. No, I appreciate that because I want to get the message out. The work is there. It is completely silenced and swept under the carpet by the mainstream. Any work on the Holocaust over the past, 20 years that does not at least consider the work we have done cannot be called scholarly! Scholarly means even if you disagree with a scholar, if it’s a considerable work—and 54 volumes is a considerable amount of work—then you have to at least say:

 

“Well, this work is there and I disagree with this for this and this reason.”

 

And that’s it! If you completely ignore it and you pretend it doesn’t even exist, that means you’re a dogmatist, you’re not a scholar anymore. And that’s the situation we have in the field of Holocaust studies—have had now for the past, 20 years plus. But this is only the scholarly issue; we’re talking about suppression. I frame it in a certain way to make clear what’s going on. History at gunpoint! Writing of history at gunpoint! That’s what we have in the Western world—have had ever since. The first country to introduce a law that basically puts historians under the threat of imprisonment was Israel. Surprise! In ’85 or ’86.

 

Kenny Ko: I wonder why that is!

 

[32:53]

 

Germar Rudolf: Yeah, so that was coming up with the John Demjanjuk show trial that started shortly after, to make sure that nobody gets any funny ideas of challenging the show trial they were about to pull off. So in that context that has to be seen.

 

And then the next one was France. And by now we are up to 28 countries who formally have declared it illegal. But there are many more if you look at those who informally prosecute it. Most of the Arab countries actually throw people in prison if they dissent publicly, not because they want to, but because they are basically in the pockets of the United States and the Europeans. They are all bankrupt states, most of them, except for the really oil-rich countries. When we’re talking about Jordan and Egypt, the two examples that come to my mind, or even Lebanon—they’re in debt and they get bailed out financially by Europe and by the United States over and over again! So they are basically corrupted. They should have an interest in free discussion of the topic because it impacts their region massively these days. But they suppress it too. In South America, there are a number of countries which suppress it.

 

So it has come to the point that over the years many mainstream historians have gotten in touch with me—privately, of course, and some of them anonymously. They just create a Gmail account and get in touch and don’t tell who they are, but by the amount of assistance they have provided—giving us archival material that we don’t have access to because many archives now are closed to us. You have to identify yourself before you can get in. And we can’t do that; we’d get arrested. More and more archival material is being put online. So that will hopefully— we’ll see it.

 

Anyway, these historians give us massive amounts of information from archives that we can’t access, and therefore we know they know what they’re doing. They are professionals.

 

Kenny Ko: Right.

 

Germar Rudolf: And I hear from them the fact that they work from behind this kind of a firewall to prevent any leak who they are and that they’re helping.

 

But also of those who actually have contacted me, I had one of Germany’s most prolific historians, Professor Werner Maser—may not mean much to you, but he has written on modern German history and the World War II era. Many books, many of them were translated in many languages. So he was one of the leading scholars in the field from a German point of view. One of these days he called me! When I was in the United States shortly before my deportation, complaining to me about the dictator-style conditions in Germany and that historians are constantly afraid and can’t write anymore what they want to do.

 

And I had a number of these encounters with half a dozen mainstream historians. These are the ones who stick their neck out and risk getting in touch with me. You can figure out how many more there are who will not say anything and just toe the party line quietly or stay out of this area entirely. One of the leading Polish historians on the Auschwitz matter, Wacław Długoborski [sp], who was an Auschwitz inmate himself—he became the curator of the history department of the Auschwitz Museum after the war for many decades—said in 1998 in an interview why Polish historians from the Auschwitz Museum for decades until the collapse of the Soviet Union had spread false, exaggerated victim numbers even though they admit that they knew better:

 

“Why did you lie?”

 

He said:

 

“Well, we were put under pressure in the Eastern Bloc. We would have faced disciplinary measures had we not toed the party line.”

 

That was 1998, that he had this interview. And that was the same year Poland introduced a law making it up to three years imprisonment to challenge the current narrative. So back in the communist days they were facing disciplinary measures—which is on a professional level, administrative stuff, like you get demoted, you get removed from that position and then have to go somewhere else or whatever. But not criminal proceedings! Now we have criminal proceedings. Poland is finally Democratic—and democracy, as you know, is when two wolves and a lamb decide what’s for dinner!

 

So that’s the situation when it comes to this topic—democracy and dictatorship are not mutually exclusive concepts. If you’re a democracy, the majority decides to dictate to the minority what they can think and say. That’s a Democratic dictatorship! And that’s what we have in these 28 countries.

 

Kenny Ko: Thank you—Canada included! [clapping] By the way, a lot of people don’t understand democracy or how it operates.

 

[37:14]

 

Germar Rudolf: Yeah, if it’s not guardrailed strictly by inalienable civil rights and the right of self-determination—I throw in there for the sake of being complete—then democracy is a lynch mob! That’s just a nice way of saying lynch mob. So in a democracy, a majority should never be allowed to take away essential civil rights—human rights—from minorities, no matter what. But that’s what you see here. So be that as it may—got a little bit sidetracked with this here! Yeah, so Długoborski says:

 

“We acted under coercion. That’s why we lied!”

 

At a time when the Polish government jacked up the coercion that they are threatening.

 

So if they lied before, and they agreed and admitted that they have lied because of coercion, and the coercion has increased—now it’s even worse! Why would you believe them now, the story they tell now? Historians the world over when it comes to this topic all act under coercion! Usually only those people get into the field on the mainstream who are ideologically charged. You see a hyper over-representation of jews in that field—no surprise. And you see people with left-leaning ideologies. So Antifa kind of attitudes—no surprise there too. A lot of the quote, unquote, “evidence” that we have for the mainstream Holocaust narrative was produced, skewed and faked and forged and fabricated by communist Eastern Europe.

 

When you look at the six camps where mass extermination is said to have happened—that’s Auschwitz, Belzec, Chelmno, Majdanek, Sobibor and Treblinka—and the Einsatzgruppen mass murders, gas vans, mass murders etc., that are said to have happened behind the Soviet front. All this is on former Soviet territories. So for 40 years it was behind the Iron Curtain. And the evidence that was presented in the Nuremberg trials and in many trials thereafter was produced in those countries in those years.

 

Can you believe them? I wouldn’t take anything at face value that comes from these countries! Does everything have to be a lie? No, of course not. We have to discern critically, with tools of source criticizm, to figure out what is true and what is not. Forensics. There are a lot of tools that historians have— forensic historians in particular. And in the encyclopedia, with all these crime locations, claimed crime locations, they have entries in there and they go through what the documents say, what the forensic research—if any was done—says, and what forensic research should be done to clarify any issues that we still have a lot of the fields have never been researched in a way that they should have.

 

You probably have heard of the mass murders at Katyn and Vinnytsa. So the Soviets and the Germans divided up Poland in 1939. And the Soviets arrested some 20,000 people of the upper society of Poland that came under their control. And after a year of detention they executed them—or not even a year—in various mass graves. The Germans in ’43 found two of them and made a big fuss about it. But they did not do the forensic examination of these graves all by themselves. They actually invited experts from all over the world, from neutral countries and even from countries they had occupied, and let them do the research or at least partake in that research.

 

And that is the way you should do it. The Soviets after the war—already during the war—did nothing like that! They had a commission that was actually re-examining the Katyn mass graves and blamed it on the Germans with an expert report—complete fake! And the same commission, with the same people, discovered more and more mass graves of German atrocities all over Soviet Russia and claimed outrageous numbers of people killed. On the face of it, obvious exaggerations.

 

What should have been done is somebody go in there and do the actual Katyn, German-style, independent, international forensic examinations. For instance, it happened in Cambodia—massive atrocities, auto-genocide if you wish. They called it a politicide. The intention was not to wipe off an ethnic group—that was not the intention of the Khmer Rouge. The intention was political ideology of an extreme degree. Mass graves of up to 2 million people. So up to one third of the Cambodian population was murdered there. And they had intensive forensic efforts to exhume those mass graves and to count the victims—an absolutely atrocious job when we’re talking about well north of 1 million human beings that were eventually found. Similar thing you had with the Kosovo mass murders that are said to have happened in the Kosovo War, 1999 and thereafter.

 

So this is the way it should be done. It’s never been done in the context of what we are looking at here. And the longer it takes to do it, the less likely it is that things can be clarified. Who are these victims? Who has killed them? It gets more and more problematic because Soviet territory is drenched in blood. We’re talking about 1 to 2 million jews presumably killed by German execution squads in this area. We’re talking an area that has seen the Holodomor, that has seen wars with millions of victims and mass graves of war casualties and prisoners of war, the mass executions that the NKVD, the Cheka, has done in the early years—particularly of the Bolshevik Revolution and the reign of Lenin and Stalin. It’s all in those soils there.

 

So wherever you dig, you’ll find bones. We’re talking north of 10 million, potentially, that are not jews murdered by Germans. Who talks about them? There’s a single focus only on that! But the Soviet Union never had an interest in clarifying any of it. They didn’t want anyone to dig in their soil because what you would find most likely is victims of Lenin and Stalin and so forth, rather than jewish victims of German units. And after the collapse of the Soviet Union, nothing changed really. There were a few attempts of Western scholars to excavate mass graves in Ukraine, which has a more neutral stance now since it’s independent. They have an interest in documenting Soviet atrocities—any kind of atrocities.

 

However, those research efforts into claimed German massacres of jewish civilians were again not done forensically. They were done with the background of public attention and commemoration culture. Locate a mass grave—don’t disturb it. It’s kind of the pressure from jewish groups. A jewish grave is not supposed to be disturbed. That’s against certain interpretations of jewish law. That doesn’t hold up in other crime cases.

 

But in that case they are adamant. Don’t rock the boat—meaning don’t investigate who these people are and how many there are and how they died. Just find the mass grave and put a memorial on top of it, and that’s the end of it. And so that’s kind of what happened, which is unfortunate.

 

Massacres did happen. There’s plenty of documentation and some good forensic evidence in a few cases where this can be found, and anything else would be a surprise. As I just mentioned, the Bolshevik Revolution, the predominance of people with jewish background in the early leadership of the Soviet Union and the early leading figures of the Cheka and the NKVD is well documented.

 

Kenny Ko: Also in America why do you think there’s such a heavy focus on the Holocaust and not the Holodomor, or the Bolshevik Revolution? Like why is it such a matter of the emphasis on one?

 

[44:43]

 

Germar Rudolf: Two reasons. First of all, you have of course mightily influential pressure groups. As you know, the Cambodians have a massive pressure group that can impose a memory/commemoration culture of the Cambodian genocide in this country? No, they don’t! The Ukrainians have somewhat of an immigrant group. They don’t have political clout.

 

Jews most certainly in this country have a lot of political clout, to put it mildly. And that’s the entry to imposing that kind of commemorative culture upon a host nation that has originally nothing to do with it. The United States has neither contributed nor assisted, nor was it in any way the victim of anything that concerns the Holocaust.

 

So why is it here?

 

Kenny Ko: And also why is there Holocaust museums in the United States?

 

Germar Rudolf: The other issue is, of course, you need to have a justification for the suffering of the sick. This has been portrayed in general as the “Good War”. The painting of a black-and-white image of absolute evil against absolute good. The Democratic countries fighting absolute evil in the shape of Adolf Hitler and his cronies. This is a narrative that finds its ultimate confirmation in the Holocaust. Even though the Second World War—when it broke out—there was no Holocaust going on. When it was escalating in 1940, there was still no Holocaust going on. When it was then completely getting off the rails with the invasion of the USSR, there was still no Holocaust going on! It is supposed to have started then, within the first half-year or first year of the war against the Soviet Union, step by step on various levels.

 

So the Second World War in itself—its initiation and its expansion and becoming global—had nothing to do with the Holocaust at all!

 

But it’s a convenient tool for people to say:

 

“Yeah, we fought absolute evil!”

 

In hindsight more than back then. And my reaction to that usually is, I’m not defending a dictatorship that tramples human rights into the dust. And that was National Socialist Germany. As I just mentioned a Catholic priest was sent for a few months to a concentration camp in the Third Reich for speaking out against oppressive policies.

 

Had I been alive and kicking in those years with my attitude to stand up against injustice, I may have ended up in a concentration camp as well. I don’t want to have a government of the Third Reich style when it comes to their disregard for the rule of law and for human rights.

 

But on the other hand, any government that allies itself with Stalin cannot claim to fight a good war! The Second World War breaks out in 1939 by Stalin and Hitler both dividing up Poland. So they are both evil at that point and have started the whole mess.

 

Hitler at that point, when you look at the Third Reich death toll of civilians who had become a victim of the regime, you can amount it to roughly a thousand people—people dying in concentration camps, not too many, but already some dying there who probably wouldn’t have died otherwise. You have the November of ’38 pogrom against jews where roughly 100 jews died. And you had the internal strife of the Röhm Putsch in ’34 where several dozen people were killed.

 

So we’re talking about a thousand people roughly that were victims of that regime. Not necessarily murder all of them, but some of them most definitely, or just gross negligence and so forth.

 

At the same time you have the Stalinist regime, which at that point—we can discuss whether it was 5 million, 10 million or 20 million by the time the Second World War broke out—but we are talking about four or five orders of magnitude more victims on the account of Stalin than Hitler!

 

So why would you pick the side of Stalin? I’m not saying you should have picked the side of Hitler. You should have stayed out of it altogether! If you have an interest—you consider both evil, okay? Make sure that they are well balanced and they start fighting each other and grind each other down and destroy each other. And at the end that both of them are kaput! That would have been a good strategy. Then you wouldn’t have to deal with the mess that we had for the entire Cold War.

 

And now with the conflict with Ukraine and all the rest of it—if Russia had been just as exhausted as Germany would have been and then brought to the point where it collapses internally and becomes reasonable; or Germany collapsed and became reasonable to some degree.

 

So anyway, with all this said, during the 1920s in Europe, German jewish organizations were ringing the alarm bell. In the ’20s, Germany itself was kind of unstable. There were a lot of attempts by Left-wing radical groups and communists to destabilize the country and have a revolution of the Soviet style. While at the same time in Europe they were observing very closely—and particularly in Germany—what was going on in the Soviet Union with the massacres happening, the Holodomor being one, but in general, the absolute atrocities on an order of magnitude that was unimaginable in the history of mankind. And seeing in the early 1920s that a lot of it is done by people with a predominantly jewish background. And people were seeing that. So jewish groups in Germany were saying:

 

“Well, this is bad—what’s going on there. The massacres in the millions—and it’s going to get blamed on jews! So the revolution that Trotsky and the Bronsteins are implementing now is going to end up with a backlash of massive retaliation. And during that coming Holocaust, the Goldsteins and the Goldbergs are going to suffer.”

 

So that was a prediction, I think in 1925 or something, by a German jewish organization. And it was kind of a prophecy. Eventual collision between Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia was a counter-revolutionary war against the initially predominantly jewish-Bolshevik Revolution. Now, by the time Stalin was in power and the Second World War broke out, Stalin had kind of cleansed his own ranks from predominantly jewish people.

 

When you look at the internally recorded ethnic consistency of the NKVD back then, you see that from ’34,’35 onward, the percentage in the higher echelons of that organization went down when it comes to jews—from 40% that they were at that time down to only, I think, 4% within a few years. You see an anti-Jewish cleansing of the entire political apparatus that Stalin put in place.

 

[Image: the mostly jewish CHEKA secret police]

 

Now of course Germany—Third Reich Germany—didn’t know that; it’s something that came out later. But in the view of Third Reich Germany, that was the embodiment of evil—looking at the millions of people massacred, impersonated by people with jewish background on purpose. Because these people were, in the classic sense, not jews anymore in a religious sense, but they had that background. So massacres were inevitable. They started already when the German army went into Russia. The Soviets, were retreating massively! And they— the local population, particularly in Ukraine—had suffered so much. They were the main battlefield of the Bolshevik Revolution.

See: The Other Holocaust — the Terror Famine in Ukraine

 

And then you had the Holodomor—the attempt of the Russians to break Ukrainian will of independence. What’s going on right now was nothing new. They have been through that for the past hundred years. They’ve been through it repeatedly. So the poor Ukrainians, they get it over and over and over again in history.

 

So by that time the Germans move in, the Ukrainians take matters in their own hands. They have massive pogroms directed against officials and against anything jewish. I know from personal account of Otto Strema [sp]. He used to be a major general in the Third Reich and he went into Russia in 1941 himself—that he stopped pogroms. So certain German units were turning a blind eye to it. Some units were encouraging it, others were stopping it, depending on the mood of the command or whatever was going on. But it was going on. And then Ukrainians collaborated in a large degree with whatever suppression and possibly massacres happened afterwards.

 

That was the backlash of 20 years of Bolshevik massacres that killed north of 10 million, mostly Christians, in Russia! If you see that in the context of the greater historical picture, it’s not a justification. As I mentioned initially, two wrongs don’t make a right. That goes on so many levels.

 

So whatever wrong the Bolsheviks had done is no justification for massacring every jew in sight. And many jews who lived in Russia had nothing to do with the Bolshevik massacres. But it makes things understandable.

 

And ultimately, why do we do history? Because we want to understand, we want to learn the Right, the correct lesson. And if you don’t get the story straight, you’re not going to learn the correct lesson. It’s an ever-escalating sequence of massacres, one justified by the other. And we need to see that, see that we all have blood on our hands when it comes to identifiable groups. That’s one with me. We—I don’t mean individually—but Germans have done bad things. Americans—the carpet bombing and throwing nuclear bombs on Japan—there were war crimes, there were atrocities, there were massacres. So destroying basically all of Central Europe and all of Japan.

 

So you need to understand that we need to find a way out of the circle of violence, to learn the correct lesson here. And it is sure not the correct lesson to learn from the Holocaust to teach jews now, already from the cradle—I’m exaggerating, but I think in 2014 they introduced a law in Israel that Holocaust education is now ready to start in elementary school. Elementary school kids in every country in the world— to any, not just elementary—but it is illegal to expose any children to chainsaw massacres and other fiction horror movies for good reason. It should be just as illegal to expose them to gas chamber massacre movies like Schindler’s List or whatever, which is shown to them at an age when they’re heavily impressionable.

 

Kenny Ko: Right.

 

Germar Rudolf: Because it is even more traumatizing if you show them a chainsaw massacre:

 

“Oh, that’s just fiction, it’s just made up!”

 

But it’s bad enough. And I have an adopted son who has been exposed to that prior to his placement—his biological parents had shown him these things. And I know what effect it can have. It should be illegal.

 

And if you tell them:

 

“Oh, this really happened—something like that—and it can happen again and it can happen to you, and the same people who did that are still around and they’re in your back. Yesteryear there were the Germans. Yesteryear there were the Ukrainians; right now they are the Palestinians in Gaza or the Persians in Iran!”

 

And that justifies then the next massacre. So if teaching about historical massacres is used to justify or gloss over the next massacre, we learn the completely wrong lesson! And that’s what this country, with its support of whatever Israel does! And in particular, jews and Israel, Zionists in the vast majority have been learning because of what we experienced, presumably because it was so unprecedented:

 

“It was without logic, without rhyme and reason, without any historical nexus whatsoever! We have to be aware it can happen anytime and therefore pre-emptively we need to lash out at someone as soon as someone looks askance—under every rock a goy can hide who may want to stuff you into the gas chamber—be aware of it jew! So if anyone ever makes the wrong move, kill them pre-emptively!”

 

“Rise and Kill” is actually a book that was written in this context. And that’s what we see in Gaza. And that’s what we hopefully will not see now in South Lebanon. Detraumatizing jews, but also detraumatizing Germans. They have had a similar lesson to learn that leads them to genocide-suicidal tendencies of wanting to give up because they are so evil, historically speaking, that the best they can do is just disappear. So with broken self-confidence they need detraumatizing, but jews need detraumatizing. If you have a heavy trauma as an individual—and the same applies for ethnic or religious communities, whichever way you want to frame it—you need to understand where the trauma is coming from. But then you need to prevent yourself from being constantly exposed to the same triggers. Overcoming trauma—and I had my own trauma: If you’re torn from your family twice and your family’s been destroyed twice and you’re thrown into prison for scientific research you have done—it is traumatizing.

 

And sometimes when people ask me, tell me a little bit more about the story, sometimes I say no. The jewish attitude of “always remember”, and I translate that as “wallowing in your own suffering of the past as an ethnic group” is exactly the wrong way. You can’t overcome trauma if you wallow in it all the time. You need to move forward. The rock climbers say, don’t look backward.

 

And I couldn’t lead a normal life. You know, I know the US authorities—there are strong groups in this country who want to have me deported again, frame me again, or even in this administration, they just arrest anyone they don’t like and deport them even if they have green cards. They have tried that—they could come after me. So I’m constantly in an ejector seat and I have lived that way over the past 35 years and I can’t be constantly reminded of that. I’m trying to have some normalcy. If you’re in this situation, normalcy is what keeps you sane.

 

And if you constantly wallow in it just destroys you! And turns you into a psychopath or at least a sociopath. And that’s what we see with the approval ratings among average Israelis about what’s going on in Gaza.

 

In fact, fully aware that massacres happen on the magnitude that they are happening, that genocide is being committed on the scale as it is described in the Book of Joshua, of the conquest of the Holy Land, where God has ordered the jews to kill everyone in the Holy Land and take the land. That’s kind of what they are reenacting and get the consent of the majority!

 

What kind of mental conditioning must these people have gone through to get to the point to have no empathy whatsoever and to have these attitudes? And the answer to this is Holocaust indoctrination from childhood!

 

Kenny Ko: That’s a great point!

 

[58:36]

 

 

Germar Rudolf: So it needs to stop. And it is, I think, good news for jews to realize the nightmare they’re living under that turns them into these sociopath/psychopaths almost as a nation or as an ethnic or religious group—whichever way you want to frame it. The nightmare of this uniqueness, the icon of which is the gas chamber, is a nightmare! You need to wake up! Yeah, jews were targeted during the Second World War. And it has a historical reason—it was not justified, but there is reason behind it, but not to the extent and with the means that you think there’s one picture that I show sometimes to people of a group of jews from Israel that have been taken on a tour to Poland—because tours, traumatizing tours of jews into former German concentration camps or the former so-called “extermination camps” on Polish territory are organized regularly. They go there to, … It fulfills the same role as in the past the rabbis had with ghetto jews in shtetel * in Eastern Europe—to make them afraid of the Gentiles outside the ghetto, so that they would stay in the ghetto and would stay together as a herd. And these kinds of traumatization serve the same purpose.

 

[* Shtetl or shtetel is a Yiddish term for small towns with predominantly Ashkenazi Jewish populations which existed in Eastern Europe before the Holocaust. The term is used in the context of pre-Second World War European Jewish societies as communities within the surrounding non-Jewish populace, and thus bears certain connotations of discrimination. Shtetls were mainly found in the areas that constituted the 19th-century Pale of Settlement in the Russian Empire, as well as in Congress Poland, Austrian Galicia and Bukovina, the Kingdom of Romania and the Kingdom of Hungary-Source: Wikipedia]

 

And beyond that, leads to these sociopathic tendencies. They go into a gas chamber at the Majdanek camp, or what is depicted to them as a gas chamber—was until several years ago. And they reenact a gassing scene. How traumatizing that must be for young people after all the indoctrination they had already! Now it turns out the Majdanek Museum later says:

 

“Oh, okay, we lied. That wasn’t a gas chamber. That was one of these things that we had to drop.”

 

In 2005 they made that major revision. Over the years dropped the claimed death toll from 2 million down to only 78,000—not even 4%—and scrapped seven of the originally claimed homicidal gas chambers.

 

So a lot of the enactment that jews had done was completely done in places that were fumigation chambers—closed disinfestation chambers—no homicidal gas chambers at all!

 

Now we skeptics knew that a long time ago and published that. It’s good news—it didn’t happen! And the two remaining gas chambers that they claim—it didn’t happen either. Yeah, massacres happened; happened all over the war. The jews weren’t the only victims. If they get themselves into the line of massacres and genocides that have happened during and after the Second World War—get down from your attitude of being unique! Unique victims feel uniquely entitled not only for recognition, but also for blank checks, …

 

Kenny Ko: For reparations.

 

Germar Rudolf: For lashing out, for repression, for pre-emptive lashing out against whoever is in their way. And this is bad! They need to stop! And the way of doing it is realizing the story has been blown out of proportion and is used to traumatize you need to downgrade it to the real size, which is still bad enough, but not extraordinary. And it just is one link in the chain of human atrocities and catastrophes that have happened. The good news, …

 

Kenny Ko: Based on your findings of doing the forensic research, for instance at Auschwitz, and of course I know I’ve looked into the Treblinka forensic studies of ’99 from Australian researchers—do you believe that gas chambers were actually used to exterminate the jews in any regard?

 

[1:01:49]

 

 

Germar Rudolf: No! Gas chambers, … I have actually written a book that you can find as an ebook on HolocaustHandbooks.com. It’s titled Nazi Gas Chambers: The Roots of the Story. After doing 35 years of research on several levels and writing the Encyclopedia, finally when I wrote it, I had to get an overview and had to connect all the pieces and interconnect everything so that it all fits together. And I started to connect dots that I hadn’t seen before and started to realize who has created that story. After the war primarily jewish witnesses—or witnesses with jewish background, I should say—testified and attested to the existence and use of homicidal gas chambers. Which is no surprise because they were the primary targets for persecution of the National Socialist regime and therefore would of course make up the main body of the witnesses.

 

However, if you look at the claims they made, they were completely disorganized, contradictory. You can say it’s a testimonial chaos and anarchy! Nothing made sense, nothing was disallowed. Whatever claim you can come up with, you find testimonies. This story was streamlined during the postwar years, 1945, 1946, 1947. And I document in that book what the original chaotic claims were—made no sense whatsoever! You could find the absolute most ridiculous claims about anything! And how then step by step, by whom and for what reasons and with which methods the narrative was created.

 

Basically created out of whole cloth, invented out of thin air! And the actors, as I mentioned before—primarily they were actors of the Soviet communist bloc. All these six camps were in Poland.

 

So we’re talking about just four Polish individuals who streamlined. They were—three of them—investigative judges who were interrogating all these witnesses, faced complete chaos:

 

“What are we going to do?”

 

And eventually they agreed on one method, threw everything else out—or in one case actually threw out all the witnesses because none of them made sense—and replaced it with something they copied over from a different camp. So it’s all neatly documented there. It was an operation that was done under the auspices of the Soviet Union—of the Stalinist regime—and the new Stalinist authorities that had been imposed upon Poland after the war, and with the help of, just as I mentioned, fleeing Polish scholars—one historian and three investigative judges. So, no! We know from one particular case that is so elucidating that logic tells you it can’t be anything to it.

 

And I’ll give you a quick rundown of that. Josef Kramer was an SS officer who ran, in the earlier war years, a concentration camp in Alsace-Lorraine. And then later he was transferred over to Auschwitz, ran a camp there for part of the camp for a time, and at the end of the war ended up in Bergen-Belsen, which is an infamous camp too because of the typhus epidemic that caused tens of thousands of victims there, as the British found and filmed the mountains of dead inmates.

 

 

[Image: British army bulldozer at Bergen Belsen being used to move bodies]

 

Now he was put on trial there and he was made—after torture, we have actually accounts of how he was tortured—he claimed that in Natzweiler, in the camp in Alsace-Lorraine, he rigged a little room and did a test gassing. And the way he describes it is absolutely ridiculous from a technical and toxicological point of view. Makes no sense!

 

However, that is supposed to have happened at a time when massive gassing operations are said to have been ongoing in the Third Reich already for years. So had it happened, Kramer, who had experience in various camps, would have known how to do it! But they have him testify to something completely ludicrous that makes no sense at all!

 

Kenny Ko: So you think that was through means of torture, …

 

Germar Rudolf: Yes!

 

Kenny Ko: And essentially getting him to confess to something that was never done?

 

[1:05:31]

 

Germar Rudolf: Yeah, exactly! Now we have proof that it was never done because he was made to testify that this gassing happened with a number of Auschwitz inmates that had been transferred to it in 1943, I think, to that camp in order for their skeletons to be used in a skeleton collection at the Strasbourg University—rather macabre claim. At the Strasbourg Anatomical Institute they found corpse parts with tattooed numbers and they figured these are some of the victims that were transferred from Auschwitz. So there seems to be some truth to it. We don’t know what exactly!

 

But then they made forensic investigations of those inmates. Did they die of the poison that Kramer said he used? That investigation— forensic investigation by a French scholar—conducted in 1946, as I’m not mistaken, disappeared in archives for many years, and only in 2018, I think, was it finally released by the French authorities, and the result is negative. No, it didn’t happen!

 

Of course they’re dead. They died somehow, but not with gassing with hydrogen cyanide.

 

So the whole thing is clear to have been made up. And on the face of the absurd claims of how it’s supposed to have happened—which is technically impossible—it was clear that it can’t have happened. But had Kramer had any idea of post-application in Auschwitz and wherever else he was of such massacres, he would have known what to say and so would the French have. So it’s clear the whole story is made up.

 

Also it’s one of, I would say, the only clear-cut cases where we know from forensic testing of the actual claimed victims—no, it didn’t happen. They have been executed, but not that way. No gas chambers! That doesn’t mean that people didn’t die. I just mentioned in Auschwitz we have documented cases of 135, 500 people dying. Most of them of disease. Typhus epidemic was raging in that camp for one and a half years—and they had dysentery, other issues.

 

And so the biggest death toll of any recorded, documented case in Third Reich German history— all the other camps did not come close to that in itself is a humanitarian disaster! Putting people who are snatched from their homes without due process, without anything, and putting them in camps and exposing them to conditions where they have to die like flies may not be outright murder, but it is manslaughter with gross negligence at least—and 135, 500 cases in that camp alone. And that’s something that Third Reich leadership, …

 

Kenny Ko: Do you believe the amount of deaths was due to the Allied powers cutting off supply routes and whatnot into Germany?

 

Germar Rudolf: In some of the Western camps at the end of the war, ye! When we’re talking about Bergen-Belsen and the amount of corpses there, that was due to force majeure, if you wanted. But still, somebody put these people in the camps. Unless they were hardened criminals or some people who justly were in there—POWs would have been in a war; that’s legal to put POWs in camps—and they would have succumbed to the same circumstances. And some of them did. But if you take civilians—Jewish or otherwise—without due process* and just deport them and put them in these camps, you can’t evade responsibility.

 

[* This is a weak argument as the jews were considered a security threat to the war effort, just as Japanese were put in camps in the USA, Germans and Italians in Australia, etc.]

 

When it comes to Auschwitz, no—the typhus epidemic there broke out in 1942 and got under control only in late 1943. So there were no mass bombing raids disrupting supply lines in the eastern part of Europe at that time, at all! What we do have there, however—we have evidence of the Polish underground spreading typhus germs, typhus-infectious lice, in hundreds of cases on purpose! So it stands to reason that they had some impact, were quote, unquote, “successful” with this kind of underground biological warfare, and made sure that German attempts at wiping out the disease in order to have camp inmates fit for labor and work for their war efforts would be undermined in one way or another. Now that’s war. You can look at it which way you want; the Polish underground killed mainly their own compatriots with that, because they were mostly the inmates in those camps.

 

I mean, there were other East Europeans. But anyway, people who were just as oppressed and occupied as the Poles were. And so it should undermine some part of the German war effort. Whether that’s morally justifiable—this is a different issue.

 

But again, it was the Germans who deported jews by the millions without due process just because they belong to a group—and that this shouldn’t be acceptable.

 

Kenny Ko: Another question I did have for you is—because of the non-gassing of jews and them fabricating the story—why do you think they would have chosen that means if it would have been so hard to prove, of course, through forensic studies and people could have come years later to see that the story was untrue? Why did they choose the route of gassing essentially? Or what do you think your opinion on that would be?

 

[1:10:19]

Germar Rudolf: Again, it is kind of laid out in my book Nazi Gas Chambers. If you look at the Nuremberg Trials, when the story hadn’t coalesced yet, they were claiming for Treblinka steam chambers; they were claiming for Belzec electrocution; Sobibor hadn’t settled yet—they were claiming there mainly chlorine as gas. Auschwitz had Zyklon B. So as I just mentioned, chaotic testimonies about what happened there at the Nuremberg Trial hadn’t settled in yet. It’s completely contradictory that we then eventually agreed—or the Polish scholars agreed—on engine exhaust gas in some of the camps and Zyklon B in Auschwitz. It’s a long story. It starts already in the First World War. I would say. The absolute horror of gas warfare is what people were most afraid of in the interwar period—that if another war breaks out, this is going to erupt again and it’s going to get much nastier than during the First World War.

 

 

So the first stories we have coming out of Auschwitz are actually claims by the underground that the Germans are testing war gases on Russian POWs. It was completely made up, but that was how things started—on that level—and developed from there. Zyklon B was of course used in camps because it’s an insecticide to fight lice. As we just mentioned, epidemics broke out—always break out in war. It’s almost inevitable. In many, many wars in the history of mankind, epidemics have caused more victims, particularly in the civilian population, than the war itself. And to some degree that’s true for World War II. Zyklon B is a convenient item that can— even though originally it’s a benign thing to preserve the life of the inmates by fighting epidemics— be twisted around and be seen as evidence for evil things if it has been used for homicide. You see that on various levels, that things that have the ability for dual interpretation—both benign as well as evil—have been used by the Allies. There is evidence that there was Zyklon B. Therefore they twist the story and say:

 

“You used it for homicide! Because there was so much sold and shipped to Auschwitz. You can’t explain that possibly with disinfestation—you must have committed mass murder!”

 

That’s actually the reasoning that was done by the Allies.

 

When you look at the actual record—Auschwitz being such a huge camp, the hundreds of thousands of inmates that were led through that camp, the huge size of it and the epidemic lice problems they had—it perfectly justified the amount of Zyklon B they received. As a matter of fact, they didn’t have enough to combat the epidemics, evidently. But it gives the opportunity for propagandists then to twist it into something that it was not.

 

And the same with the fact that there were crematoria. Crematoria are also a thing that can fire up the imagination of people. Back then, cremation wasn’t quite as common as it is now. And funerals by fire had been illegal in most European countries—in Christian countries, I should say—because of opposition from the Catholic Church and also a lot of Protestant churches, to the effect that it was just illegal by state law. And that was rescinded only starting in the early 20th century, step by step.

 

And by the time the Second World War was on, it was still not a widespread method, particularly in Eastern Europe. The imagination that people get burned, whether they’re dead or not, is just a horrifying imagination. A lot of people still—they want to be interred, they don’t want to be cremated—because the feeling is, my body is getting burned. It doesn’t sound right.

 

So that’s a convenient way for black propaganda to latch onto their fear and turn the hygienic way of disposing of the victims of mass epidemics and mass casualties into something evil that looks like mass murder. “Gas ovens”—the combination of the two—which is a term that shouldn’t exist because the oven, the furnace, and the gas for killing are two separate things.

 

But it’s this imagination, the merging of these two horrific things, that gives black propaganda a perfect opportunity—proving that many of these German camps had crematoria, and therefore mass murder must have been committed there. And this is just fallacious reasoning, but it was an opportunity that the victorious powers seized and they had the total power to ram this narrative down the throat of the general public. And they succeeded with it.

 

Kenny Ko: Right.

 

And another opinion I wanted of yours is, of course, Treblinka, which I think is one of the more interesting ones due to the revisions and everything that were done once the forensic studies and stuff started to happen. I just wanted your overall input on Treblinka as well.

 

[1:15:00]

 

Germar Rudolf: Treblinka is one of the three camps—in the more narrow sense—said to have been pure extermination camps, close to the demarcation line that separated the German-occupied area of Poland from what the Soviet Union gobbled up after the division in ’39 and which used to be Soviet up to 1921. Poland had just gained them— border stations, if you wish.

 

The revisionist take is that they were transit camps for jews who were sent east. Now the mainstream said they were pure extermination camps. Jews were sent there just to be killed in gas chambers. And as I just mentioned, the initial story for Treblinka was actually steam. That was the predominant claim. How murder was, …

 

Kenny Ko: I thought it was diesel—or was it steam?

 

Germar Rudolf: Diesel is the narrative that became predominant starting in ’46,’47. Back during the war it was steam. There’s an official government report of the Polish government in exile from 15th of November 1942 that explicitly says it was steam. Very detailed, describing the camp and anything that’s going on—allegedly based on witness accounts. So it’s so detailed that it is either a fictitious story made up well, or it had a lot of witness claims to it. Be that as it may, steam was the thing. And the steam is also how it was entered at the International Military Tribunal there. Well, there’s a little bit of— they introduced two. One of them said steam and the other one said:

 

“Well, steam, vacuum, electrocution, gas, whatever.”

 

So as I mentioned, anything goes. The shift to engine exhaust gas happened after the war and it was kind of ongoing when the International Military Tribunal was unfolding. It didn’t find entrance really in the documentation there. But you find it, as I mentioned, in the interrogation protocols that were going on, particularly in Poland. And one key event was a German high-ranking official—high-ranking not by military grade, but by the importance in the context of what we’re talking about—that’s Kurt Gerstein. He has been an officer in charge of the SS Office for Hygienic Technologies and in particular there for disinfestation. He was the man who was overseeing the delivery of gas chambers and Zyklon B and other disinfestants to the various camps—gas chambers in terms of fumigation chambers.

 

So at the end of the war, when the gas chamber propaganda took off and Zyklon B appeared as a mass murder instrument at the Majdanek and Auschwitz camps—Majdanek already in July 1944; it was the first camp to be overrun by the Soviets— and then in January in Auschwitz as well—January ’45—Gerstein was sitting in his office in Berlin and knew that he’s toast! Because he is the one who was in charge of supplying all these camps with the technical means and the disinfestants and the Zyklon B to do whatever they have been doing. So he eventually flees from Berlin, surrenders in his hometown in southwest Germany to the French authorities, and writes a report where it says:

 

“Well, yes, I have been in charge of that Zyklon B. And I was actually ordered to drive to one of these camps—to Treblinka—to change the murder method from diesel engine exhaust to Zyklon B. And I didn’t do it because I convinced the guy that, keep your diesel, Zyklon B is no good. And he kind of destroyed it.”

 

Now why did he do that? He had to depict himself to the authorities as a secret resistor, who would actually destroy the Zyklon B and would make sure that the Zyklon B never reaches the camp—and his account is full of it—that he actually intercepted and made sure that it disappears and that it doesn’t get used and that it gets used for disinfestation at a different place after all.

 

So it was an attempt for him, because on the scale of evil of the Third Reich depicted by the mainstream, you have of course Adolf Hitler, Himmler and so forth. And then you have Adolf Eichmann who deployed all the people to the camp. You have Kurt Gerstein who supplied them with this poison gas and the technical means for applying the poison gas. And then you have the local camp commander. So Kurt Gerstein should have been right up there with Adolf Eichmann—and he knew it.

 

So he makes up this story:

 

“Oh, Zyklon B, I was resisting, I was making sure it doesn’t get there. And instead this stuff actually wasn’t happening with Zyklon B. It was diesel engines. So Zyklon B wasn’t even used. And I made sure the switch to Zyklon B didn’t happen!”

 

A big lie! Mainstream historians nowadays have completely discredited him. The testimonies he made are full of complete absurdities and insanities and historical lies!

 

What has been found out is that he actually embezzled, in today’s money, worth more than $100,000 of funding for Zyklon B purchases and had made a luxurious life during the war for himself. Had people go to Paris, get exotic food items and so forth. And he even stole a painting from a jewish estate that was found in his estate later. So he was corrupt, he was a thief, and he knew he’s on the chopping block and he made up this wild story.

 

Now this wild story he tells to the French authorities; the French authorities wrap it up, they interrogate him and they figure out that he’s probably lying because the stuff he’s saying makes no sense. But they convey this message:

 

“Oh, diesel exhaust is said to have happened. We have this high-ranking, top-notch Nazi official who tells us all about how this is supposed to have happened!”

 

And they communicate that to the Poles and in late 1945 send the whole set of documents to the Polish authorities. And that’s when you see the Polish authorities suddenly switching from electrocution, from steam, from vacuum and all the rest to diesel engine—or engine exhaust. And they throw out everything else and rewrite—1946,’47—the stories of Sobibor, Treblinka and Belzec. They don’t even commit necessarily to diesel, but definitely engine exhaust. In decades thereafter, mainstream historians, when it comes to Belzec – and based on Gerstein – and Treblinka, they say then:

 

“Okay, it was diesel exhaust!”

 

Now diesel exhaust doesn’t have the toxicity needed to commit that kind of mass murder. Diesel engines run on a vast excess of oxygen and so oxygen comes out the tailpipe too, and very little carbon monoxide, which is the lethal part. Tests made with small mammals show that it takes many hours—under worst-case scenario conditions—to kill those little mammals. Humans are usually a little bit less susceptible to this kind of toxin, so it takes even longer. So we’re talking about many, many hours that it would have taken.

 

[1:21:24]

 

 

German engineers knew engines! If you look at who has invented all these engines, you find out the Germans were the center of engine invention. They knew the toxicology and they had even better methods at hand. They had the producer gas generators, because they were cut off from petroleum supplies during the war. Mainly they switched their truck fleet, their buses and even some tanks over to producer gas, which is basically: You take coal, coke or wood and restrict the oxygen supply and make it a little wet. Then it burns incompletely and the gas that comes out is very rich in carbon monoxide, which you then can funnel into the engine and use as fuel. They had hundreds of thousands of them. And the top-notch officials of the Third Reich—Hitler, Himmler, Heydrich—everyone was promoting it to get out from underneath the dependency on liquid petroleum products.

 

And German engineers knew about this technology. It is so rich in carbon monoxide, up to 30% and more, that it’s very quickly lethal. It was everywhere, mass-produced, deployed everywhere, particularly in the transport region. So jews were transported—probably some of them—in vehicles with this kind of producer gas technology. There’s no record anywhere that anyone was ever murdered with this. It was well known. Even this technology was used at times before the invention of Zyklon B to kill vermin! Insects are not susceptible to it. It works only for mammals, but to kill mice and rats. So, known that it is a good method to kill—never used.

 

So the Germans had that and then they are supposed to have settled for the worst possible solution—that doesn’t work: Diesel! No, didn’t happen. In the meantime, mainstream historians have shifted the goalposts again. First they were at steam, then they moved on to diesel. Now they figured out—after the research we’ve done and pointed it out for decades—diesel doesn’t work:

 

“Okay, it wasn’t diesel; it was gasoline engines!”

 

So how long does it take for people to stop believing these mainstream historians if they keep shifting the goalposts, here as well? So much about the technological background. The forensic investigations that were conducted over the years—the Soviets did one, and the Poles after the war,’45,’46. The Poles were doing some excavations but didn’t find the mass graves or leftovers of mass graves that witnesses claimed were there. Then we had a preliminary, somewhat superficial, ground-penetrating radar analysis by an Australian engineer back in 1999, and he’s never published his research because he got cold feet with this.

 

And then we had a British team of forensic archaeologists starting research in 2011—2011, 2012, if I’m not mistaken. And they had preliminary conclusions published in a series of BBC interviews and then in a documentary that they made about Treblinka. But the scientific publication of the actual research results has never been released to this day. And we suspect the reason for that is that they didn’t find what they’re supposed to have found.

 

The claim is that in Treblinka at least 700,000 victims were initially buried in mass graves. And you can roughly calculate what kind of earth volume you need to bury that many people. You can have a theoretical maximum of, say, 10 people per cubic meter.

 

But more realistically, if you’re looking at all the mass graves that have ever been disinterred—where victims of National Socialist massacres have been found, or even other circumstances like the Katyn massacre, like mass graves in Bergen-Belsen that the British dug at the end of the war, or mass graves in Hamburg from the Allied air raids—the 40,000 German civilians that died there were put to rest—so we know roughly what kind of a density these mass graves have. And you don’t get up to 10 per cubic meter; it’s lower than that.

 

But even if you were to do that, the amount of disturbed soil that the ground-penetrating radar research found by this British team doesn’t come anywhere close to what should have been found—certainly in the order of magnitude of 10 or 20% or so. I don’t remember exactly the number. But anyway—way too little! And we are talking about just indications of disturbed ground—that doesn’t mean there were mass graves. Because we know the Soviets did excavations in the area and they didn’t find any. No. So did the Poles—and they didn’t find anything. So they definitely disturbed the soil on a massive scale with these excavations they did. But these are not mass graves.

 

And then the civilian population in the area did wild diggings after the war because there was the rumor running around that the jews had left treasures behind. Whatever jewelry or money they were taking with them—some of it fell on the ground, was buried secretly, or whatever. So civilians were digging up the whole place. There’s actually a Polish report that describes the area kind of like a moonscape with craters. Evidently Soviet soldiers had joined in the frenzy of trying to discover jewish gold by using munitions they had and blowing some artillery shells or whatever to quickly, quote-unquote, “excavate” areas. So there were craters of ordnance that had exploded. Some of it has exposed a few bones here and there, but not to the degree that you would expect for a massacre of that size.

 

But anyway, all these disturbances of the soils—some of them may intersect with actual former mass graves, who knows? But some of them may not so we don’t really know from ground-penetrating radar what we are looking at. You would have to actually do a whole-scale excavation to figure out what is there.

 

Now, as I mentioned earlier, jewish authorities disagree with the disturbance of jewish graves. So they prevent anyone from looking.

 

Kenny Ko: Did they lay pave stones or something over the area of Treblinka?

 

[1:27:11]

 

Germar Rudolf: Yes, I think in the 1960s they paved over a large area where it is said to have happened—whatever that is—with concrete. And they have a lot of rocks erected there as monuments. So ground-penetrating radar, depending on the technology, can look through that.

 

And it’s also not completely covered, so there are areas where it’s not so that wouldn’t completely prevent you. It makes it a little bit more difficult, but it does not completely prevent you from using that technology.

 

Similar in Belzec, however—there they did do core drillings. So it shows you if there’s a will you can do more than just non-invasive methods. You can use mildly invasive methods. And the jews agreed to that they found there as well disturbed ground—way less than is needed, even under the worst-case scenario. So if the jews that were deported—of which we know; we have the records— so and so many jews were deported to these camps—not all of them, only a minority of them in the worst-case scenario—can have ended up in the ground there, according to the data we have for now.

 

Where did the rest go? We know the claims—how the murder is supposed to have happened—can’t work. We know that the claims of how the traces of the mass murder were made to disappear—all those mass graves are said to have been excavated eventually, in the course of mainly 1943, and burned on huge pyres. The claims made there are technically unfeasible for open-Air incinerations. The amount of wood and labor force and space that would have been needed—and time that would have been needed for that makes it completely incompatible with the claims.

 

So this is just a convenient and very anti-scientific way of explaining why the evidence isn’t there:

 

“Oh, because the evidence was destroyed!”

 

The absence of evidence doesn’t prove what you’re claiming. And when you are adding another claim on top of it, which you can’t prove either—that something was destroyed:

 

“I don’t have evidence you killed my wife.”

 

“Where’s your evidence?”

 

“You destroyed the evidence. So you have committed two crimes—you killed my wife and you destroyed the evidence.”

 

So you have to go to jail two times. That’s the way the argument goes here. And that’s ridiculous! With that kind of attitude you can prove every crime.

 

Kenny Ko: Right.

 

Germar Rudolf: That’s not the way it works. That’s not how science works. That’s not how law should work. Which isn’t to say that criminals do not try, and sometimes succeed to some degree or another, to actually make traces of their crimes disappear. Of course it does happen, but that doesn’t alleviate you from the duty to prove that something like that did happen.

 

And by the way, if you have 700,000 corpses in the ground and you have no technical means other than wooden logs and a lighter to make them disappear—they don’t disappear tracelessly. There’s just no way in heaven! So things need to be there! Will anyone ever look, with the attitude societies have now? No! By the time that may have changed—down the road in decades or centuries to come—I don’t know whether it will still have any way of succeeding.

 

But then again, technology—hundreds of years down the road, who knows. Forensic archaeology can find out amazing things about human settlements and human graves that are thousands or even tens of thousands of years old. So who knows what we can find out in future.

 

So there’s a lot of things to be done that mainstream doesn’t want to do.

 

Actually, the lead scientist who did the British archaeological research in Treblinka is going to have a lecture at the US Holocaust Memorial Museum upcoming in a few weeks, I think. And we guys are actually considering going there—but a little bit of a logistical challenge, and it’s a risk because if you start asking inconvenient questions, you don’t know what happens, because you’re going into the midst of people who get very angry. If you challenge—just challenge. Not even say:

 

“Well, it’s wrong.”

 

Just ask inconvenient questions. Then all kinds of shit can hit the fan.

 

So let’s see whether that’s something we can pull off.

 

Kenny Ko: Right.

 

[1:30:56]

 

 

Germar Rudolf: So this is Treblinka. The Achilles’ heel of Holocaust skeptics in this regard is, of course, we don’t— we know that many of them can’t possibly have ended up in the ground, and they can’t have been made to disappear with these fires either. So where are they? Where’s our answer to the question—where are they? We do have anecdotal evidence of people who have claimed—witnesses during the projects launched in the 1980s to get as many survivor testimonies on tape, on record—quite a few witnesses have testified that their trains full of jews were transited through Treblinka, through Sobibor, through Belzec. We have actually a paper about that— it kind of goes through them and lists how many we have—that shows yes, these camps did operate as transit camps. That doesn’t mean they operated only as transit camps, but they definitely did serve to some degree and had the ability to serve that purpose, because there are plenty of witnesses that say:

 

“We were transited through there.”

 

Now, unfortunately, I have experience with getting transited through situations like that, because when I was in Germany spending time, I was several times relocated to different prisons. And sometimes you get through the transit section of another prison on the way to your final destination.

 

Kenny Ko: Right.

 

Germar Rudolf: And I know from experience, I remember having been through a transit camp, but I can’t remember the name of it because you’re there only for a few hours, a few days, depending. In my case, it was even six days. Actually, it was long.

 

In the case of Bełżec/Treblinka, people say they were there only a few hours, or a day or so. why would you remember the name? How likely is it that a train full of 5,000 people or 10,000 or 1,000 people—whatever the train may have had, how many people in it that have been in this place that’s completely remote, unknown back then, completely unknown name of a little, tiny settlement, not even a village in the deep backwoods of Eastern Poland—why would you remember that name? So that some of these witnesses do remember. And they were not alone. They were not brought there individually in a car. No, they were in a train full of people who were all transited through there.

 

So you can extrapolate—if you find 10 witnesses who say that, 100 may have forgotten the name and will never have thought of it. And maybe 10,000 never testified anywhere.

 

Kenny Ko: Very interesting.

 

Germar Rudolf: And then we have, of course, records of resettlement actually having happened. That is the official narrative that you find in the documentation—resettling the jews to the east—because Germany thought they were having the Soviet Union close to its collapse after the ’41 onslaught, and then in ’42—which we’re retreating still deep—the whole thing turned around only in Stalingrad, 1942, 1943.

 

Kenny Ko: I think that was the turning point in the war.

 

Germar Rudolf: Right. That’s when the Germans knew it’s not working. And that’s when all these camps were shut down—no transit anymore.

 

So you have a historical coincidence there. Yeah, coincidence that points to—yeah, in late ’41 and throughout ’42, they thought they can ship those jews to the east, have them work there, have them resettle there, because they’re going to control the area. The Soviet Union is going to collapse. We’re going to reign until the Bering Strait. That didn’t happen.

 

And then in late ’42, early ’43, when things were clear, these camps all got shut down.

 

So what happened to the jews that were resettled to the east? I’m sure we have a number of documents saying as soon as they get unloaded, the local German authorities—they can’t handle them. They are stretched thin with all the limited resources they have in a war. We have no camps, we have no nothing here. These jews, they run all over the place. They run into the woods. So they join the partisans right away. And then we have a major partisan problem. They are fighting us.

 

So one of these local commanders says:

 

“If you don’t announce ahead that we’re going to have these jews coming and if you don’t give us the means to actually accommodate them somewhere, the next train that comes unannounced, we’re just going to shoot all these people. Because if we don’t, they join the partisans right away and then they are going to come back and kill us!”

 

So he was ordered to stop this nonsense and to find accommodations for them and make sure that they all get settled there. That’s what was going on. Massacres did happen in this situation of local commanders saying:

 

“I can’t handle these jews. What are you guys doing? They are joining the partisans!”

 

And so some of them got killed ahead of time. Some of them joined the partisans, got killed in that process. Some of them survived. There’s actually one report saying that the Russians, at the end of the war—the Soviets—overran a camp where Germans had concentrated many of them, and the Soviets ran into them. There were jews that had been deported from Western Europe. So there they were. And that was only one case that was reported. Maybe there were more. So some of them got overrun by the Soviets. They may or may not have let them pass.

 

The number of people in Europe who were displaced persons—that includes jews, but not just jews. Eastern Europeans were fleeing from the Red Army advancing. The Germans were being ethnically cleansed all over the place. End-of-war and post-war Europe was a mess where people by the millions were moving Left and Right. How many jews who had been pushed this way and that ended up in displaced person camps that eventually led to them immigrating to Israel—what was to become Israel—obviously a lot of them to the United States, which stopped counting jews or registering the religious affiliation of people somewhere in the early stages of the war actually— and to other countries—is not 100% recorded. So there are a number of fates that these people will have had.

 

And another nasty one could be that a lot of these jews, if they were fit to work, were made to work for fortifications, improving infrastructure. You see that in Ukraine now in the war—each fall and spring they have a mud problem. And they had that back in the Second World War too. The roads back there were in worse shape.

 

So they had a lot of these jewish labor columns improve the roads so that the German supply runs could actually go to the front. And these jews, if they were ever overrun by the Red Army, had collaborated with the Germans—with the German war effort. Stalin didn’t have any mercy for these people. They didn’t really do it voluntarily for the Germans and were forced laborers. But Stalin didn’t give a rat’s arse! If you surrender as a Soviet soldier and become a prisoner of war, Stalin would kill you! A similar situation you have actually right now with what’s going on in Ukraine.

 

And if you are a civilian, you surrender to the German authorities and you work for them rather than fight to your death, then I’m going to kill you! So yeah, people were deported to Siberia. Even if they were concentration camp inmates, forced laborers whatsoever—not all of them, but I’m sure some of them were.

 

So there’s a whole broad variety of things that can have happened to these people. Some of them led to their death, some of them led to them immigrating and being just fine. So we will, at the end of the day—with history being obscured by the Eastern Bloc having been obscured for 40 years, and the Western powers not having too much of an interest in clarifying this issue, of diversifying historical data, historical viewpoints, historical interpretations; and then of course keeping that narrative as it is because it’s supportive of the post-war order and the powers, the pecking order, so to say—the chances of us ever finding out exactly what happened to these people will not be improving.

 

And Russia nowadays—after the collapse of the Soviet Union—they haven’t been cooperative either. Initially, yes, we could actually get access. A lot of the material that we’ve published is based on documentary resources that we found in archives that had been hidden from Western researchers up to the collapse of the Soviet Union.

 

But then, mainly on pressure of the German government, these Eastern archives closed their Gates again to independent researchers. You now need university or government accreditation before they let you in. So much about freedom of science and scholarship.

 

So that’s where we are with this. Is that a good answer for your Treblinka question?

 

[1:38:50]

 

Kenny Ko: Those were great answers all around, I must say.

 

And actually we just hit around the two-hour mark. I would definitely be down to do a part 2 diving into some more with you, without a doubt. Before we wrap up, I also of course want to thank you, Germar, for not only standing up and doing this for the masses and the future generations to get this information—continuing down that journey and seeking the truth! Because I think it is a core fundamental part, like you said, with history, to learn lessons. And if we don’t have the history correct, how are we supposed to learn lessons moving forward?

 

So is there anything you want to close with? I know you already said, of course, where people can find a lot of your writings and of course the free and then also the purchasable versions. But any social medias or anything you would like to tell the people?

 

Germar Rudolf: Well, the easy way, if you want to get in touch with me or follow me—I have it here on the screen. My website, my personal website, is GermarRudolf.com. It also has links there to all the things that I mentioned: To the Holocaust Handbooks, the encyclopedia. We have a Holocaust Academy where we teach the ropes of Holocaust skepticism. And we have actually a HoloCast—a podcast—where I elaborate on these things. The Holocaust 101 from a skeptical point of view, and 102, and the rest of it. Links to the free speech lobby group that I’m involved in, the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust—CODOH.com. You’ll find links there to that, to our stores where you can purchase the books, and social media links you can find on that website too. My channel on X, which is basically what I focus on. The rest is too much censorious and you get thrown out.

 

Kenny Ko: I get that. Blanket censorship is a little out of control! But you guys that are watching, make sure to leave a like on the video. Go show him some support for what he has been through for all of us to obtain this knowledge and understanding and evidence, and through the forensic studies. Leave in the comments down below what you guys think of all of this, or any future topics—if we do a part two—that you guys would like Germar to discuss or cover for you.

 

And once again, Germar, thank you once again for your time. I appreciate you sitting down and having this conversation with me.

 

Germar Rudolf: Yeah, much appreciated.

 

Kenny Ko: Of course. Have a good one.

 

Germar Rudolf: You too.

 

Kenny Ko: Awesome! All right, here—I’ll stop the recording.

 

 

[1:40:59]

 

 

END

top

 

 

 

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

 

Rumble Comments

top

(Comments as of 5/8/2026 = )

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

See Also

top

 

 

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

Mark Collett: Hello everybody, and welcome to tonight’s special stream. We are live tonight on Odysee, Rumble, DLive and Entropy. Please do share the links because we’ve got a very special guest here tonight that I’ll be introducing shortly. It is of course, Germar Rudolf. And before we do that, I’m going to give you a couple of updates.

 

Now, as I said, this is a very important stream. It’s because we’re introducing a special event that Germar Rudolf is hosting called, The Holocaust Summit. And this event is something that hopefully will be very big. And this is basically a bit of an advert for the event, a bit of a discussion about how it came about, but also a discussion about who’s trying to stop it!

 

So we’re going to go through all those things and many more tonight and at the end you’ll have a chance to ask questions.

 

Now, if you support my work, if you like what I do, please share the stream.

 

But also if you support my work and like what I do, you can give a donation, you can donate through Rumble, you can donate through Entropy. Anything donated throughout the show will be read out live on the show and any questions will be put directly to Germar Rudolf.

 

So if you ask me a question or pay for a question via a Superchat, I will read it out after the initial presentation and we will answer your questions. All donations are gratefully received. And as I always say, if everyone gave a small amount, $3, $5, $10, that would make a great, great difference. Some of my streams in the past few months have been seen by upwards of 75,000 people. Imagine if everyone had just given $3, what we would be able to do with that money would be almost limitless at that point. But everyone would barely notice that money leaving their account because it’s probably the price of an energy drink, probably less than a coffee house coffee, certainly less than the price of a McDonald’s double cheeseburger these days.

 

So if you can afford something, please do consider donating. You can also donate by crypto-currency. All the crypto links, as always, are in the description below and you can email me at mark@thefallofwesternman.com. And many of you will be saying:

 

“Well, how can I get in touch with Germar?”

 

And this is obviously all about Germar. You can get in touch with Germar via the Show Notes. The Show Notes have the link to his website about this very event. So you can find him there. You can also find him on Telegram.

 

So thank you so much to anyone who does donate in advance. And please do consider supporting Germar’s event, because that’s what this is all about.

 

Now, obviously, Germar is the special guest here tonight, and I did a special show with him a while back. It was an excellent show, and his ability to present his evidence and to tell his story is almost unrivalled! I couldn’t believe it! I asked one question and Germar sort of spoke very eloquently for about 58 minutes, at which point we went to Questions and Answers. It was sort of the least work I had to do ever in a show! I didn’t need to interrupt. I didn’t need to ask him any additional questions. He just has this skill of being able to tell his story in a timely way and weave it all together almost perfectly in the allotted space that we had on the show. And after doing that show with him, I was sort of really happy with the way it turned out. I was really happy with the reception, Germar got from my audience, and I really did want to have him back on.

 

So when he contacted me and told me he was doing this conference, this Summit, I was very happy to promote it. And I asked him:

 

“So, hey, sort of, what can I do to help you?”

 

He said:

 

“Well I could always come on the show.”

 

So I thought:

 

“Well, what better way to push this event than invite him back on and spend sort of 45 minutes to an hour talking to him about this event and also just having a general catch up.”

 

Because the last show, as I said, it was so good and everyone appreciated it so much. I did want to get him back on eventually anyway, so this is a perfect time.

 

Germar, you have been a very busy man since we last spoke. How have you been? And what sort of led up to you wanting to do this event? Because you have an excellent website, you have a number of really good books, you’ve been busy with other content creators. I know that you went on Unity News Network and you’ve had sort of a little flurry of appearances, but if you want to get people up to date with what you’ve been up to and when, what sort of inspired you to decide to put on this conference, please tell us all about it.

 

[04:45]

 

Germar Rudolf: Yeah, well, thank you.

 

First of all, thank you for having me on the show again. A short remark. If people want to get in touch with me personally, learn more about me, how they can support me if they are so inclined, the easy way is just go to my personal website, which is Germarrudolf.com. So you see my name there on the screen. Just put this together without a blank and a dot com at the end, and you’re on my personal website and you can browse it there.

 

Now, as to what I’ve been up to over the past year, the main work that I’ve been focusing on was getting the Holocaust Encyclopedia, the English edition of which had appeared in late 2023, out in several other languages. The Spanish and French are out. The Spanish came out in I think it was maybe of last year. And the French we got out, I think it was in November. So we are up now to four languages. English, German, which was done by a different company. It was not in my ballpark. But the French and the Spanish edition, and that’s a lot of work. I mean, writing an encyclopedia is one thing, then AI helps you translate. But at the end you have to walk through it. My Spanish and French is good enough. I could do most of the proofing and editing myself. And then came the big one that we’re preparing right now! It’s an Arabic edition.

 

So that’s like proofing a pot full of spaghetti, because that’s how that language looks like to me. [chuckling] No clue about it! But I have professionals working on it.

 

And so this is making good progress and hopefully within a few months that will hit the mark and we’ll see how that’s going to be received. What kind of ripples that we’ll have, if any. So that’s on that side.

 

Now coming to the actual event for which we have come together today. Holocaust sceptics have been organising conferences since the late 1970s. And the early, …

 

Mark Collett: Okay, I just ask a quick question before you go into this?

 

You mentioned that the books are available in French and Spanish, but aren’t the Holocaust sort of revisionism laws or laws and against revisionist literature in France?

 

Germar Rudolf: So what?

 

Mark Collett: I was just asking about sort of the legality of the sales. Really, I was just, … What you might have to overcome in that case.

 

Germar Rudolf: Yes, if I have the intention to abide by unjust and illegitimate laws that violate United Nations Charter of Human Rights, I wouldn’t have gotten into the topic to begin with. So I don’t give a rat’s arse about any dictatorship passing laws, prescribing the writing of history at government gunpoints. This is something that doesn’t go down well with me.

 

Now, when it comes to printing and publishing the book, that’s an international network and I’m not going to expose here or reveal here what kind of logistics we use. But it basically gets lost in the massive mail stream that goes into and out of every country every day. So we haven’t had any interference, be it getting literature, English literature, or French, also to Canada, to France, to, … You name the countries. If we had them by the bag or by the truck load going into the country that would be selectively subject to border controls, that would be a problem.

 

But it’s just going individual for every customer into the mail stream. And this just gets lost in the shuffle. So we haven’t encountered any problems yet. So knocking on wood. Fingers crossed. I hope I’m not going to jinx it now.

 

Mark Collett: Yeah, I was just interested about the logistics of these things because there are draconian laws and I think what you’re doing is obviously very brave. And that answer of you’re not going to allow unjust laws to stop you. I think you’re a very courageous man. So sorry for the interjection. Please, please continue.

 

Germar Rudolf: That’s quite all right. So back in 1976, the first really scholarly book of Holocaust scepticism was published. That was Arthur Butz’s hoax of the 20th century. The first edition of which actually was published by Historical Review Press, kind of a small outlet that was established on occasion of that book appearing down in Brighton by Tony Hancock in the UK, even though the author, of course, is in the United States. That was the launching pad of people getting interested into Holocaust scepticism seriously, but also realizing that this is a serious School of thought that has to be reckoned with. And it led to the formation of the Institute for Historical Review in California. And they did have first conference was in 78 or 79 [1979], I can’t remember, I think it was in 79.*

 

 

[* See: The World’s First Anti-Holocaust Convention-Instauration Dec, 1979

https://katana17.com/2016/09/27/the-worlds-first-anti-holocaust-convention-instauration-dec-1979/.

[In this article, written for the Dec. 1979 edition of the revisionist journal,  Instauration, an interesting account is given of the first ever, “Anti-Holocaust” convention,  with speakers including:  Robert Faurisson from France; John Bennett from Australia; Udo Walendy from Germany; Louis FitzGibbon from Britain; Arthur Butz and James Martin from the US. This was held in Los Angeles and organised by the Institute for Historical Review  —  KATANA.]

 

And they had had subsequently, over the next two decades, conferences almost on a yearly basis, with a few exceptions. And unfortunately they had some internal strife in the mid-1990s, a kind of a schism there that led to internal fighting, unfortunately. That’s something that occurs on occasion. And that led to the whole School of thought and the Institute losing steam. And eventually those conferences petered out in the early 2000s.

 

And there hasn’t been any for the better part of 20 years now. And now I myself participated, since the first conference I attended was in 2000, I think so participated in the last few that happened, until I got arrested and deported back in 2005 and had a hiatus of six years in Germany, well, 44 months of them, full board at government expense. And after I came back to the United States a little bit shell shocked, got my feet wet slowly and eventually got back into the race.

 

But my family situation, I was married to a US citizen and we had a baby. And of course I was deported right out of this family. And she had to raise her daughter the first six years almost by herself. And so she was more traumatized by that event of government persecution. It was eventually decided that they deported me in violation of US law, and I had to litigate but eventually succeeded and came back. And now here I am in the United States, relatively safe from European style thought crime prosecution.

 

But my wife wasn’t happy in me continuing this kind of work, fearing that it would have another negative impact down the road for the family, not just for me.

 

[11:49]

 

So we had an agreement that I could continue my work privately but keep my head down and limit or try to not even at all have any public exposure. That also means I couldn’t do any conferences. I was approached during those years starting 2014, 15, something, that a conference should be held again and I would have been the person to go to with my connections, with my involvement in the various organisations and with my track record of productivity. But I waved it off. I couldn’t have pulled it off logistically back then.

 

A physical conference requires a lot of work of getting the venue, organising food and accommodation for all the people that want to attend and of course for the presenters themselves. And the costs, the overhead costs could be daunting! And it’s not clear that at the end you actually walk away with profit more likely not. Most of all because you always have to have a “Plan B”. The traditional enemies of free speech and freedom of assembly in the past have always tried to shut down events like that. And they most certainly continue doing this to this day. Not just when it comes to Holocaust scepticism, but anything that is considered Right-wing, whatever that be. Even though Holocaust scepticism is neither Right nor Left. It’s about accuracy in history. But it is something that finds interest in the Right-wing spectrum of the political spectrum more prominently than in Left-wing circles or libertarian for that matter.

 

Be that as it may, you have to have a Plan B, a second venue, in case the first bails out under pressure of the usual suspects, you have to quickly be able to switch over. So you always have to pay kind of for both. And if your contracts are not written right, you start paying through the nose. With all these challenges, I said I can’t do it, apart from the agreement I had with my wife.

 

Now Covid hit. With all the negative things there is one upside to Covid and that is that in the meantime everyone is used to and technically capable of attending virtual conferences.

 

So the kind of discussion we have now with a lot of people watching, we can have 10 people discussing something and 10 million people watching. It has become so common due to Covid that this is something that can now be pulled off. The platforms are there are plenty of them and the overhead costs are reduced. People have the software, have the gadgets to participate, to watch it. And they used to it. Particularly the new generation is very comfortable that kind of technology.

 

So last summer a friend and supporter of mine, actually a pair of sisters, approached me and said we need to do something with Gaza brewing there’s an opportunity opening with people opening their mind that who see that the Zionists and the jewish Israelis to a large degree, not all of them, are pushing and committing genocide. The United Nations Commission has officially recognised Israel is committing a genocide in Gaza with the justification that they have to pre-emptively wipe out the Gazans in order to prevent them from committing another holocaust against the jews.

 

So the Holocaust is used as a political weapon to commit mass atrocities, to commit a genocide. That has made people realise that the agendas and the historical narrative pushed by Zionists and it’s not just jewish Zionists, I always say there are more Christian Zionists in the world than they are jewish Zionists, is recognised by people as being illegitimate, as being driven by a Holocaust narrative that is misused for these ends. And they see how the narrative about what happened on October 7th back in when was that? 2023, right? So long ago already, wasn’t quite accurate what Zionist sources told about it either. So there is the distortion and misuse of history for political purposes.

 

And then people are willing with their open mind:

 

“Wait, what’s going on here?”

 

To look back in history and see other cases and then the to look at the big elephant in the room when it comes to historical narratives. And that’s the Holocaust used by pressure groups, not just jewish, not just Zionist ones, to push their agendas.

 

With that said, I couldn’t really bail out anymore. Unfortunately I had gone through a divorce in the meantime. And so my a home still agreement with my no ex-wife was no excuse anymore, that had evaporated. So my family situation also most of my children are now grown up and they’re out of the home. There’s only one left who needs a little bit more of tender loving care still.

 

So that argument is gone. The logistical nightmare of doing physical conferences doesn’t exist when you do a virtual one. And I had agreed:

 

“Okay, let’s do it!”

 

The sisters actually suggested a name, Holocaust Summit.

 

[17:30]

 

So I went online and looked whether the domain name is still there was. HolocaustSummit.com was available. I instantly reserved it and we started contacting people who would be willing to present it. Now the website is up. If we can share that screen with the audience. I’d like to go through a number of things we’ve put up there.

 

So as I mentioned, anyone can go there. Holocaust Summit.com, and it is organised and sponsored by a number of organisations. I’ve actually created a Holocaust Academy roughly a year ago, which I plan on and in the process of developing as a platform to teach sound Holocaust historiography to whoever wants to listen to give an accurate and holistic picture of the evidentiary situation when it comes to this event.

 

One of the first things that we’re now doing as the academy, major things we have already given private lessons, but the website itself is currently under development. So having a curriculum of a college style is somewhat daunting. But I’m working together with a retired Professor of humanities to get this going. And sometime later this year we will have that flying. But it will come now into the open as the organisation that will officially host the Holocaust Summit. So we are going to be independent, we’re going to be fearless, because unfortunately in this area you have to be! And we are not going to be censored if we can help it. And we’re not going to be constrained by politically correct taboos of thinking and asking questions and looking for answers.

 

So we’ll be tackling the most harmful ideology, undermining peace, truth and freedom world-wide. Because the Holocaust is used to trigger wars and genocides. That is used to enact censorship laws that suppress the search, the sharing of truth, and thus is used as a starting point for government to increase censorship measures. It’s easy to get a quote, unquote, “anti-Holocaust denial” law through Parliament.

 

And once the first fortress of freedom has fallen, then censorship like a cancer grows. And we see that in every country in the UK. You know it for yourself, what’s going on in your country. It used to be a stronghold of freedom of speech until they passed the new., … What was in 2002, I think the Public Communications Act. And now it’s completely escalating with the constraints they put on it.

 

So we need to be aware that the Holocaust is at the centre of the orthodox Holocaust narrative and its abuse, its misuse for political purposes, is at the centre of the problem of deteriorating freedom world-wide, or at least in the Western hemisphere.

 

Now we have picked the 27th of January, which, what is today, the 20th? I’m getting flustered here. Third. It’s already the 23rd, so it’s just in four days and next Tuesday should be. We picked that day for a reason. 27th of January 1945 was the day when the Red Army conquered the Auschwitz camp. And I choose that word wisely because the Red Army never “liberated” anyone. So they conquered the camp. And in 2005, if I’m not mistaken, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution declaring that particular day 27 January, International Holocaust Remembrance Day.

 

So the iconic camp of Auschwitz, which is the most known alleged crime scene of what is labelled the Holocaust, Auschwitz is also the reason why we have this day as the international day of commemorating this event. And we want to use that too. Commemorating the truth and the lies, the exaggerations and distortions and the victims of this Holocaust narrative. The Gazans are the most recent, most extreme victims of this narrative. But we will have people present their experience of persecution and prosecution. Victims, martyrs, dissidents thrown into prison or having their livelihood destroyed.

 

So there’s a lot to commemorate and remember for us as well, and we will do that as well.

 

So the event itself will start 9:00 AM Eastern US time, which if I’m not mistaken is 2 clock in the afternoon for the UK and 3 PM for the rest of the most of the, …

 

Mark Collett: I think 7 PM in the UK. 2 PM Eastern is 7 PM in the UK.

 

Germar Rudolf: Yeah, but we started 9 AM so it should be 2 PM

 

Mark Collett: Oh, okay. Sorry.

 

Germar Rudolf: Yeah. We actually may start the stream a little earlier to test things and make things sure that things are running smoothly and make few accommodations and have a few organisational remarks before actually the day picks up with the presentations that we have.

 

Now if you click on the second link there, that CCR list and timeline of presenters that gets everyone down to the actual table where we have the presenters.

 

So this is our day. How we plan on having it unfold. We have the day started out with a contribution that I’m giving. Originally we had hoped actually for Nicholas Kollerstrom to take that spot. He initially had submitted a paper but then he had to retract it because it came under pressure, has been under pressure for a long time. So he wanted to talk about the English eclipse of communications.

 

But anyway, it’s not going to happen. There’s already one casualty of censorship and suppression, which is mounting and increasing in the UK. So I’ve taken that spot. And I take the opportunity because that event, short side note here, that event of course is streamed live. We will have the links on that website where people can reach it. Actually at the top there is already one and we’ll keep that updated.

 

But it’s a Tuesday. Not everyone will be able to sit and watch an event like this all day, on a normal workday. We will of course record it will be posted and people will be able to watch it whenever they please. And we will have it not only on our holocaustsummit.com website, but the company that actually hosts it, as at least the plan, is FTG media.com, and they are an independent platform.

 

So when it comes to them, we will not be de-platformed because it’s owned actually by one of the board members of one of our main sponsors, which is the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust. And he’s on the board there and he has suggested we use that platform so that we can’t be de-platformed.

 

I will be talking about 80 years of Holocaust scepticism, whence we came and where we are. So I give a historical overview since we assume that a lot of people over time, as years go by and these contributions will be accessible, a lot of people will not know much about our School of thought, its history and its views, that an introduction is due. We haven’t had anything like this happen in 20 years.

 

[26:02]

 

So there’s an entire generation that has grown up which needs to be or should be given an introduction of what we are handling and what we’re dealing with here. So I will be talking about the main events and the main achievements of Holocaust scepticism over the past, well, since the end of the war, basically 1946 or 47 when it kind of started. And in the second half I will give a quick rundown giving the most striking, the most convincing arguments why everyone should be sceptical about the mainstream Holocaust narrative, and give resources in that context where people can learn more.

 

So with that, the event kicks off. Every contribution, full contribution will have 45 minutes. I hope everyone stays in that slot, but you know how it goes. There will be a time overrun, possibly. Followed by 15 minutes of question answers. There will be a chat feature, FTG media.com like any other, like Rumble, like YouTube has a chat feature. In order to chat you have to have registered with the platform that doesn’t cost anything. You just submit your email address and get a free account and then you can chat. Now for the question and answer series session at the end, the last quarter hour, people are requested to make a donation in order to submit a question like the Superchat and various other platforms. And in order to do that you have to have a wallet with FTG media and the wallet is just automatically set up. When you get an account, you just have to fill it with some funds, whatever resources you take it from, plastic money or crypto or whatever.

 

So that is the plan. My contribution is followed by a compatriot of yours, James Mosley, who is a Catholic priest from the UK. He has done a number of documentaries on the Holocaust over the past several years. Really good documentaries. And when he was working on his first one, he approached me and asked me a number of questions. So I became his historical advisor, if you wish. Each time he was working on one, he submitted what he was doing and I would make suggestion how to improve it.

 

And he will be presenting what he found about the evidentiary situation in one particular camp that he had investigated and done a documentary on. And that’s Treblinka. Now if you click on James Mawdsley’s name up there in the list that actually will get you to, for every one of the presenters will get you to where there’s a short bio, you can see a portrait and a summary of the presentation. If you scroll a little up or down, you can go back to the list, back to the timetable.

 

So this is James Mawdsley. We have actually grouped the European presenters first. UK comes first. James Mawdsley. Next one is Peter Rushton, also from the UK and he will be talking about also history between dogma and taboo. He talks about the British intelligence communications and interaction with the German intelligence toward the end of the war. Looking for evidence that the Brits were really thinking that the German intelligence community, which was under the rule of Heinrich Himmler, the supposed main architect of the Holocaust, that the British were actually acting and communicating as if they believed that Himmler was really murdering or had already murdered at that point of time six million jews is a very interesting contribution. I’m looking forward to myself the that the title of it, the Dog that Didn’t Bark is already an indication of which direction that will go.

 

We’re having a lunch break after that. It is scheduled to be 2 hours long now I expect some time overruns and maybe stretching into the hour between 12 and 1. But we will have enough time during that break and I have yet to announce it because we just finished up preparing for this. The lunch break will have will see the premiering of a new documentary we have just finished. And this is about an appearance of representatives of the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust in the public arena. And we had a little bit of an impact there and we want to share that with the community. That’s I think a 35 minutes so it will fit in there either way.

 

So in the afternoon the first session is actually shared by three individuals who will be talking about their personal experience getting into Holocaust scepticism, how that happened and then also to what degree they were exposed to persecution, prosecution, ostracism and that kind of stuff. Nathaniel Kapner has been a very active person on social media, on YouTube, and now on other alternative platforms going after self-chosen people and their capers and also critiquing the misuse of history for political purposes.

 

Leo Walls is a bookstore owner in the US who tells his story of how that went when he started offering books that most don’t like.

 

And Georges-Marc Theil is actually a French fellow who has had decades of experiences of exposure to persecution in France.

 

Which leads us then to the next contribution that’s a bigger one. Seasoned revisionist Vincent Reynouard from France has under his belt now already 30 years of activism and I would say historical scepticism in general on the World War II issue, not just the Holocaust. And he has been the main focus as of last two, three years of the French judiciary to lock him away for good. He currently has to deal with seven court cases at once. He will be speaking during his presentation primarily about his experience of the abuse, … No. Not the abuse, the misuse of the law and the judiciary to suppress dissidents, peaceful dissidents on historical issues.

 

[32:54]

 

 

And after that we go into abuse of power and politics based on history. Heinz Bartesch and Andrew Allen will report about their experience with the Office of Special Investigations, that’s the jewish branch of the FBI that was focusing on what they call informally, “Nazi Hunting”. Hunting down immigrants who had some association during the war with what the Axis powers were doing and the OSI was trying to deprive them of their immigration status or even citizenship and deport them to Europe to have them put on show trials there. The biggest case known is probably the case of Ivan Demjanjuk, John Demjanjuk from the 1980s. Bartesch and Allen will actually discuss a different case, that concerns Heinz Bartesch’s father, late father, who the OSI wanted to deport. And they got a bloody nose because they didn’t reckon with the stiff resistance and skilled defense that Andrew Allen, a lawyer from the San Francisco Bay area, was putting up. They were presenting some insight into how the FBI’s branch, back in the days, it has been disbanded by now, was violating the law, breaking the law left and right and forging evidence and so forth in order to frame immigrants, just to have a heyday for themselves or to push Holocaust propaganda.

 

After that we have retired Professor Dr. David Scrbina, who used to lecture in the humanities and philosophy at Michigan State University, if I’m not mistaken. He will be talking about early mainstream voices of Holocaust scepticism already during the war and right not too long after the war, which shows that back in the days, even mainstream people were sceptical about the narrative being pushed at war’s end.

 

And we wrap up the day making full circle what I started beginning the day, showing where we came from and where we are. Carlo Mattogno, probably the most prolific revisionist scholar and writer that we have, but in my opinion, also the most knowledgeable Holocaust scholar on the planet! The mainstream included! He is. He can’t speak English or understand it well, and he is currently in a besieged situation in Italy where they passed a law in 2016, threatening anyone voicing their dissent on the Holocaust narrative with up to six years in prison. Now they haven’t done anything against him, even though he kept publishing books by the truckload. I think he’s by now more than 50 books published on that topic. But he does that in a very scholarly manner and in a very low profile. So in Italy there are a few, 10 people and maybe buy the books, but they’re kind of shelf warmers. And he wants to keep it that way. He doesn’t want to gain a larger profile. He wants to do his work underneath the radar of public attention in Italy. And therefore he has submitted his paper to me to present it. And I have increased it by my own take of: Where Do We Go from Here? One part of it is what are the White spots on the map of Holocaust historiography, which still need to be investigated, explored. But also what else needs to be done to hand the relay staff over to the next generation. And there are some quite promising prospects when it comes to new people coming on board with new ideas, with the help of new technologies, bringing it to a new level and a different level. So trying to imitate or copy what Carlo Mattogno has done with his massive work is not what’s going to happen. The direction I think will go somewhere completely different. And I will be talking about that and hopefully this is going to happen. And with this I hope we will be closing the day.

 

Now, there’s always a possibility that things don’t run as smoothly as they are listed here. Just today we got information that a powerful group, international group, in the business of suppressing a free speech and freedom of assembly. They call themselves “Opponents Against Racism and Anti-semitism”. But basically what that means is they want to stifle anyone who has an opinion that certain ethnic and religious groups with power and influence, don’t want to hear!

 

So they are working in the background. We know of that and we hope hopefully will be able to prepare for there’s no way of telling from DDoS attacks to trying to get to the backbone provider and what have you. Anything is possible these days to just. And if it takes to turn off the power plant so you don’t have electricity, [chuckling] but that’s what it takes, that’s what they’ll do! So we expect something. They have noticed with the kind of exposure that our Summit has already received beforehand that we are there, what we’re doing and that we are reaching out and having a ripple effect and they don’t like it!

 

Now the kind of presentation that I’m giving here right now, I’ve done a number of them. If you scroll up on the screen here slowly, you can actually see listed on the right-hand side a number of presentations linked to of other platforms where I have given an introduction to this event. So if anyone is interested in listening to those, you just click on the image and go to the respective platform which is usually Rumble or Bitchute where this is posted. And because of this, I think, and you helping out now too, this event hopefully is going to be a success. It promises to be a success for us, and it threatens to become one for those who don’t want our voices to be heard.

 

[39:37]

 

So there is going to be in the background the usual electronic warfare from the traditional enemies of free speech, to be expected, and we will see how that goes.

 

This is by and large my narrative now we are here right on the screen where the organisation of that event is shown. We actually, when we submitted to people who were potentially able to give presentations, the invitation to do so, we said we basically accept papers on three main topics.

 

The first is Holocaust in History, Taboo Between Dogma and Descent. It just talks about new historical findings and insights and interpretations on the event itself. The next one is Holocaust and Politics History as a Weapon. And I mentioned we have one contribution in this regard which will discuss the weaponisation of immigration law against immigrants in order to get propaganda campaigns out of it. And the last one is Holocaust and Human Rights History as a Muzzle, Holocaust Used to Push Censorship. And we have a number of presenters as mentioned who will discuss their very private experience of censorship.

 

So it should all be civilised and decent and for no one to get overly excited about in either direction. But of course certain groups get extremely excited if they fear that voices be heard that can disrupt their main source of power and influence. And there’s a lot at stake for them and they will go to extremes if need be to shut us down. We’ll see who at the end will have the upper hand.

 

Mark Collett: So are you expecting the usual sort of suspects to try and put a stop to this? Have you had anybody threaten your platform or have you had any threats in the run up to this or any attempts to stop this already?

 

Germar Rudolf: Yes, yes! We just today we got information that as I mentioned, you can have your own platform which is a computer program, but it has to run at the end of the day. It has to run on a server and has to have the connection to the backbone with the Internet cables with enough bandwidth. And usually you have some company providing services from the telecommunications company that hooks you up to what we call today the Internet, the physical Internet, to companies who do server co-location or dedicated server renting. And along that line I’m not quite sure what it was and I wouldn’t necessarily want to reveal it either. We already had approaches from certain quarters of pressure groups to shut down any link in that chain that would get our voice from where we sit to the Internet to the world. So that’s going on in the background and we have to see how that goes. Nothing has been shut down yet, but they’re trying.

 

Mark Collett: And when you kick this off, what sort of attendance are you expecting?

 

Germar Rudolf: Well, the Holocaust Summit website itself, HolocaustSummit.com if you go to the top, you actually see a link there where people can jump to the sign up form and just submit their email address so that they can stay informed if there are any sudden changes in the timeline in whatever is going to happen. Because we never know. If we go by that the last time I checked and that’s a week ago, that’s not quite accurate. We had submitted 300 emails through that. But I would expect these are only the hardcore ones who are willing to share their email. And the other, there’s not really a need if you just keep to the website. Go to the website and look up what the link is to the actual event and we will have it posted on other websites as well. You don’t have to identify yourself. So I would assume that the vast majority will not identify themselves even with an anonymous email.

 

So we need to see how it goes. I don’t know. Sign up has really accelerated with my frequent experience appearances on shows like yours over the past two weeks. And I would assume by now we have probably harvested several hundred more. But there’s no way of telling, as I mentioned, how many people who, how many of those who will attend will actually have submitted their email address. I would assume it’s a minority.

 

So hopefully we are going to have several thousand which will most certainly exceed, far exceed the range we could have had in the past with physical conferences, which were limited to a few hundred.

 

And of course then we have it not just streamed, but we have it posted. So on the usual platforms that will reach many, many more thousands, ten thousands in days, weeks, a month and years to come.

 

Mark Collett: And bearing in mind you said you are going to be doing donations and questions and answers on the day, sort of how do you expect or is there a way that people can sort of sponsor you in advance?

 

So obviously these events, they take a lot of time and effort to put together. I know it’s not a physical event and I know you’re not paying people to be there, but sort of, is there a way that people can actually sponsor the event and make donations in advance to help you guys with your infrastructure and to make sure the event goes smoothly?

 

[46:00]

 

Germar Rudolf: Absolutely! The HolocaustSummit.com website itself, if you were to go there and you go to the very end of the very bottom of the page, it shows the logos of the two companies who are the main sponsors and have officially declared themselves to be sponsors. You know, most actually want to stay anonymous. But there’s also a link that simply says, “Become an AMREC Holocaust Summit sponsor today”, which gets you to the shop of our Holocaust Academy where you can buy sponsorship packages and that actually has several tiers of whatever you want to invest in it. This would be the way to go. So holocaustsummit.com at the very bottom of the page, that’s where you could chip in to cover any costs. Most of us are actually working for free right now and there’s no payment. And FTG Media.com is a sponsor itself and their way of sponsoring is by giving us access to the platform free of charge. We don’t know what happens if, excuse my French, shit hit the fan with all kinds of attempts to shut us down and then we have to come to some more expensive ad hoc solutions to circumvent these things. There’s no way of telling right now!

 

Mark Collett: And one final question. So with it being on a Tuesday, it’s going to be difficult for some people to attend. Obviously it looks like it’s going to be a fascinating day and your lineup is an extremely strong lineup. And it’s rare to have a conference that is that well packed with guests, to start at 9 AM and go all the way through to 6 PM. It’s a big event. So where will this be posted for Replay? Is this going to be up on Odysee? What sort of places will it be available on replay?

 

And as a final sort of additional question, usually with conferences there are some kind of sort of, I don’t know, maybe a brochure, or some kind of physical keepsakes available. Is there any merchandise that people can purchase as well to support the event? So sort of two questions. There will there be sort of a full re-upload of everything? And is the like to commemorate this, any kind of physical merchandise that supporters could also purchase?

 

Germar Rudolf: Yeah. So to the first question, once the event is over, it’s getting archived on our own website. HolocaustSummit.com will be moved to a folder 2026, and we will have there with posters and a short description, all the contributions listed. You click on it and you will probably have several options. They will be on Rumble and Bitshute and Odysee, and you can pick which platform you want to watch it on. We are probably not going to strain our own server because those platforms are good enough.

 

So this will all be available and the link to that archive will then be of course on the front page, on the home page, prominently displayed. When it comes to merchandise, we just started developing that and if I am not mistaken, … Let me have a quick look where we are with this.

 

The only company right now that actually has a merch contract is Armreg and we are developing, … Now if you were to go to armreg.co.uk as you know, the publishing branch of what we are doing is actually located in the UK. It is located in London. So if you go to armreg.co.uk and share that with the audience or do you want me to share it? Which way is faster?

 

Mark Collett: I’m just doing that myself now.

 

Germar Rudolf: So Armreg.co.uk.

 

Mark Collett: Just bringing that up. There’ll be two seconds. Just give me a couple of seconds just to get that set up. There we go.

 

Germar Rudolf: Okay, now at the top menu you see merch as the third entry. Yeah, click on that’s for merchandise and once that has loaded.

 

Mark Collett: Oh, it has loaded. Sorry, it’s just now I have to share that window as well. Well, just give me a second because it’s a pop out window. So two seconds. It’s weird how that works. Give me a second. Share screen. That’s the one.

 

Germar Rudolf: Yeah, that’s the one, yeah.

 

So if you scroll down a little, we have our various merchandise there’s one for Armreg itself and general stuff and there you see some merchandise. We have a mug and a Tshirt right now that has the announcement of that particular event.

 

Mark Collett: Wonderful.

 

Germar Rudolf: So that’s how to go about it.

 

Now I have still to put that link more prominently on the Holocaust Summit website so people can get there directly. That’s a good point for you to make that and I will make that happen once we’re off here, and I will add that to the site so people can get to the merchandise easily.

 

Mark Collett: Well, thank you so much! We do have some Superchats so I’m just going to bring them up two seconds. We actually have a couple that hung over from the other night, so I’ll deal with them quickly. Covenant Soldier gave $10. Thank you so much! And said:

 

“Love the show with Rob Rondo. Hail the active clubs.”

 

Thank you so much! Flying Dutchman gave $50.

 

Thank you very much. And said:

 

“Catching up. Happy New Year!”

 

Well, thank you my friend. I’ve actually sent you a message today so you can pick that up on Telegram. Thank you very much. Nationless Nationalist gave $3. Thank you so much! And said:

 

“Hope and encouragement to those suffering in silence.”

 

Well, thank you so much! Some Guy 14 gave $10, thank you so much! Said:

 

“Qu huge respect to Mr. Rudolf.”

 

Thank you so much! And Aunt Sally gave $5 and said:

 

“Mark, how likely am I to get my door kicked in for watching this conference?”

 

In the UK you see, one thing I’ll say is like in the UK, if I’m correct, And I’m just getting this sort of as correct as I can. In the UK it isn’t illegal to actually deny the Holocaust or to engage in revisionism, as far as I know.

 

[53:13]

 

However, if you were to do so in a way that was seen as insulting or demeaning to people, it would be. So if you were making jokes or if you were saying things which were couched in the way that was meant to be insulting, that may be illegal.

 

However, if you were doing sort of academic work such as what you do, that would be seen in a different light.

 

So I think in the UK this would be legal, but it would be very hard for anyone to get into trouble for simply watching this at home. Would you agree with that?

 

Germar Rudolf: Absolutely! We have, with all the censorship laws we have not a single case where a country has stooped down to the point where they persecute people for just attending, listening and consuming. Even the countries with the harshest policies when it comes to this. That’s Austria and Germany. You can, for instance, you can buy Holocaust sceptical literature that is not illegal if you buy only one copy for your own use. If the government happens to intercept it, they can still destroy it, but they can’t prosecute you for it. The same with attending a conference like this. It is not an offence in any country of the Western world. And when it comes to the UK, case law says you can contest the mainstream Holocaust narrative until you’re blue in the face. What you cannot do is in that context, disparage victims, survivors, martyrs, whatever. So in any way talking ironically, sarcastically, humourously, or in any way that is considered offending toward the survivors, the victims and so forth.

 

Now the company, as I just mentioned, Armreg.co.uk that has published and republished all this material and before that we were actually in the UK since 1996. I was personally, I lived in the UK until 1999. And I started the whole operation there. And it was called Castle Hill Publishers has gone belly up in late 2023, and then we switched over to Amreg. So just a reorganisation basically. Almost at all times been in the UK except for a stretch of one and a half, two years, and we have never been harassed by anyone. So keeping it scholarly, keeping it matter of factly and civilised, as you should, any discourse anyhow, keeps you safe in the UK for now.

 

Anyone attending, when you are in the chat and you make comments in there that can be considered disparaging to jews in general or survivors or descendants and victims of the National Socialist persecution of the jews. And you do that with an account that for some reason, because you set it up that way, allows the authorities to identify you, which would probably not be smart.

 

If you want to go on FTG media or somewhere else, use an ID that doesn’t allow anyone to identify you. And if an email is required, if you want safety, use a burner email or someone, some email that is not officially traceable to you directly.

 

However, if you abstain from making those kind of comments, which I advise under any circumstances, because nasty language doesn’t reflect good on the community and I’m no fan of it. So if you abstain from these kind of comments, you should be good under any circumstances on any place on this planet.

 

It’s different for our presenters. Some of them come from Europe and as I’ve mentioned, when we’re talking about those coming from France, they’re talking about their persecution. They’re not going to make statements on history themselves because we don’t want to get them in trouble. And if we have the question and answer session, I would like the audience also to abstain from questions that corners those French individuals and putting them on the spot, because they need to fly home and don’t want to be arrested. Not fly home, [chuckling] because they are at home! They don’t want to get arrested the next morning or whenever.

 

Mark Collett: Yeah, and I want to echo that. I mean, look, I believe it’s very important to talk about the kind of things that we’re talking about tonight. I think it’s important that we discuss things like this.

 

But I also think it’s very important to ensure that we do so in a productive and polite manner. Talking about this kind of stuff in a way that is disparaging or rude or ridiculous, it not only opens you up for arrest, which is a ridiculous position to put yourself in, but it also demeans the seriousness of the topic and it takes what we do out of an academic light.

 

Now, I’m not a revisionist. I talk about revisionism. I have revisionist guests on, but I’m generally speaking somebody who talks about demography and jewish or Zionist power and the way that jewish power affects the Western world. They’re the topics that I mainly specialise in. I do speak to revisionists. I’m interested in it. But obviously, if you are going to get involved in this, my suggestion is that you deal with it in an academic way for your own safety.

 

And also so the topic is held in the high regard that it deserves to be held in. If you’re there sort of cracking jokes and sharing memes and trying to be as edgy as possible, kind of undermines what people like Germar are doing. And there’s an awful lot of revisionists who have suffered greatly at the hands of the authorities over the years. And you don’t want to demean their suffering and their sacrifices.

 

We’ve got a five dollar Superchat from Mr. Smalls 14, who, regardless of what I just said, said:

 

“Germar, is it true you tried to sell soap in Sacramento with Pastor Eli?”

 

That’s obviously one of those jokes. You don’t have to answer that if you don’t wish. No.

 

[59:57]

 

Germar Rudolf: Yeah. The UK’s attitude towards Germany is that Germans have no humour. And you need to understand that the chicken has come to roost. The UK, as a winner of the Second World War, has pushed Germany in a situation where Germans can go to prison for jokes. The shortest German joke, do you know what that is?

 

Mark Collett: No, I don’t.

 

Germar Rudolf: The German word for joke is “witz”. Okay. The shortest German joke is “Ausch-witz”.

 

Mark Collett: [uncertain laughter from Mark]

 

Germar Rudolf: That gets you in prison in Germany.

 

Mark Collett: Indeed, indeed.

 

Germar Rudolf: So Germans don’t have humour because they have to watch their back. And they had to watch their backs for centuries. The Nazis didn’t invent book burning and the current government didn’t invent censorship laws. Germany has been under the stranglehold in the medievals of the Holy Inquisition, the worst of all European countries. So it has been bred into the German and out of the Germans to make certain jokes. Jokes live from the tension of putting things together that are not quite acceptable, talking seriously about them. So you package them. And that is exactly the attempt that this fellow has been doing, pushing the envelope into the not quite acceptable. But making this joke.

 

And that has become a crime in Germany and in borderline areas, has always been. And now in the UK, people are getting in trouble for showing sarcasm, irony and so forth in that context. If and when jokes become punishable by law, you stop laughing! And I take that opportunity to make that clear. These kind of jokes. Make them when you’re sitting in the bar, but don’t make them publicly.

 

Mark Collett: Yeah, I want to sort of echo this is a serious point. So I actually believe that when it comes to comedy, when it comes to humour, when it comes to making a joke, really nothing should be off limits.

 

And once you start making certain things off limits, it’s very easy to make anything and everything off limits. So then you get sort of the Edinburgh Fringe voting the joke of the year as “Why did the chicken cross the road?” Because no one’s allowed to actually joke about anything else.

 

And I think it was Jimmy Carr who made the remark, a famous British comedian, who made the remark that:

 

“He’s probably already made the joke that will get him one day cancelled and ruin his career.”

 

And that’s how it is, because we constantly see the mainstream media, liberals, sort of fans of censorship, spending hours, if not days, if not in some cases weeks, trawling through people’s back catalogue of streams, tweets, Facebook posts, searching for something that they can find offensive in order to cancel someone, or worse still, get them arrested. And I find this very interesting because I’ve wrestled with this myself. People might say:

 

“Well, look, Mark, I came to your shows and I’ve now watched 200 hours of them and I found these three things offensive.”

 

And my question would be, if you came to the shows of Britain’s leading ethno-nationalists, and you were looking to find something offensive, is that really my fault? You know, I’m not out there saying it in the street. I’m not shouting it through a megaphone into people’s faces. I’m hosting a show. People come to the show, they know what they’re gonna get when they come to the show. This isn’t something that’s being broadcast to every car and home and workplace in the UK. You come here and you seek this out, knowing that you’re going to get a discussion about things relating to our cause.

 

And I think the people going out of their way to dig things up on people and to, it’s like Germar’s conference. If you were to go there and to record everything that was said and watch it in detail, taking notes, looking to find something offensive, that kind of defeats the object of watching the conference in the first place or attending the conference in the first place, because you’re not going there in good faith and then finding it offensive by accident. You’re going there on purpose to look for a reason to be offended so that you can then report it.

 

And this is one of the widespread problems in the West that people, the people who claim they don’t want to be offended will go out of their way and go to great lengths in order to be offended, or so they can claim that they were offended in order to report people to the authorities, which is just essentially a charter for censorship, allowing this to happen. But I do always ask people to be respectful, to exercise caution, not to use racial stuff.

 

As I said to all my guests, you know, please abide by sensible rules so that we are always the polite academic group that talk about things in a sensible manner.

 

And one thing that impresses me with Germar both times I’ve had him on is the way he can speak so fluently and in such a way that I think it would be impossible for anyone to find him offensive unless they were going out of their way to do. Optics prime gave $5. Thank you so much! And said:

 

“This man is a national treasure. Thank you for your work, good sir.”

 

Well, thank you for that Superchat. Lars Aerback with AE, gave $15.

 

Thank you so much! He said:

 

“A positive story from Denmark today. Our Supreme Court acquitted a man for hosting a site with racist jokes. Old fashioned holocaust jokes amongst them. The case has been through all three courts and has been going for over six years. This is a win for freedom of speech!”

 

Well, that is certainly good news from Denmark, and I hope to see more.

 

[1:06:17]

 

Germar Rudolf: Denmark? Regarding Denmark?

 

Mark Collett: Yeah.

 

Germar Rudolf: Oh that’s good! Yeah. Denmark has been a stronghold in all those years. Some German holocaust sceptics and historical sceptics actually fled to Denmark and found refuge there over the past four, five, six decades.

 

Mark Collett: And I’d like to say as well, big thank you to Malibu and Coke for gifting 10 subs to the channel.

 

And as I always say, those who accepted the gifted subs. It would mean a great deal to me if you kept them up. You know, $5 a month means very little to most people, but if I had four or five hundred people every month subbing my channel, it would take a lot of weight off my mind at the beginning of every month.

 

And that’s the end of the Superchat so I’m going to bring the stream to a close now. You’ve been a wonderful guest as ever! The advert for the conference has been excellent and again you’ve done most of the heavy lifting tonight and most of the speaking, but is there anything you’d like to say as a final thought before we wrap things up?

 

Germar Rudolf: Not much more than holocaustsummit.com! So the ultimate link will be streaming and that can change any minute depending on what happens, will be posted there there. If you submit your email, you’ll get it also in an email. And I hope we all see you there! And we are going to build a new community that gets stronger by the day!

 

Mark Collett: Well, thank you so much!

 

I’d like to thank Germar for being here. He’s a courageous guy. He’s a very good speaker. We have interviewed him in full before. If you want to watch that interview, it is in my previous videos. Go and watch it. It’s well worth watching. It’s a two hour special, that one where we talk about Germar’s personal journey, what he’s been through, the incredible repression he’s faced and his incredible journey in his life. Please do that and also support his event, support his work. He’s a really nice guy. It was really kind of him to come on here tonight and he’s been, as always, the perfect guest.

 

I’d like to remind you all that I will be back on Sunday with the ladies from Return to the Land. That’s three housewives, mothers and home-schoolers from Return to the Land talking about women in nationalism and their roles as mothers and homemakers and educators. So that’ll be an interesting stream. Please join me then 7 PM UK time on Sunday for that. Until then, if you’re out doing activism at the weekend, please be safe, stay within the law and know your rights. And until Sunday, have a great evening, have a great weekend and I’ll see you all again soon.

 

Thank you to Germar, thank you to everyone who donated so generously. And as always, thank you to this wonderful community for supporting us, for supporting these shows and for supporting the good work of my guests. Thank you everyone. I love you all. Have a great weekend. Good night.

 

 

[1:09:08]

 

 

END

top

 

 

 

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

 

Odysee Comments

top

(Comments as of 1/25/2026 = 60)

Mark Collett
1 day ago
Pinned by @MarkCollett
If you would like to contribute to the stream, please use Entropy:
https://entropystream.live/app/markcollett

3
0
Valkyria81
1 day ago
88

8
0
The Bee Sting
1 day ago
Wooden doors?

5
0
Alice1488
1 day ago
Watching replay. I’ve never heard this brave intelligent man speak before.

5
0
Sir Trancealot
1 day ago
14

5
0
Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
14 Night all!

5
0

@Aunt-Sally
1 day ago
Thank you Mark and Germar

5
0

@noreplacement
1 day ago
Thank you Germar

5
0

@noreplacement
1 day ago
One day Mark and Laura will be presenting a day time TV show. With guests like Monika Scheafer

5
0
yes dear
1 day ago
2mm glass and a wooden door, no in/out pipes.

5
0

@RonP1
1 day ago(edited)
This HMD is getting more unbearable with each year that passes. For starters, they start talking about it in the media a week or two before the actual day, that’s without all the other propaganda being inflicted on the public all year long. What a sick world we live in where a vile group, with the help of its puppets, think it is their God-given right to teach young minds of British children a load of old BS.
As Arnold Leese said..
“Fascism holds that education up to 14 is a half-measure with attendant
evils nearly as great as its benefits. It produces a population which can
read but which has not learned to think, and is accordingly open to every
kind of evil suggestion or lie, readily disseminated in print.”
Less

4
0

@noreplacement
1 day ago
Britons will not have humour for much longer. Just look at the liberal boneheads we have for “so called” comedians.

4
0

@tuer
1 day ago
the jews ethnically replacing their liberators in europe and america should be the eye opener gaza is

4
0
Hide replies

@Evola19
15 hours ago
That is a misunderstanding of history – the jews have been at war with Europeans their entire existence. WWII was a gentile uprising put down by other gentiles – no jews were “liberated” from anything, they won WWII and were still surrounded white Europeans whom they hate. Not for much longer though.

2
0
yes dear
1 day ago
God Bless Kamerades x

3
0

@BritishGammon
1 day ago
Sophie Duker can “joke” about killing White folks on the BBC and the police took no action

3
0
yes dear
1 day ago
Jailed for physically explaining how high his dog could jump!

3
0
yes dear
1 day ago
holes in the roof and chimney built after surrender

3
0

@nationless8nationalist
12 hours ago
Just figure all subscriptions giving a mere 12 dollars a year. 192000 dollars in a year. Do not get frustrated and be overwelled. We can help our activists.

2
0
jm
20 hours ago
Problem: if you order a book when you live in EU, you have to pay a lot in douane rights -I ordered a book from Antilope Hill from Irving en had tot pay MORE in charges and taxes than the book itself…

2
0
yes dear
1 day ago
One People

2
0
Echo_Harp
1 day ago
Thanks.

2
0
Valkyria81
1 day ago
hi from denmark

2
0
yes dear
1 day ago
Im looking forward to wearing my Flecktarn next week

2
0
Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
“I said to him, ‘Simon, you are telling a lie,’”

2
0
yes dear
1 day ago
God Bless Ursula x

2
0
Skyler Durden
11 hours ago
I have Germar’s encyclopedia.

1
0
Through it, not around it
13 hours ago
WTF is Germar promoting FTJMedia? That site is cringy basement soy larper central. It is the complete antithesis of Germar and represents everything he tries to distance himself from.

1
0

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
just missed it

1
0
Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@ForKamerade
wot???

1
0
yes dear
1 day ago
British gammon, Turncoat Dlive Traitor lol

1
0
Valkyria81
1 day ago
ive just found out. and im out… so sad im beeing missing this

1
0
Echo_Harp
1 day ago
“Found 3 things of offensive stuff” sounds like a joke in its own…

1
0
yes dear
1 day ago
Not long Enough Valk!

1
0
Valkyria81
1 day ago
how long do u continue this chat tonight?

1
0
yes dear
1 day ago
\0

1
0
Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@BritishGammon
you can say anything as long as you can make the cops run away showing up at your house.

1
0
Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@ForKamerade
o/

1
0
yes dear
1 day ago
Thanks Merkal, Congratulations Kalugi

1
0
yes dear
1 day ago
Only in Deutschland 2026!

1
0

@noreplacement
1 day ago
The state can easily spin revisionism into anything they want

1
0
yes dear
1 day ago
Will look, Thank you

1
0
Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
https://www.timesofisrael.com/remember-the-11-million-why-an-inflated-victims-tally-irks-holocaust-historians/

1
0
yes dear
1 day ago
Scientific & Engineering Impossibility

1
0
yes dear
1 day ago
How dare you question history, Its got Laws protecting it Because Truth needs Laws or you go straight to the Gulag Goy

1
0

@Aunt-Sally
1 day ago
Good evening folks

1
0
Sir Trancealot
1 day ago
Evening gents

1
0
Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@SublimeBraid
gassing 6 million jews and fighting a two front war at the same time?

Hide replies
Tomigun
19 hours ago
They decoded the Germans’ Enigma in 1941, yet didn’t intercept ANY message about a “holocaust” or “final solution” carried out.

SublimeBraid
1 day ago
the risks of multitasking, lol

yes dear
1 day ago
Dragged out, “One by One” LOL

danzimmons
1 day ago
it’s all of them.

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
odysee chat ded?

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
evening all

@Aunt-Sally
1 day ago
I don’t blame his wife, they’d probably take their child away somehow

yes dear
1 day ago
test

yes dear
1 day ago
LOL

yes dear
1 day ago
110,000 at most

yes dear
1 day ago
Guten Abend Kamerades!

Hide replies

@nationless8nationalist
13 hours ago
thank you comrade.

0
0

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

See Also

top

 

 

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

 

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

 

BitChute Comments

top

(Comments as of 7/31/2025 = 2)

4 years ago
Patriot Gus
Please contact Gus Stefanis Leader of the Canadian Nationalist Party.

4 years ago
ShanRiHa
Zundel is undoubtedly a fantastic German who was dedicated to telling the truth about these jews and what they’ve deliberately done to Germany and its people. This relentless attack upon Ernst because of his honesty and commitment to exposing the truth about these jews and what they did to the German people and for this they’ve attacked him using jewish Liars like Lipsdat etc to attempt to defame and ridicule him in the Courts etc. Ernst has shown us all what these evil jews have done and are still doing to this day and for that he has earned the respect of many. Vale Ernst Zundel.
Peace.

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

See Also

top

 

 

 

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 36 with Jürgen Neumann on Ernst Zundel – Mar 22, 2025 – Transcript

Ernst Zundel – Another Voice of Freedom Radio – Why World War II Started – 1994 – Transcript

Ernst Zundel – 1967-68 Radio Shows in Montreal Discussing Israel and Jewish Topics 1 – Transcript

Ernst Zundel – 1967-68 Radio Shows in Montreal Discussing Israel and Jewish Topics 2 – Transcript

 

 

 

 

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

Ernst Zundel: Ernst Christoph Friedrich Zundel being interviewed by John Reynolds, former Member of Parliament of Canada, on CJOR radio in Vancouver, August, 78.

 

Radio Host: Oh, hello, it’s John Reynolds, CJOR. Yes, standby please.

 

Hello?

 

Ernst Zundel: Hello.

 

Radio Host: Yes, we’ll be going on in about one minute. What is samizdat?

 

Ernst Zundel: Samizdat is a Russian word and it means to be self published in the underground.

 

Radio Host: Okay, I’ll ask you that.

 

Ernst Zundel: Thank you.

 

Radio Host: Do you also call yourself. Is that the only name you use? Or you call yourself the Nazi Party of Canada or anything?

 

Ernst Zundel: No, no, no, no! We are strictly only publishing books.

 

Radio Host: Okay. You don’t have any organization, political movement at all?

 

Ernst Zundel: No.

 

Radio Host: Okay.

 

Ernst Zundel: However, I’m German and I was responsible for leading the demonstrations against the movie Holocaust.

 

Radio Host: Okay.

 

Ernst Zundel: It is not that we are political, Mr. Reynolds.

 

Radio Host: Okay, hang on a second. I’ll do an introduction, then we come back about a minute after this. You’ll hear it on this tape. Beep.

 

02 Some Commentary by Zundel on the Nature of Commercial Radio and Its Effects on Listeners

top

 

Ernst Zundel: At this stage, it is important for our European listeners to understand that in North America, radio stations, most radio stations are privately owned and that they live off radio commercial advertisements. So every once in a while the announcer will be interjecting and stopping for exactly such commercials. And it is during those commercials that I might come in with some explanations of what was being said, the importance of it and so on. And it might be interesting just to leave a few words of those commercials in there for our European listeners so that they can get an idea of the mentality and what shapes the mentality of the North American and what the North American psyche is constantly being subjected to and why Americans and Canadians maybe think the way that they think.

 

Radio Host: Hi.

 

Ernst Zundel: Hello.

 

Radio Host: If suddenly you don’t hear the feed on the line, hang up, we’ll call you right back. Okay? Just in case something happens.

 

Ernst Zundel: Okay. If I do not hear the feedback, then I’ll hang up.

 

Radio Host: Yeah, if you don’t when you’re on hold, if you don’t hear the show right, then hang up right away and we’ll call you back.

 

Ernst Zundel: Thank you very much.

 

03 Zundel’s Pamphlet Promoting Books and Tapes About UFOs, the Third Reich

top

 

Radio Host: Okay. The present airport temperature 14 degrees. At 8:31 it’s 18 degrees at CJR in the Grosvenor Hot Morning Report. I’m Maury Heskit. Have a good day!

 

Next to Reynolds Reports.

 

Good morning. The other day I received a pamphlet in the mail called What’s New at Samizat? It’s got pictures of Nazi swastikas on it. It’s got UFOs that asks questions about UFOs, are they real? It talks about were Hitler and Eva Braun on board, they may be still alive? It tells you can get tapes that you can listen to on the way to work in the morning. Battle songs and marches of the Third Reich. Very strange pamphlet. The gentleman who is an author of a book called UFO and Nazis A Secret Weapon, Christoph Friedrich is with us this morning. He’s on the phone line from Toronto. We’re going to talk to him about this pamphlet and some of the other books he publishes right after these messages.

 

Ernst Zundel: Again, please pay attention to what Mr. Reynolds has been saying.

 

The one thing that immediately grabbed his attention were the Nazi swastikas, as he calls them, and also some of the things that we are advertising in conjunction with UFOs. Therein lies the secret. He would never have called me if our advertisement had looked any different. Had it been a straightforward UFO advertisement, I doubt whether he would have called. But it was the combination of swastika and UFOs that got him to call us and we continue to listen to him now.

 

04 The Toronto Sun Calls Zundel a Fanatic, a Neo-Nazi

top

 

Radio Host: Okay, what is Samizdat all about? The Toronto Sun calls you a fanatic, a neo-Nazi.

 

Ernst Zundel: Well, one of the writers of the Toronto Sun does, yes, in a kind of a slanderous article that is kind of slippery that you can hardly sue him, or you would spend about $12,000 to sue him.

 

However, as to your question, what samizdat is or what samizdat means. Samistat is a Russian word and it simply means that all the material by samizdat is self produced, self written and published in the underground.

 

In other words, Sharansky, Solzhenitsyn, they are Russian samizdat authors. And I found to my complete surprise, in Canada, in the United States, in Western Europe, in the Western world, we have our Sharanski and our Solzhenitsyns. And I happen to believe that I am a Canadian Solzhenitsyn!

 

Radio Host: You really believe that?

 

06 Demand for Zundel’s Publications, Including the Book, the Secret Nazi Polar Expeditions

top

 

Ernst Zundel: I certainly do and I can prove it to you. We have suppression of new software, all kinds of intellectual thoughts in this country. We have censorship, not by a government censor, but by self-chosen and self imposed censorship in newspapers due to pressures from advertisers, certain business groups, ethnic groups, labor groups and so on. And I have been in the media field and lecturing, writing for the last, 20 years in my life in Canada. And I can assure you that we have a very definite system of censorship in this country.

 

Radio Host: Okay, you were born in Germany.

 

Ernst Zundel: I was born in Germany, lived half my life over there, and now I have lived exactly half my life over here. I came here when I was 19.

 

[06:27]

 

Radio Host:

 

“And restricted by government agencies to a small group of special authorized listeners. Samizdat that now makes these vital moments of history available to you.”

 

Are you back there?

 

Ernst Zundel: Yes.

 

Radio Host: Okay. How did you get all these documents that you tell us that our allied governments are not allowing the rest of the people to hear? How did you get them? Why are you being allowed to publish them and nobody else?

 

Ernst Zundel: Well, it’s not a matter of being allowed. So far I have had several visits by threatening people that I should stop this stuff. I’ve been kicked out of magazines because I advertise our books. But why am I allowed? Because I go back to the original German sources. I have made a fairly good amount of money in Canada and I’m independently well off. I have traveled the world and I have searched out the Germans who were involved in World War II on these projects. I’ve got original blueprints.

 

Radio Host: But doesn’t that prove that your case? You’re saying there’s censorship and this stuff is not being allowed to be shown. Isn’t it really a case of who really cares? Who wants to hear this stuff?

 

06 Demand for Zundel’s Publications, Including the Book, the Secret Nazi Polar Expeditions

top

 

Ernst Zundel: Well, the 12,000 people, after they were able, through some circuitous means, in fact out through my advertising efforts, underground advertising efforts, hand bills and so on, they were very much in favor of reading it. And I have got several hundred letters by people totally unsolicited who said they just love to read this stuff. They’re waiting for my next books. I put out a second book called The Secret Nazi Polar Expeditions that has sold already in the second edition. And there’s the German translation out of it. That’s selling briskly. The first book is the German edition that’s selling briskly. There’s a Spanish edition in the works and an Italian edition and the French edition.

 

08 The Holocaust Movie and Anti-German Programs Are Hate Propaganda

top

 

Radio Host: Surely there’s probably always some people that might want to buy some radical material on one end of the spectrum or the other. But aren’t you really creating, it really looks to me here like you’re creating a whole company based on a hatred. A hatred of jews!

 

Ernst Zundel: A hatred of what? Where do I hate jews? The jews don’t figure. You see, Mr. Reynolds, that’s the problem with you Anglos. You know, you accuse the Germans of having a hangup over the jews. In our thinking, …

 

Radio Host: I don’t accuse the Germans of having a hangup with jews. I accused you of it.

 

Ernst Zundel: Okay, basing on what? Is there one word about jews in my pamphlet?

 

Radio Host: No, he’s very careful that there aren’t any.

 

Ernst Zundel: Well, that’s the point. Because you people, maybe when you were MP up in Ottawa had to stifle freedom of expression through a Bill called Hate Bill.

 

Radio Host: Oh, I never stifled anybody. Why did you pick at the movie, Holocaust?

 

08 The Holocaust Movie and Anti-German Programs Are Hate Propaganda

top

 

Ernst Zundel: Because it’s nothing but lies! Zionist propaganda for profit. It’s that hate propaganda!

 

If you want to see hate propaganda piped into people’s homes, that was hate propaganda on a massive scale! And Mr. Reynolds, I am very sad to say that not one single nice noble Canadian came to our defense. No official government body. That after all, we Germans do enjoy, I think, some citizenship privileges which is equality in front of the law. We don’t get it! Every single night you can get anti-German programs on television or radio. What is this?

 

Radio Host: Well, certainly you would be allowed to your own movies if you wanted to and put that on.

 

Ernst Zundel: But then I’m saying to you, then the censorship comes in that we can’t advertise them, that movie houses won’t carry it. That’s the freedom. That’s what I mean to you. In the Soviet Union we have got the KGB putting Sharansky into jail. In Canada, what do we have? We have the self imposed censorship of certain ethnic groups who wield a tremendous amount of power here!

 

Radio Host: Are you saying that most of the things that were in the movie Holocaust didn’t happen?

 

Ernst Zundel: They were lies, outright lies! And that’s why they didn’t make it a documentary, but they called it a “docudrama” therein lies legalistic tricks!

 

Radio Host: What parts of it were lies? Are you trying to tell me that there were not a bunch of, millions of jews killed?

 

Ernst Zundel: No 6 million jews! That’s the basic point. Were ever murdered in Germany just for being jews.

 

Radio Host: Say that again.

 

09 No Six Million Jews – the Red Cross Report

top

 

Ernst Zundel: No 6 million jews were ever murdered in Germany!

 

Radio Host: How many?

 

Ernst Zundel: Murdered? Very few. Died? Maybe 350,000 maximum. I have in front of me the Red Cross Report put out by the International Red Cross in Geneva in 1947. Now you can write to the Red Cross in Geneva and get that same report. It’s an official report of the Red Cross, into the concentration camps of World War II on the German side. There is not one single gas chamber that they found.

 

Radio Host: What about Poland, some of the other countries?

 

Ernst Zundel: Well, are you asking about Auschwitz, for instance? Because Auschwitz was in Poland.

 

Radio Host: Yeah.

 

Ernst Zundel: The United States, Air Force overflew the concentration camp of Auschwitz dozens of time. Now we know that today from released Air Force documents. They never found one single thing resembling a gas chamber. The United States, Air Force never bombed any gas chambers. You know, World War II aerial photography was so good that the British were able to take out the German V1 bases before they were even built and operational.

 

Now, if they found gas chambers and the American jewish community was always very strong in favor with President Roosevelt, they could have wiped out those gas chambers. Nothing flat! But they didn’t do it because they were not there. It is Zionist propaganda to blackmail the German people and to cow the rest of the world into their voracious demands!

 

Germany is not the way it is portrayed in the world. I am German. I was raised in Germany. I didn’t see one single proper German in that [word unclear] Holocaust!

 

[11:45]

 

 

10 There Were No Gas Chambers Anywhere in Germany!

top

 

Radio Host: Are you trying to tell us that there were no gas chambers?

 

Ernst Zundel: There were no gas chambers anywhere in Germany!

 

Radio Host: What about anywhere where the German people, where the Nazis controlled the power?

 

Ernst Zundel: No such thing! When you, if you know the gas chambers, what they were delousing things, but they were certainly not used to gas people.

 

Radio Host: [words unclear]

 

Ernst Zundel: No, they were not. There’s a large body of evidence, suppressed again and censored in the usual Canadian and North American way, that states very clearly that there were no gas chmbers. We have a Professor of Northwestern University, Professor Butz has just written a 600 page study in which he comes to the very same conclusion. They have trials in Israel in which Adolf Eichmann was tried. The entire testimony of Adolf Eichmann, not one single time mentions a specific number of jews killed. Mr. Reynolds, we have had stories out of Europe of 11 million jews killed! Nine million jews killed! Six million jews killed!

 

The Red Cross says they never saw any gas chambers. The Germans statistically have a Red Cross report that talks about all the people died in World War II on all sides. And for the German nation there is 9 million people, including its 358,000 jews who died in German concentration camps.

 

Radio Host: Gotta go for a break. 685-9181’s our number. 685-9181. If you’d like to speak to Christoph Friedrich from Toronto, the head of Samizdat, give us a call, 685-9181. We’ll be right back with him after these messages. Hang on. I won’t put you on hold this time. I don’t know what happened last night.

 

Ernst Zundel: Well, I thought we were through.

 

Radio Host: Oh, did you? You hung up?

 

Ernst Zundel: Yes, I did. I’m sorry, I had no idea what the format of the show was going to be.

 

Radio Host: Oh, no, thank you. Hang on, we’ll get back and we’ll take a couple of calls. I’ll put you on hold here.

 

Ernst Zundel: Okay, thank you.

 

11 Zundel’s Commentary on the Conversation So Far

top

 

Ernst Zundel: We’re hardly into the program and what do we see? This man, a former Member of Parliament, Federal Parliament, obviously not a stupid man and certainly above average in intelligence. Otherwise he wouldn’t do the kind of work that he is doing. This Canadian called 5,000 km across the continent to a guy called Ernst Zundel to talk to him about flying saucers. Fascinated, attracted like a moth to the light by this combination of swastika, flying saucers, Third Reich, speeches of the Third Reich leaders which we advertise in our pamphlet. He only was cursorily interested in the flying saucer issue. Once in a while he comes back to it, touches upon it.

 

But basically what irks and bothers this man is all the stuff that I’m bringing out on this topic. Let’s return to him and listen to what he has to say.

 

Radio Host: Okay, John Reynolds back with Christoph Friedrich from Toronto. Are you still there?

 

Ernst Zundel: Yes, I am.

 

Radio Host: Okay, we’ve got some callers that want to speak to you. We’ll get to them in just a second. I just want to warn everybody because I’m sure, Mr. Friedrich, there’s going to be some people who want to yell and scream at you, but we won’t put up with that if you want to talk sensibly, talk to Mr. Friedrich. If you agree or disagree with, and I hope nobody will yell at either side of us, have to cut you off because nobody can understand people yelling, go ahead.

 

12 Female Caller Tells Zundel to “Lay Down and Die!”

top

 

Caller 1 (female): I couldn’t hear what he’s been saying recently. However, I have a statement here and I’d like to continue with it. It’ll take about 10 minutes.

 

Radio Host: You have to be quick because we’re going for the news. Go ahead.

 

Caller 1 (female): How dare do the [words unclear] come in now and [words unclear] this very many times? Do they think we’ve forgotten the horrors committed against the European continent and their plans to conquer the world?

 

Ernst Zundel: Oh dear!

 

Caller 1 (female): Who was the top spy in the USA, Reinhard Heindrich [sp], working with the American First Ambassador Hotel in New York with ITT, General Motors, Ford Company, Texas Oil, Standard Oil and defied the Neutrality Act by shipping supplies to South America and on to Germany. The then President Roosevelt, drafting his [word unclear], fearing impeachment, dared not make public firsthand information from William Stevenson, a Winnipeg born Canadian who headed the Secret Service in Britain. He’s the man called Intrepid. Germany was close to producing the A bomb and thousands of men and women sacrificed their lives to gather information that later helped to change all. If it had not been for Churchill, Roosevelt and Hitler, plus the Russian invasion, you might have won, but you didn’t! Lay down and die!

 

Ernst Zundel: [chuckling] Talking about hate. Was that love, Mr. Reynolds?

 

Radio Host: Well, you see, that’s what I was trying to tell you. I think what you do sometimes generates that kind of hate when you try to bring back some of the things the Nazis did during the Second World War.

 

Ernst Zundel: Mr. Reynolds, I want to tell you something that’s entirely the typical Canadian and North American attitude. You people think that you have a monopoly of what is truth and what is history. What you in effect have is your own World War II propaganda parading as history!

 

Now, when we Germans stand up and ever so mildly and meekly ask for equal time, never get number one, equal time. I have to send out a flamboyant pamphlet and I have to demonstrate, to denigrate myself, to demonstrate in front of newspaper offices, human rights commissions and so on, because we are not even getting equal rights and equal treatment in front of the law.

 

[17:48]

 

Radio Host: Well, it will be interesting to see if any of our German friends in Vancouver fall out because I’ve talked to a number of them who don’t feel exactly the way you do. Go ahead.

 

Caller 2 (female): Oh, good morning. This is the first time I’ve done this. I’m a little nervous, but I am so angry because listening to that voice in the radio, it brings it all back. And this is a tragedy of the German people. This man is talking in arrogance. He is talking from a prideful position, saying that we should tolerate him, that we should put up with him when he’s caused millions of people to [word unclear]. This whole thing is going to continue. The German people, unfortunately, are going to have to suffer for several generations, as long as my generation is alive. Who can remember being bombed in the UK you can remember the first pictures of the concentration camps being opened when there were children. You can remember everything about the war.

 

13 Camps for Japanese, Germans and Italians in Canada, America and Britain

top

 

Ernst Zundel: Okay, may I come in here, please? For equal time.

 

First of all, the United States, England and Canada bombed the living daylights out of Germany, killing 3 million Germans! 30,000 Englishmen were hurt, didn’t die, but were hurt in World War II bombing of England. So the score is certainly far out of proportion. That’s number one.

 

Number two, you had concentration camps in Canada in which you put innocent Japanese, robbed them of their property. And you also put Germans in concentration camps and Italians in concentration camps. You had the same in the United States.

 

Now we were in Germany. We are a dictatorship. You were a Democratic country. What did you, madam, do in England when you were in England at that time about those imprisoned in English concentration camps under the 18B regulation.

 

Radio Host: Okay, listen, let’s go for the 9 o’ clock news. We’re right back with Christoph Friedrich after the 9 o’ clock news. CJOR. Thanks for your call.

 

Caller 2 (female): Thank you. I was just child at the time. I couldn’t do anything.

 

Ernst Zundel: Well, so was I. But now we can do something.

 

Caller 2 (female): No, we’re not.

 

Ernst Zundel: Yes, we can prevent the same thing from happening again by speaking the truth!

 

Radio Host: Okay, thanks. Listen, we’ll call you back in five minutes, okay?

 

Ernst Zundel: Okay, thank you.

 

Radio Host: Make sure you don’t use your line.

 

Ernst Zundel: No. Okay, I can’t help incoming calls.

 

[break]

 

Ernst Zundel: Hello.

 

Radio Host: Yes, I got you. Okay, I’ll come back in about 30 seconds.

 

Ernst Zundel: It is interesting that during the next 30 seconds I could not monitor what he was saying. So I have absolutely no idea if he was going to give me some kind of a bad introduction or bad mouthing me or telling the listeners I was some kind of a nut case. That’s a very interesting point. Let’s return to the program.

 

[break]

 

14 Why Don’t You Use Your Real Name?

top

 

Radio Host: Tom Reynolds back and on the phone lines Ronald Christoph Friedrich out of Samizda. Are you the president of Samizda?

 

Ernst Zundel: Yes, I own it lock stock and barrel.

 

Radio Host: You own it. It’s no shareholders. It’s one man. Listen, somebody phoned me yesterday and told me that your real name is Ernst Zundel, that Christoph Friedrich are your two middle names.

 

Ernst Zundel: That’s right.

 

Radio Host: Why do you use those as your name for publishing?

 

Ernst Zundel: Well, because I run a fairly successful two other businesses. And when I started out, this Samizda thing, it was not flying saucer strictly. And you have to admit it’s a somewhat [word unclear] subject and people are leery of dealing with nuts. So I thought I might get myself a little protection. It’s nothing illegal. Everybody in the arts and in writing has nom de plumes, you know. It’s a perfectly natural and normal occurrence.

 

Radio Host: Let me ask you another question before we go back to the callers. You talk about censorship in Canada and the United States. Would you be allowed to do what you’re doing with your talking about your UFOs about Hitler, about the Nazis, if you were living in Germany today?

 

15 West Germany and East Germany Are Dictatorships

top

 

Ernst Zundel: No, because West Germany and East Germany are the most horrific dictatorships. They make Hitler pale into insignificance!

 

Radio Host: Why would you say West Germany is a dictatorship? They have elections. The German people elect all the people that go into their legislature.

 

Ernst Zundel: Because, number one, it’s a matter of having no choice. In West Germany, the Allies have riddled Germany with spy networks and we have a strictly political police and a political judiciary in Germany. The nation’s element which carries the German State for 13 years, is completely outlawed, has been killed, is rotting in jails.

 

Consequently, what we have in Germany are quislings. We have in West Germany, West German, pro-American, pro-British, pro-French, pro-Canadian quislings. And in East Germany we have pro-communist, pro-Russian quislings. Germany is occupied country! It is not independent. The people who have been speaking for Germany are executive organs of the occupying powers.

 

16 Do You Believe in the White Superiority?

top

 

Radio Host: One final question before we go back to the calls. Do you believe in the White superiority?

 

Ernst Zundel: No. No.

 

Radio Host: You are not [word unclear] with leader of the Nazi party in the United States then?

 

Ernst Zundel: He’s a jew!

 

Radio Host: Yes, I know that.

 

[22:43]

 

Ernst Zundel: Okay, fine. Now if you have a jewish agent, he might be a jewish hero in Nazi uniform if he brings out lines like that that conform with the Hollywood image which Hollywood has created about National Socialism and about Germany, that’s one thing. Hitler in all of the 800 pages of Mein Kunk not once mentioned the word Aryan “superiority” or “master race” or stuff like that! This is strictly Anglo-jewish propaganda! It is not true.

 

Radio Host: Go ahead.

 

Caller 1 (female): Hi John. I was born after the war, so this is really all history thinking, but I don’t feel any angry towards this guest. But I am kind of fascinated with him. Fascinated in the sense that I think he’s really taking us for a really good ride. I think he’s really capitalizing on our ignorance, on all these things and all that. But it kind of frightens me too in the other sense because people are angry and not these kind of things get stirred up.

 

Radio Host: That’s a very good question though. Christoph Friedrich, are you just really capitalizing on the Holocaust and other things that are happening to make yourself some more money?

 

Ernst Zundel: Mr. Reynolds? I don’t need to make more money. What I’m telling you is that I am now 39 years old. I’ve got children born by a Canadian mother going through the Canadian school system that are being brainwashed with lies and nothing but lies which will disarm them in any future conflict that we are seeing coming up on the horizon! The western world is in a life and death struggle and doesn’t realize it, because it is looking constantly over its shoulder flailing a dead horse called Nazism while there are Marxists in the highest places in government, the military, the media in this lovely land! That is my point!

 

Caller 1 (female): But sir, you must think we’re really fools because all these things have been past for so many years.

 

17 Problems with Canada and Its Immigration Policy

top

 

Ernst Zundel: You are asses because you allow non-subversives and certainly incapable people of running the affairs of this nation. Canada is a paradise, and it could be a paradise. And it was almost a paradise when I came to these shores. What we have now is our old people robbed of their pensions. We have got riots in jails, we have got kidnappings, we have got muggings. We have got murders on a scale that is unprecedented before. If you were such intelligent people and exercising your duties of citizenship properly, we could not get the kind of rotten leadership we are getting!

 

Ernst Zundel: Well, sir, I just don’t take you very seriously.

 

Ernst Zundel: Well, that’s okay. I don’t take you very seriously either.

 

Radio Host: Christoph Friedrich one of the reasons we’ve got these problems because of our immigration policy.

 

Ernst Zundel: Certainly, yes!

 

Radio Host: What should we do about our immigration policy?

 

Ernst Zundel: I was the only person in 1968 that appeared in front of the Parliamentary committee and the Senate committee on immigration and said:

 

“For God’s sake, do not change the immigration policy in this country or your children will curse you!”

 

Mr. Reynolds, what has happened is not the children are cursing the politicians of that 1968 Parliament. Their wives, their mothers, their grandmothers, their uncles and their hands are cursing them!

 

Radio Host: What should we do with our immigration policy in Canada?

 

Ernst Zundel: Don’t import problems!

 

Radio Host: Are you saying what types of people are the problem and what countries do they come from?

 

Ernst Zundel: Ask any police official. Who are being picked up for, numerically speaking, for dope peddling, pimping, distribution sniffing and stuff like that.

 

Radio Host: Are you talking about the blacks and the yellow people that are coming in?

 

Ernst Zundel: You know, that’s a loaded question.

 

Radio Host: I’m sure it is.

 

Ernst Zundel: Mr. Reynolds, I’m saying to you that we didn’t have it before, but certainly we now have it. Does that answer the question fairly?

 

Radio Host: More White immigration from England, Germany and the other such as that?

 

Ernst Zundel: Certainly.

 

Radio Host: Okay, go ahead.

 

Caller 4 (male): Mr. Frederick?

 

Ernst Zundel: Yeah?

 

18 Have You Ever Been to Auschwitz?

top

 

Radio Host: Have you ever been to Auschwitz?

 

Ernst Zundel: Pardon me?

 

Radio Host: Have you ever visited Auschwitz concentration camp?

 

Ernst Zundel: No, but I’ve entered Dahau. I don’t need to go to have a piece of fictitious history paraded in front of my eyes.

 

Radio Host: I have visited Auschwitz and the place where it is said that the gas chambers were, which is right beside the incinerators.

 

Ernst Zundel: Yes.

 

Caller 4 (male): Is right in the middle of the camp. You say, if the British believed there were gas chambers, they would have bombed them.

 

Ernst Zundel: Yes.

 

Caller 4 (male): With all the tens of thousands of inmates in Auschwitz, it would have been another “Holocaust”. Tens of thousands of prisoners who would have died through the bombing.

 

19 Red Cross Report on German Concentration Camps

top

 

Ernst Zundel: Okay, may I respond to that? I have in front of me the Red Cross Report, page 92. That’s an official document. No Germans participated in writing it. It is strictly based on the work done by the International Committee of the Red Cross, which by the way went to see every concentration camp in Germany and had even delegates living within some concentration camps. Now I put it to you, if the Germans had something to hide, they would certainly not allow number one to visit, number two, allow delegates to live there.

 

Now, the Russians don’t allow Red Cross delegates to go and visit their concentration camps, but the Germans did!

 

Now, on page 92 it says that the confidence man, the man of Kofiyas [sp], is the French reporter that I’m looking at was a British commando who was captured by the Germans and he was in Auschwitz. The Red Cross delegate asks him:

 

“What are these rumors about Sal Didush, meaning shower bars?”

 

And he said:

 

“They are nothing but rumors. We have been unable to verify that there were such things.”

 

Now, the concentration camp of was in September 44. Shortly thereafter, the concentration camp of Auschwitz was closed and the German razed it to the ground! Every single German concentration camp in the east that the Germans abandoned was razed to the ground! So any structure that you see there, built today was built after the war! So much for your historical accuracy.

 

[28:34]

 

 

20 Belsen and the Typhus Epidemic and the Germans Told to Protect the Camp Until the British Arrived

top

 

Radio Host: And you say the same for Belsen?

 

Ernst Zundel: No, I can explain to you Belsen very easily.

 

Radio Host: That was raised to the ground also?

 

Ernst Zundel: No. That was not in the East. If you were to listen and hear what I’m saying, you could get someplace in the story. Belsen is in central Germany.

 

Now, the commander of Belsen was forced to take up, because of the situation of the war, 20,000 more prisoners than the camp was designed for. Now typhus broke out because Medicines and food couldn’t get to the camp because England and America destroyed the entire German railroad system in Operation Thunderclap, which knocked out 9,000 German railroads stations and railroad junctions. Now the system of transportation and food supply broke down. Food rations had to be cut. Belsen suffered a typhus epidemic. And the German commander said in radioing to the International Red Cross in Geneva:

 

“We have this situation here. If the war comes to our camp and these prisoners go out into the land, they will infect the occupying army, namely Montgomery’s army, and also the whole population of Europe. What should we do?”

 

And the British commander and the German commander agreed that the German SS guards were to go and protect the camp and keep it while the war raged around it. And when the war was just about over in this area, the British came and they took over the camp. And in typical English, World War II fashion, they grabbed the guys who had agreed to stay behind and they, number one, had them beaten up and the torture of the guards and the story of how you Anglos at the end of World War II got your lovely show trials and stuff like that. That’s another kettle of fish.

 

Radio Host: Now you saying, … Gotta go for a break. I have to let some other callers. Thanks for your call. 685-9181’s number. We’ll be right back after these messages. Back in about a minute. I won’t put you on hold just in case we get cut off.

 

Ernst Zundel: Okay. Fine, thank you.

 

Radio Host: How’s the weather in Toronto?

 

Ernst Zundel: It’s a beautiful day, Mr. Reynolds. It’s a beautiful day. I wish I could talk to you about something simple like flying saucers. But I want to thank you for giving me the opportunity, believe me. I do appreciate it, believe me. There are far too few people in the Western world today like yourself.

 

21 Zundel’s Advice Re Dealing with Radio Station Hosts

top

 

[Zundel’s commentary]

 

Ernst Zundel: Now a very important lesson to be learned. Always congratulate your host. Always be deferential to him and be kind to him. Never bully him and never embarrass him! Always leave him a way out, because he too has a boss. He too has a station owner, station manager, program manager, advertisers. Don’t burn the bridges behind him unless you want to destroy him. And those cases ought to be very few. Always behave in such a way, even if you have to give a point or two, that you are the nice person, that you are the friendly one and a well mannered one. You don’t have to be mealy mouthed. Be hard and be soft. [chuckling] What I mean is be gentle and be kind. It has paid for me tremendous dividends. And time and again I’ve been told by moderators of radio and TV, the reason why they had me back on was because I always allowed them a way out with their station managers.

 

Now let us rejoin the program and carry on with the interview.

 

[Interview continues]

 

22 Germans Innocent of the Alleged Crime of Killing Six Million Jews

top

 

Radio Host: John Reynolds back with Christoph Friedrich, the head of Samizdat out of Toronto. Mr. Friedrich, let me ask you a question. You mainly deal in other than things with the records and the tapes about German music and so forth, but UFOs, why would [n’t] you stick to UFOs, and stay away from the Nazi angle?

 

Ernst Zundel: Because it’s a matter upon which our civilization fails or survives!

 

Radio Host: Explain that.

 

Ernst Zundel: The German, supposed German guilt for World War II has taken the militarily, economically, politically strongest nation in the heart of Europe which after all is the heart of our culture and has made it the [word unclear]. We are the outcast today. You have had no German input of any significance since the end of World War II.

 

Mr. Reynolds, we have had 138 wars since 1945.

 

Radio Host: In British Columbia the largest ethnic group is German.

 

Ernst Zundel: Of course.

 

Radio Host: They’re top citizens. They’re leaders in business. This situation with the “Holocaust”, and what you’re trying to promote is passe with a lot of people. Jewish families involved in the war. German families involved in war that maybe have some guilt, have some hard feelings. But the young people today don’t have those types of feelings.

 

Ernst Zundel: Mr. Reynolds. That’s exactly my point. Why can we not discuss it sensibly? And why can we only judge it from the Jewish-Anglo, jewish angle?

 

Radio Host: What talk about it all?

 

Ernst Zundel: No, we can’t do that, Mr. Reynolds. Why should German people collectively bear the [word unclear] and individually the stigma of coming from a group of people that have murdered 6 million people, if they are innocent of the crime, why should we? We are not, …

 

Radio Host: Number one, that I don’t think is a stigma. The German people living in this country. Number two, there was a crime there.

 

Ernst Zundel: Okay, was Dresden not a crime? Was Hamburg not a crime? Was Nagasaki not a crime?

 

[34:48]

 

Radio Host: That’s a crime.

 

23 Was the Canadian Concentration Camps Not a Crime?

top

 

Ernst Zundel: Was the Canadian concentration camps not a crime? You see, even, …

 

Radio Host: I agree with you. The way we treated the Japanese in the Second World War was a crime.

 

But it’s well talked about.

 

Ernst Zundel: Mr. Reynolds, but no restitution has been made, and to put it in proper perspective. You see, we have to first heal the wounds of the old before we can start anew. Humanity is like an organic body. If you have a cancer growing in one area, the body is sick, you see? And I’m saying to you, I want the wounds of World War II healed properly, not festering. And all those people who put on the Holocaust movie that was seen in 70 million American homes at one and the same time. And it was full of lies! ! Mr. Reynolds, they are the hatemongers! I tried to have that movie stop before it started. I am the nice guy! The others are the aggressors in this thing.

 

Radio Host: Go ahead.

 

Caller (male): Mr. Friedrich. How old are you?

 

Ernst Zundel: I’m 39.

 

Caller (male): So you were what? About six years old when the war ended?

 

Ernst Zundel: That’s right.

 

Caller (male): Do you really have no firsthand knowledge of what went on?

 

Ernst Zundel: My dear man, I have firsthand knowledge of being frightened like a dog by bombs falling on our head, by our house collapsing around us. By my mother being chased by American and Algerian invading troops. By the cruelty of your occupation, by the starvation. Don’t come unto me with honeyed words and say I have no recollection of the war. I do!

 

Caller (male): I happen to be German too. I came from there.

 

Ernst Zundel: Hey, that’s nice.

 

Caller (male): And I happen to be a lot older than you are.

 

Ernst Zundel: Good.

 

Caller (male): I saw it was, …

 

Ernst Zundel: It doesn’t make you necessarily wiser or more knowledgeable, though.

 

Caller (male): I’m not saying that I’m wiser, but you know, when I’m listening to you, I can understand, you profess to represent what German people think or say.

 

Ernst Zundel: I never did. I never did!

 

Caller (male): You don’t?

 

Ernst Zundel: I say what some German people think, those who think and not those who think they think.

 

Caller (male): I’m glad to hear that. Because, …

 

Ernst Zundel: You see, you don’t think, you just think you think.

 

Caller (male): I can quite see if somebody listens to you, then you just get turned off. If that is what comes out of Germany. Good God! You know, you’re a nut!

 

Ernst Zundel: What would you like to come out of Germany? Tell me! More reparations for crimes we didn’t commit? More flagellating, more self incriminating for things we didn’t do?

 

24 Caller Recounts Seeing Ss Shot People

top

 

Caller (male): All right. I happened to be in Germany and outside of Germany during those years and I have seen what was going on.

 

Ernst Zundel: You were outside those years in Germany, is that it?

 

Caller (male): Let me finish, please. Just don’t butt in all the time!

 

Ernst Zundel: No, look, get your story straight. Were you in Germany at that time or out of Germany?

 

Caller (male): Yes, I was in Germany. I was in Poland. Let me tell you. I have seen how the jews were rounded up. I have seen them running around in droves being driven by SS people. I’ve seen them being shot. Shot! Just because somebody was straggling, couldn’t follow the rest.

 

Ernst Zundel: And what did you do about it?

 

Caller (male): What I did about it? Nothing! I couldn’t do anything.

 

Ernst Zundel: Exactly!

 

In other words, you were a coward then and you are a coward now!

 

Caller (male): Let me tell you something right now. I may have been a coward! I probably was. I was at the time, 15 years of age.

 

Ernst Zundel: Well, if you saw somebody shot and didn’t do something about it, you were a coward!

 

Caller (male): I probably was.

 

But I can tell you one thing, it certainly has weighed very heavily on my conscience. Because what was going on, that was not right. And I don’t give a damn how much you rant and rave.

 

Ernst Zundel: I’m not ranting or raving.

 

Caller (male): You will never be able to obliterate the darkest period in German history. Okay?

 

Ernst Zundel: Well, if the Canadians are doing as well, and the British and the Americans and the jews in obliterating their dark parts in their history, we’d have a beautiful world. But as long as it’s only one sided, I Intend to speak the other side as long as good God gives me a breath to do it.

 

Caller (male): I just hope that people don’t regard you as representative of Germany.

 

Radio Host: 685 918 was the number. We’ll be right back after these messages.

 

[break]

 

You get any interference from the RCMP coming in to look at your membership list?

 

Ernst Zundel: Not anymore. Not anymore.

 

Radio Host: They did it one time?

 

Ernst Zundel: I used to be [word unclear] two or three times a week. Yeah, but not anymore. The main problem now comes from the Canadian jewish Congress and their agents.

 

25 There is Always an Uncle Tom.

top

 

[Zundel’s commentary on the caller]

 

Ernst Zundel: It never fails. There is always an Uncle Tom! The blacks have him, the jews have him and the Germans have him. That is if the caller indeed was a German as he claimed to be. He did have some strange accent, that’s for sure.

 

However, I practically smelled him coming from left field and decided early on that here was one guy that was going to be nailed. And he certainly was! And I’m happy that that is now. There is no way that you can allow people like that to dominate the program by trying to be overly kind to them. People like that who mess into their own bed, you have to be short and swift! Back to the program.

 

[39:59]

 

Radio Host: John Reynolds back with Christoph Friedrich in Toronto. 685-9181 the number go ahead please.

 

Hello?

 

Caller (male): Hello.

 

Radio Host: Go ahead.

 

26 Caller on Japanese in Concentration Camps

top

 

Caller (male): What he says about immigration coming in this country. Well, I’m in agreement what he said about only the White race, that White people should immigrate here. But I wasn’t in agreement with what he said about the Japanese being innocent because it was myself I think it was a good thing that they were put in concentration camps because if the Japanese had landed here the ones that were in the country would have helped the Japanese invading forces.

 

And one of Japanese was educated in Vancouver here went to school and had his education here. He went over to Japan during the war and he was one of the worst ones over there. He beat the Canadian soldiers with whips in the camps there and [word unclear] for it.

 

Radio Host: Does that mean that all the rest of them would have been the same?

 

Caller (male): Pardon?

 

Radio Host: Does that mean that all the rest of them would have been the same? Why would a Japanese Canadian be any lesser Canadian than you were?

 

Caller (male): Well, I mean I don’t have any agreement with it. It wasn’t very innocent. You didn’t know what’s behind it. They [word unclear] truckloads of rifles and war stuff and short waves receivers and everything.

 

Ernst Zundel: And Mr. Reynolds.

 

Radio Host: I don’t know believe that gives us the right to take away people’s property.

 

Ernst Zundel: Mr. Reynolds, if I may interject here. I have read the story of the tragedy of the American Japanese and the Canadian Japanese. I am not aware of one single instance where truckloads of Japanese rifles were taken away. That is a red herring of wartime propaganda. Now in the calmer days 30 years after. That’s simply not true.

 

Number one, I’d like to say on principle Japan did not declare war on Canada. Number two, Canada meddled in Japanese affairs 10,000 miles away from home in Hong Kong. Number three, the Japanese people who were in this country were legally admitted immigrants, had an excellent work record, were frugal, thrifty, pillars of society. They were robbed in the most sneaky, slimy way of their hard earned property. Proper restitution has not been done. When Premier Kuro went over to Japan and apologized to the people of Japan, the columns and the radio stations in the Toronto area were so full of hate towards our own Prime Minister. Just apologizing, that I am telling you Canadians have some skeletons in the crossing and their skeletons are intolerance and hate! And I am bringing those out. And if I speak forcefully, I speak with the eloquence of emergency. Because I can assure you if you Canadians are going to let this thing get done to the Germans today and you were allowing it yesterday to the Japanese, tomorrow you will allow it to another ethnic group. I’m telling you, if we don’t come to grips with this cancer in Canadian society tomorrow, it might be you!

 

Caller (male): Why don’t you speak to some of the Canadians that was taken Christmas day, prisoners in places there, and they were tortured.

 

Ernst Zundel: Sir, my question to you is, what business did they have to do over in Hong Kong? Did Canada have no problems in their own country?

 

So you see, if you meddle in a fight between two bullies, if you meddle in that and you get a black eye, it’s not like, don’t come back, complaining!

 

Caller (male): Well, they landed here, they came here by the submarine. They were just about pretty close to taking over the Aleutian islands. They had places dug in rock there and they confixated all their supplies. Don’t worry my friend, they were just about right to our doorstep here.

 

Ernst Zundel: This was after the war was on.

 

Anyway. Listen, this is a very fruitless discussion. I frankly think that the Japanese were maltreated and Canadians cannot make any excuses and cannot treat it under the rug. Justice is what we want. Justice for all the people, including jews, Pakistanis and Indians. What I’m saying to you is that I was the only one in 1968 to prevent problems from happening. Don’t you see? 1968, the United States was experiencing civil war on a massive scale where blacks were burning down practically every large city. You know, Watts and Detroit and so on. And I said at that time to the special Commission sitting in Montreal:

 

“Gentlemen, please learn from what is happening. We don’t owe these people anything!”

 

Canada didn’t have empire, you see I can see England having to import these people, but Canada should have a policy that is best for Canadians.

 

Caller (male): Well, the Black Panthers are stirring up the Indians here in Canada. And the Indians didn’t have enough sense to fight for themselves. But until another outfit came in here called the Black Panthers and they just stir these Indians up and it’s just making trouble for the Indians. And the Canadian government is surprised that they let these leaders come in from the United States.

 

Ernst Zundel: No, afraid I have to once again put it in the proper historical perspective. You Canadians in World War II allied yourself with Marxism, international Communism!

 

Now, because they were your allies then, you feel kind of uneasy about cracking down on them now because it would mean you made a mistake then. So what are you doing? You are allowing all kinds of Marxist infiltrators into your university, into your news media, and into the book publishing business and into education. And what they turn out are young commies. And these young commies then go out agitating minorities. Naturally, they’re not going to actually agitate the mass of Canadians because they are so lethargic. So they go after the Indians and other minorities.

 

[45:47]

 

27 Zundel’s Commentary on the Typical Canadian Man in the Street on Race

top

 

Radio Host: Okay, thanks for your call. 685-918 was the number. We’ll be right back after these messages.

 

[Zundel’s commentary]

 

Ernst Zundel: What you have just heard is the typical average Canadian man in the street, World War II veteran speaking. A simple man with a bigoted viewpoint. Basically what he is a racist, but afraid to say it.

 

Now, here in me, he had found somebody who was very seldom on Canadian airwaves these days, willing to put in the good word for the Whites and point out their desperate situation. And the poor devil called up and couldn’t really make his point coherently.

 

Yet he had lived this kind of viewpoint for all his life and ended up trying to defend the indefensible. Interesting also is that the moderator, former Member of Parliament, all he could think about was the Japanese property being taken away. It didn’t occur to him that that’s not the main beef. It was not that the property was taken away. It was the fact that in a Democratic country that was not under immediate attack, was not being invaded, the dignity of human beings was being insulted that they were being herded into concentration camps. Men, women, children, father, mother, grandfather, grandparents and so on. They were robbed of their fortunes. They were robbed of their fishing boats and their fishing gears, their farms and so on. And Canadians can make no excuses. And he tried to make an excuse with World War II propaganda. What he pulled on the Japanese, they’re trying to pull on the Germans. Back to the program.

 

Radio Host: Okay, John Reynolds back. My guest is Chris Christoph Friedrich, head of Samizdat. 6859181 is the number. Go ahead.

 

28 Caller on the Suppressed Book ‘All Honorable Men’

top

 

Caller (male): Yes, hello, Mr. Reynolds.

 

Radio Host: Yes.

 

Caller (male): I know you’re first, please. Thank God from your political deal. Is the other gentleman on the line too? Have either of you people ever read the first publication of a book called All Honorable Men? All Honorable Men.

 

Radio Host: Christoph Friedrich, have you read the book All Honorable Men?

 

Ernst Zundel: Is that by the English writer Douglas Reed?

 

Radio Host: English writer who was in Germany after the war. The book was suppressed. A new version came out which is completely different from the original publication of the book called All Our Men. Unfortunately, I loaned it out to somebody. I never got it back. There is a book out All Honorable Men, but it’s not the same version.

 

But in the original publication of the book, All Our Men showed how the Second World War was perpetrated!

 

Now, you realize that IG Farben was never bombed in Germany. IG Farben had a subsidiary in the United States. They made their deal and in United States manufactured and it said on there, it documented made in Germany was sent to South America. The money came back to Germany.

 

By the way, I’m a disabled war veteran.

 

And when I read that book, the original publication, which was the suppressed, showed how Schrader [sp], who was a companion of Roosevelt went to Germany and became the financial expert in Germany. I am in complete agreement. And I fought against you people. I speak German fluently. I’m a disabled war veteran.

 

Radio Host: Make your point, please.

 

Caller (male): Pardon?

 

Radio Host: Make your point.

 

Caller (male): Yeah, but what I’m saying is this. If you could, any of you, Mr. Reynolds and the gentleman there, could get the original edition of All Honorable Men, there is documentation after documentation. And I happen to agree. And Mr. Reynolds, but the other gentleman there were that not many jews were that. Now I don’t agree with all of them.

 

Radio Host: Okay, thanks for your comment.

 

29 World War II was Above All a Battle for World Markets

top

 

Ernst Zundel: Mr. Reynolds. May I say something to that, please?

 

Radio Host: Go ahead.

 

Ernst Zundel: There’s no doubt that World War II was above all a battle for world markets. You see, and it is clearly expressed in the British Foreign Office documents which have been recently released after the 30 year time is up and American Foreign Office or Secretary of State offices and documents which are now being declassified after 35 years.

 

The fact is that Japan and Germany being geographically in a small area, being devoid of raw materials, these two nations must export in order to live. So they were in effect disturbing the international trading pattern. And high finance and international multinational corporations got together the way this fellow describes out of this book, All Honorable Men, got together and they decided:

 

“Well, if we can wipe out the competition, we will have the world markets to ourselves!”

 

You see?

 

Radio Host: Let me ask you a question. What about a gentleman by the name of Speers? You know him?

 

Ernst Zundel: No.

 

20 Belsen and the Typhus Epidemic and the Germans Told to Protect the Camp Until the British Arrived

top

 

Radio Host: You haven’t read his book? He was one of the German officers who was tried in Nuremberg.

 

Ernst Zundel: Oh, Speer. Well, okay, I’ll be happy to respond to this. I’ve corresponded with him. Mr. Reynolds, that man was in allied custody for 20 years! He was only allowed to read what four different nations censored for him.

 

Now, if you and I can put on commercials in advertising and sell cars with 1 minute exposure over the radio or television, then a man whom I have for a 20 year captive audience is brainwashed so beyond recognition that he is a totally altered, different personality! The Albert Speer who came out of Spandau is an allied zombie!

 

Radio Host: So you’re saying the books he wrote about the atrocities are things that have been planted in his head by the Allies?

 

Ernst Zundel: After 20 years of confinement under sole allied tutelage, where only allied approved psychologists took his head apart and his brain apart, they only supplied him with the books that they allowed him to. Every newspaper is cut out meticulously as to articles which you’re not supposed to read, I ask you in all honesty, can that man be balanced?

 

[53:02]

 

Radio Host: May not be balanced. I don’t think he was balanced to do what he did in the first place.

 

Ernst Zundel: What did he do in the first place? He was our ministry of war production. You see, Mr. Reynolds, that’s my point. How can a grown up man like yourself, a Member of Parliament, say that he shouldn’t have done what he did in the first place? Nations in war, always find men who run the war machine for them. Canadians did. Americans did. Churchill did. Why should we not have very capable ministers of war? He was a very capable technocrat.

 

Radio Host: He also knew the atrocities that were being committed.

 

Ernst Zundel: He says he didn’t. He said he should have thought about it. But you see, the point is, if he says he didn’t, then I put it to you, if a guy in that kind of elevated office doesn’t know about it, maybe it is because they didn’t exist.

 

Radio Host: Oh, you heard the previous caller say he was a German from Poland and they did exist.

 

Ernst Zundel: Well, a 15 year old kid who was too cowardly to protect somebody from being shot, then to take his word, believe me, he doesn’t stand up against hard evidence.

 

31 Caller Claims Innocent Children Put in Gas Chambers

top

 

Caller (male): Hello?

 

Radio Host: Yes, go ahead.

 

Caller (male): Yes, I would like to know what business this German fellow has to criticize Canada and United States. I mean, listen. They have killed babies in pregnant women and send them the gas chamber. He’s lying! He’s a nobody! He was a little child at the time the war was on. What he know about it? How many innocent children was put in the gas chamber? And I lost myself 40 people for my family! He has a face, he has a nerve to come on the radio and talk lies like this. And people have to listen this. Not ashamed! You let him go on the radio station. You should send him to Germany. He wouldn’t talk like this in Germany. He don’t know nothing about the whole history!

 

There was not killed Japanese children. There was not food to give them. They let the people work till he died. Until he got killed in heavy stones. And he telling stories for the people. They wasn’t killing the jews and they don’t killing. They want to kill the whole world! There was the whole song made up from the Germans. Germany is small, the whole world is ours! What do you think men like this you let go on the radio. This is a shame! I can’t understand how can a person talk on the radio to the public like that? There’s nobody to give him the answer on it. How everything he is saying is lying. What mixing up Japanese and other nations in this program? They talk about Germany. Did Germany know that there was only 6 million jews only killed?

 

Ernst Zundel: I’m afraid you have had the, …

 

Radio Host: He’s allowed to say is a free country, whether we want to believe or not. 685918 was the number. We’ll be right back after the event.

 

32 Zundel’s Commentary on the Jewish Caller and Their Emotionalism and Lies

top

 

Ernst Zundel: Well, finally here we had it. I was waiting for that call for the very first part of the program. Usually, in the olden days, or certainly in Eastern Canada and in the Eastern United States where there is a far greater concentration of jewish people, we get this type of call by the dozens! Monopolizing the airwaves with their emotionalism. Trying to once again cry, moan, whine about all the things that have been done to them, offering no evidence. But for the gullible public, they certainly talk a good persecution and a good crime.

 

Now, is it interesting that the moderator did not allow me to get back at that man and to nail him. He just cut him off. And then, of course, went conveniently to some commercial announcements which gave me no chance to respond to this man’s accusations.

 

However, for the European listeners, this can serve as the typical call. This is why it is so very important that this issue of anti-German propaganda and of this monstrous, horrific lie about Germans killing 6 million jews must be exposed wherever we can! This is the pivotal question! Once this lie has been exposed as a propaganda lie, the world will change upside down, inside out! And our people who have been hated and maligned will become the angels of the world!

 

And this is what those who peddle the lie are afraid of they have gambled wildly and recklessly that they can can control all the channels of communications for all time. If it is possible for us to break through that curtain the way I have broken through with this interview, for instance, on this Canadian radio station, which was the largest radio station on the east coast in Canada, large enough so that they have two private helicopters looking after traffic reports, their own reporters, roving reporters, large enough that they not shy the expense of paying for a long distance call from Vancouver to Toronto over a distance of 5,000 miles for an hour and a half.

 

[58:44]

 

 

33 The Need for All Those Who Believe in the Rightness of the Cause to Help Spread the Message

top

 

Now, when we can break through day in, day out, year after year, through this media curtain with our facts, our figures, our proof, then a new age will be dawning. This is why it is so absolutely crucial that the people who believe in the same things that I believe in, who are unable because of age, lack of faith in themselves or talent in the media, maybe because they speak English with even more of an accent than I do, that they help us in financing my work. Because the proof certainly is given in this interview again that we can make breakthroughs and we can reach the public. And you can see there were all kinds of people out there who are willing to agree with us and who are willing to listen to us.

 

We have all kinds of allies. But right now they are isolated and we are isolated. We cannot reach them for lack of funds. If we had the money, we could buy radio time on every radio station, we could buy TV time on every TV station. Within a very few short years, we could change the German image in the world, the image of National Socialism, which, after all, was an attempt by White Europe to save itself at the end of a cultural cycle and to start and Make a glorious new beginning.

 

If people would only realize the importance of this, we could change the world together. I cannot do it alone. Obviously, some of the members of the jewish community made their usual quick phone calls to rustle up support and to get their fellow racial comrades to get under the airwaves and to give this German, of all people, a piece of their mind and to give them a hard time. Because it is so seldom that Germans speak out in public, and especially even more seldom that they speak out on the airwaves as frankly and as freely as I did in this particular interview. The reaction was equal. Just as we heard by the previous caller every old propaganda lie rehashed, even the canard of “Deutschland ueber alles” or the “tomorrow the world” business. So often has this story been told in Heideggerd UN Deutschland Und Morgen die ganze Welt, that I’m so sick and tired of trying to even explain it. If all the songs that every army in the world had ever sung was broadcast, I think that there would be some pretty red faces and embarrassed politicians.

 

34 Jews and Their Claims of Having Lost Untold Family Members!

top

 

And the fact that he lost 40 members of his family, well, gee, it is incredible! Everyone that I meet of these people lost 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 80 members of their family. Some 200 members of their family! Hell, I can’t even remember 20 members of my family. But these people, they can remember 200! And they all lost them. And yet they’re all here!

 

35 Anti-Semitism as a Natural Self-Defence Reaction

top

 

The next caller is a female, and she also brings out the old war horse of jewish propaganda, namely that the German people had to suffer and have to suffer because of the world retaliating against us. Nobody ever bothers to reflect or give meditation or to think about why the Germans turned against the jews in the first place! Ours was a reaction of self defense. This is why the word anti-semitism or anti-Judaism was coined and created. It is inherent in the very word itself that ours was a natural reaction of a body politic, of a nation, of a state, of a culture, of a race, if you want, against intruders. If we had been for the jews, it would mean pro-semitism. But because of the way these people behaved, it was anti-semitism. If they had behaved beautifully, it could have been becoming philo-semitism. Or if they hadn’t been there would have been no anti, no pro, no nothing. You see, nobody bothers to think about those things.

 

36 As a War Measure, the Concentration Camps Can Be Justified

top

 

And it is once again important that we make this point again and again to the people of the world, that our reaction was natural, that as a war measure, the concentration camps can be justified. However ugly they are and however little we like them. Nobody likes to be deprived of their freedom. Neither do I. But the fact is we do not have to be forever bow our heads in shame because there were concentration camps and there were people in concentration camps. Because just about every country involved in World War II had people rotting in jail, forgot about their so-called human rights and civil rights. Imprisoned men, women and children. And in many countries, notably the glorious Democratic ally Joseph Stalin killed people by the millions and nobody cared and nobody squawked! So we should forget about defending ourselves but to take the initiative.

 

Back to the program.

 

37 Female Caller Supporting the Holocaust Movie

top

 

Radio Host: Hello, Good morning.

 

Caller (female): Yes, I would like to say a few words to your guest too. He seem to be awfully upset about a story that we saw on Holocaust. That story should have been told long time ago. You shouldn’t be upset because that’s a crime that was done and it should be told. Same like all other wars when they’re on TV, nobody’s upset.

 

But now when that story is told, he seems to be awfully upset because it’s something to be upset about. Because seeing something like that really is unbelievable!

 

Ernst Zundel: Madam. Has the mass murder of the civilian German population ever been shown in an eight hour television special all over North American television? Have the rapes of the 100,000 women in Berlin by the Soviets and Mongolian troops, ever been featured played? Have the rapes of the Viennese? Have the murders, the tortures in allied concentration camps after the war, have they ever been shown? No!

 

Caller (female): They might not be. But after the things that they did, they might be understandable why the people wanted to retaliate because of that you should understand that that story should be told a long time ago to remind us all the time what was going on.

 

Ernst Zundel: I’ve been in Canada for 20 years and I’ve heard nothing but this story from one side. Until finally after 20 years, …

 

Caller (female): [word unclear] not have got enough guts to [word unclear]

 

Ernst Zundel: You know something lady? I have enough guts, … Grant me enough guts from my side to speak up for our side.

 

Look. Grant me the guts from my side to speak up to our side. There is no not only your side. There’s always two sides to a story.

 

Caller (female): There is many nation sides and they all agree. Except you!

 

Ernst Zundel: They don’t all agree, my dear. They don’t all agree, my dear.

 

Caller (female): They do!

 

Ernst Zundel: In Tokyo during the war crimes trial., …

 

Caller (female): They do agree on this story, except you!

 

Ernst Zundel: Because you, my dear woman, there are thousands of books, there are thousands of books written in the world about the jewish lies about Holocaust, the blackmail that it is, and so on. It has nothing to do with fact at all! It is a money making racket employed internationally. Just the fact that a thousand guys tell a lie does make the original lie, not the truth! It is a lie!

 

[1:07:53]

 

38 Male Caller Somewhat Supportive of Zundel’s Position

top

 

Radio Host: Thanks for your call. Go ahead.

 

Caller (male): Hello. Good morning, John. First of all, let me put the record straight. This Holocaust business, this is a drama which has backfired completely. It has been produced by the jews themselves. Secondly, we are they always talking about the 6 million jews, but they never mention that there are 22 million during the Second World War who are gentile, Canadian, British, Russians, Germans as well, they have been killed as well.

 

Thirdly, those 6 million jews they have been smuggled into the United States. And quite a bit of them, they went into Palestine itself. To legitimize their claim in Israel.

 

Ernst Zundel: Absolutely!

 

Radio Host: All these facts they have not been told to the people!

 

Ernst Zundel: Absolutely!

 

Radio Host: [word unclear] can look for one side and neglect the other.

 

Ernst Zundel: Absolutely!

 

Radio Host: And two wrongs do not make right!

 

Ernst Zundel: Absolutely!

 

Radio Host: Exactly what has been practiced by the Germans on the jews and the victims of the jews by the Germans they are by Eichmann himself, who was a jew.

 

And finally the jews they have been compensated for all the damages. They got $35 billion out of West Germany for this so-called story of the 6 million jews. People better go to library and start to read and look to the two sides. I do not believe in killing, but two wrongs do not make right because exactly the jews are doing it in Palestine on the 3.5 million Arab Palestinians. And this is all that I have to say. John. Okay.

 

39 Israel Has Got Terror Squads Going out into the World Assassinating Diplomats, Etc.

top

 

Ernst Zundel: Mr. Reynolds. The week that Holocaust was being shown in the Western world, Israel invaded southern Lebanon.

 

Now, Israel has had three wars in the last generation. Germany has had none. Israel has got terror squads going out into the world assassinating diplomats and those whom they suspect of being terrorists. And there have been several mishaps reported where they got the wrong man.

 

In other words, we have hit squads roaming the planet, abducting people, kidnapping people, assassinating people, silencing people, burning people’s homes down like they did to this German in France, Jochen Pieper and so on.

 

Now there is an international gang of terrorists loose on the planet and they are camouflaging their international power by stuff like that. And we don’t like it. And the world should be grateful for a guy like John Reynolds and for a guy like Christoph Friedrich Zundel to get on the telephone and to alert them to the fact of what is happening! We are a planet in the grip of a gang of terrorists who are using this emotional propaganda to camouflage not their bygone deeds, nobody’s ever talked about them, but their current deeds!

 

Radio Host: Don’t thank me, Christopher. I’ve only got you on because you’re, …

 

Ernst Zundel: Controversial!

 

Radio Host: Controversial.

 

And I think people should know that you’re around because I think you’re, …

 

Ernst Zundel: What?

 

[Call cut out]

 

40 Male Caller Denies Gas Chambers and Disputes the Number of Jews Who Died

top

 

Radio Host: Hello? Hello, you’re there, Go ahead, go ahead Conor, go ahead.

 

Caller (female): The war was over. Hello?

 

Radio Host: Yes, go ahead again.

 

Caller (female): When the war was over I was 15 years old. When I’ve been around in Eastern Europe and then in Western Europe. When I hear this story it’s been told over the Holocaust, you know all the murdering goes on. It’s unbelievable what kind of lies! Because I’ve been down after war and around Bavaria with how concentration camp used to be. There was nothing! There was no gas chamber whatsoever! The gas chamber been built 1948!

 

Ernst Zundel: A Hollywood movie.

 

Caller (female): American supervision.

 

Ernst Zundel: A Hollywood movie.

 

Caller (female): In a little chamber, supposed to burn 6 million jews. Like in Canada, anybody who you listen to in the radio television he’s always:

 

“I was lucky I survived!”

 

How could he survive in Europe, in only 3 million jews? When you go back to Russia now and count the population the jewish in Poland how many immigrants to South America, to Palestine, the United States, Canada, you know how many are left who got killed? One million, two hundred thousand. That’s proven from the Swiss Red Cross. But that story they never told, people died of starvation. It was from 1944-45 because there was no transportation, no food! The food rationing was anyway. I mean there was no way to get the food to the people.

 

Ernst Zundel: In other words, …

 

Caller (female): Other people died. I saw him laying on the road as we marched from Poland to [word unclear] in front of the Russians, you know. And I thought he been shot down, you know from bombs and everything. But after the war when we stayed in Bavaria, so after you went to north German plain there, when his story’s been told [words unclear] brainwashed. The older people over there, they’re dying out. They forget, you know. It’s unbelievable, …

 

Radio Host: Anything that happened at the Nuremberg trials was true?

 

[1:12:59]

 

41 Zundel Talks About the Nuremberg Trials and the Dissenting Opinion of an Indian Judge

top

 

Ernst Zundel: Let me tell you about the Nuremberg trials.

 

Radio Host: I haven’t read them all but I’ve looked, …

 

Caller (female): Yeah, that’s the trouble, you know you only read the one side of it, you know.

 

Radio Host: Hey, thanks for your call.

 

Ernst Zundel: Mr Reynolds.

 

Radio Host: Go ahead.

 

Ernst Zundel: Mr. Reynolds I have in front of me a book put out by the British trial lawyer who defends Field Marshal Manstein in a war crimes trial in Germany after the war. And he quotes in there an Indian judge. He refers to him as “the great Indian judge Rahabino de Pal”, who wrote the dissenting judgment which he delivered as one of the judges of the International Court at Tokyo. Now he would have never been chosen number one as a judge had he been pro-German. He was completely neutral, an Indian judge, one of India’s great judges. Here is what the judge said as a dissenting opinion in Tokyo. And the same holds true for Germany:

 

“The so-called trial held according to the definition of crime now given by the victors obliterates the centuries of civilization which stretch between us and the summary slaying of a defeated in war. A trial with law thus prescribed would only be a sham employment of the legal process for the satisfaction of the thirst for revenge. It does not correspond to any idea of justice and may justly create the feeling that it is much more a political than a legal affair. To say that the Victor can define a crime at his will and then punish would be to revert back to those days when he was allowed to devastate an occupied country, appropriate all public and private property therein and kill the inhabitants or take them away into captivity.”

 

Mr. Reynolds, I will tell you that the United States, that the Soviet Union, that England, Canada, Belgium and France behave in exactly this manner!

 

In other words, the Indian judge calls them barbarians!

 

Radio Host: Okay, 685-9181. We’ll be right back after these messages.

 

42 Zundel’s Commentary on the Radio Host’s Willingness to Let Him Speak Freely

top

 

Ernst Zundel: Well, I have to admit to our listeners that in all the TV shows and in all the public debates and so on that I’ve ever made in North America, this one is turning out to be something else. This moderator is allowing me to say things unopposed. I can’t believe it! This has really in all honesty never happened to me before, that I would have been able to so openly state the German case and also to so openly and continuously attack the Allies. There is very little opposition from the callers that come in. We have had an Arab for the first time, an Arab coming to our defense. The reason why I am stressing the Arab is that I used to fight for the Arabic and Palestine Palestinian cause versus the Israelis with great vehemence and never received any support at all Over The Airwaves. And I was completely disgusted by it.

 

However, that was in Montreal. It does seem that the population composition of Vancouver is different and that this is why we can say more and be on the air.

 

43 Female Caller on the Amount of Hate Mongering That is Going On.

top

 

Radio Host: Yes caller.

 

Caller (male): I really, I can’t understand this program this morning. It just seems to be made up of hate!

 

But what I want to say is that can you tell me any country in the world that has not done, you know, terrible things to other nations, like even right today, right in Ireland, look what’s going on. And because a madman, Hitler, and he was proven mad! I mean, because he did these things, why blame the German people? The German are well educated. They’re one of the smartest people in the world. And not saying there’s lots of other smart people, but just because one madman did it, why is it all this hate perpetuated?

 

Radio Host: Because of Mr. Friedrich, I think, and what he’s doing.

 

Caller (male): Jewish people, too, seem to have a heck of a lot of resentment.

 

44 Zundel’s Run for the Post of Leader of the Liberal Party in 1968

top

 

Ernst Zundel: You see, it’s interesting, Mr. Reynolds, that I am supposed to be the hate monger. You can say about German people the most foul lies and the most horrible things. And you can say it over Canadian radio, over Canadian television. You can say it in Canadian newspapers and you can say it in our Canadian university textbooks. Mr. Reynolds, I went through your school system here and through your university system. I ran for the post of leader of the Liberal Party in 1968. I know what Canadians think, and I know what they do you know! You are the people, in effect, who have love on your lap and hate in your heart when it comes to Germans! It’s as simple as that!

 

Radio Host: How much did you get when you ran against Trudeau for the Liberal leadership?

 

Ernst Zundel: Pardon me?

 

Radio Host: How many votes did you get?

 

Ernst Zundel: I purposely dropped out five minutes before the balloting.

 

Radio Host: Why?

 

Ernst Zundel: Because I wanted to make the statement that a man with his own money, totally independent, could run and arrive in Ottawa and make it to the same podium, speak to the Canadian people. And I spoke to them strictly about anti-German hate propaganda. Nothing more, nothing less! I’m not a megalomaniac. I know exactly the limits of my personality. But I use that as a platform to say:

 

“Canadians, look in the mirror, stop hating us, number one, we don’t deserve it, number one. Number two, it doesn’t make you look any better for kicking around on us!”

 

You know, it’s okay to kick around a defeated enemy, but after 30 years, it reflects on the guy that does the kicking.

 

Radio Host: Why didn’t you continue and see how many votes you’d get?

 

[1:18:47]

 

Ernst Zundel: I had no misconception that Trudeau was going to win the election because I understand my fellow Canadians. You know, they were swept up by Trudeau mania. The media manufactured it.

 

And since I didn’t have the media behind me, thanks to my infiltrated cronies in the press, I certainly had no chance, just as little as Robert Winders or Paul Helio or anybody else. But if I had made it.

 

Radio Host: Thank you very much for being with us this morning. I don’t wish you any success because I think what you do, …

 

Ernst Zundel: Really, Mr. Reynolds, if I had made it, the country would be in much better shape, believe me.

 

Radio Host: Okay, well, that’s how you feel, I guess you’ve got the right in this country to do what you want to do.

 

Ernst Zundel: The results are obvious. Thank you.

 

Radio Host: Thank you very much.

 

45 Zundel’s Commentary on the Whole Program and Practical Advice to Callers

top

 

Ernst Zundel: Little remarkable remains to be said about this interview. On the whole, it is one of the most remarkable ones that I have done because of the length and because of the truth that I was able to say. Believe me, in 90% of the cases I couldn’t have been on that radio station for five minutes, and I would have been cut off.

 

But it seems that either the mood of the population is changing, or that the mood of the men in the media is changing, or that this man in particular doesn’t like what is happening and is using me as a mouthpiece. I do not know. I don’t understand it.

 

But as they say in English, why should I look a gift horse in the mouth? The program cost me nothing. The radio station paid for the telephone call. And my cause and my German people’s cause has been once again well defended and well served.

 

For those who are about to get into the media field, I think that this tape could serve as a good training tape, if I may say so, with all modesty, if you pardon the pun. But I have done so many of these radio shows that I’m beginning to consider myself somewhat of an expert.

 

Look at some of the callers that call in. They are amateurs and you can tell that they are amateurs. They are wandering all over the landscape. And again and again the moderator has to remind them:

 

“Make your point. Make your point! What’s your point? Come to your point!”

 

In other words, if you’re going to call in a program like that, write down what you want to say point for point, Rehearse it a little, say it out loud. Nobody’s around anyways. Most people are at work. And then state your case clearly, succinctly and carefully.

 

I learned my lessons and worked hard in polishing my media stance. I just wish I could have more opportunities like this one to make use of my 10 years of training, my 20 years of training, actually. And naturally, more than anything else, I wish I could do it back home in Germany.

 

However, there must be people who have to do it over here in North America. And as long as we are here, working here, living here, it is our duty to speak out and to stand up for what is right and for what is true. Naturally, I appeal, since this is in English, to all our many English speaking friends across this land, the United States and around the world.

 

This problem is not a German problem. It is your problem. It is our problem. It is a world problem. The German people didn’t create it, you helped create it. If you are too young, your father or your grandfather helped to create it. Now it’s your responsibility and my responsibility, our responsibility to change it. Because we live in this world together. It is up to you and I to pass on to our children and to future generations a better world, a healthier world, an honest world, a clean world and an unpolluted world. Not only unpolluted, that we have clear streams, clear oceans, clean air, but also clean brains! And thoroughly cleaned souls! Because we without those two, the other will, number one, not matter, and number two cannot be achieved.

 

Therefore, it is almost ironic that this problem of undetermined propaganda, of hate programs against Germans drag down those who do the hating and inhibit them in growing, because hate makes blind. And throughout this program you will have noticed that I speak very firmly and very quickly and very much to the point, but never with hate.

 

When in my early years and younger years I was so full of pain as to why and what had happened to Germany, and when I first discovered the horrendousness of this lie, I used to get so distraught that I suppose I hated, and I lost every radio program.

 

As a consequence I would say to check one’s emotions, to make sure one is relaxed, not tired, not agitated, and to try very hard to keep one’s emotions under control because the public airwaves are no medium for sounding like some raving lunatic. Speak by all means with feeling, but never with hate. Otherwise you will lose your audience, you will not be understood, and many people won’t be able to follow you. Therefore, try to state your case without hesitation, without humming and hawing, and rather be short and to the point than try to be long winded. And always keep in mind to whom you are speaking. If you are speaking to Canadians, address them on Canadian topics such as Canadian concentration camps, Canadian war crimes and Canadian skeletons in their closets. Don’t roam around the world about the 1918 revolution and this control and that stuff. Nobody’s interested.

 

[1:27:06]

 

Another thing to remember, stay away from figures. Nothing is more deadly and more boring than to discuss statistics and figures on radio. The counting of dead bodies is stupid and lurid and sad enough on paper, but it has absolutely no place on radio and not on television. I have seen how people have lost audiences left, right, front and center because they try to impress them with their knowledge of figures. Believe me, you can use it as a tactic to throw your opponent, of course, but don’t ever think you can score points. It’s a waste of time and it’s a waste of airtime. Stick to simple things that people can relate to, like stealing somebody’s property, beating, raping, mugging, torture, prison, stuff like that. Now that they can see every now night on television, they can relate to that. And if you relate that to them in our case, your point will be well made. Otherwise you’re going to get bogged down in 6 million and 9 million, minus 472,000 and so on. So many jews in Poland and all this, it is useless! Nobody cares. Nobody cares!

 

People basically think what the Germans did was monstrous because all they can relate to is that they might know a jew who is nice, or a jewish woman or jewish kid whom they like. And of course we murdered in effect the people whom they liked. So what we have to say is exactly what I said in this program. It is not our fault. We didn’t start this whole mess, somebody else did. It could have been solved differently if people had been willing.

 

Now, we don’t want to shoulder all the blame.

 

 

[01:29:13]

 

 

END

top

 

 

 

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

 

 

See Also

top

 

 

 

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 36 with Jürgen Neumann on Ernst Zundel – Mar 22, 2025 – Transcript

Ernst Zundel – Another Voice of Freedom Radio – Why World War II Started – 1994 – Transcript

Ernst Zundel – 1967-68 Radio Shows in Montreal Discussing Israel and Jewish Topics 1 – Transcript

Ernst Zundel – 1967-68 Radio Shows in Montreal Discussing Israel and Jewish Topics 2 – Transcript

 

 

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