As I mentioned the plight of Monika Schaefer in my previous blog post, I thought this would be a good opportunity to finally upload to YouTube a recording of one of our performances together.
*Updated and revised, April 9 2018.
Support for my right to freedom of expression was never going to strongly manifest itself in mainstream press reports. Social media provides a more balanced outlook, although most alt-lite personalities dare not broach the subject of my prosecution. It was interesting to note some tentative mainstream support for Markus Meecham aka Count Dankula, found guilty last month in Scotland of causing gross offence after teaching his girlfriend’s pug to lift its paw on the command ‘Gas the Jews!’.
Meecham now has over 90,000 Twitter followers and 170,000 YouTube subscribers: being found guilty certainly hasn’t put a spanner in his works. Contrary to my songs, it seems Count Dankula’s mischief-making is not considered to be that much of an effective weapon against New World Order orthodoxy. Indeed, Meecham has since been compensated for his sins with a media career. Even Tommy Robinson turned out to report on the recovering communist’s trial. Doubtful that Israel-loving Yaxley-Lennon will be doing the same when the time comes for my verdict to be pronounced. Also unlikely that Ricky Gervais, David Baddiel and Jonathan Pie will be voicing their concerns – as they did regards Meecham – if I, too, am found guilty.
As far as I am aware, I am the only artist in modern British history to have been jailed for the heinous crime of composing and singing satirical songs which I uploaded to the Internet.
In four weeks time, my trial will take place in London and the three songs concerned will be screened in court. Two clips will show songs from my appearance at The London Forum in September 2016 in front of an audience of roughly 100 people who, considering the standing ovation I received at the end, clearly enjoyed my performance. The third clip is of a song which contains the word SATIRE in the title, which leads me to the point of this blog post.
Yesterday, I received 50 legal request takedown notices from YouTube, informing me that my entire library of uploads spanning the past ten years has been removed in Austria, Switzerland, Czech Republic, Germany, France, French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Israel, Italy, Martinique, New Caledonia, French Polynesia, Poland, Saint Pierre and Miquelon, Reunion, French Southern Territories, Wallis and Futuna, Mayotte.
That’s approximately 260 million potential viewers who, if they’re not computer-savvy, are now deliberately deprived of my audio-visual output, whether it’s a subtitled translation of news from other revisionists, almost forgotten songs or short gardening tips. Account managers at the legal firm which issued the requests will be no doubt be satisfied, along with (((whoever))) ordered them to do the dirty on my entire channel. Or perhaps YouTube simply became fed up receiving multiple requests from whining lobbyists and just banned the whole lot in one go?
It’s hard to feel pleased about losing so many potential viewers in this way. At least, it can be said that this new dose of mass censorship of my work once again shows I must be doing something right.
Perhaps the legal action came about following my recent ban from Facebook during which I uploaded several videos on the plight of German revisionist and hero of our times, Horst Mahler. Sentenced to ten years and two months in prison, Mahler was freed under caution in 2015 after an untreated wound on his left foot became infected, meaning he had to undergo amputation below the knee. Always the rebel, Mahler gave a speech last January which is truly inspiring. You can find the subtitled version here and my shorter uploads on the same subject here. My first upload is now approaching 12,000 views in just 12 days which won’t have pleased lobbying organisations. Alfred Schaefer’s voiceover version of the same video was shared on platforms such as Renegade Tribune, further helping to raise awareness of Mahler’s situation and the utter hypocrisy of draconian thought crime laws which exist in so-called free, democratic nations. It just goes to show how desperate our traditional enemies are when the wheels of justice are set in motion in order to silence an 81-year old amputee: in these same countries, rapists and murders get off with far lighter sentences.
Censorship of this kind – initiated as ever by the same traditional enemy – is only to be expected and should be taken as a shining badge of honour. It costs them both time and money. Regards Mahler’s message, the banning of my videos also came too late as Mahler has managed to flee Germany and is now in a safe place from where he intends to seek political asylum.
However, should censorship – and indeed self-censorship – coming from those on the Liberal Left be taken equally seriously? I’ve tweeted (when I still had a Twitter), written and sung about Ken Livingstone and the Haavara Agreement. I also supported, among others, Jackie Walker when she became a target of the Israel lobby for pointing out the major role played by Jews in the Transatlantic slave trade as well as asking why the Holocaustᵀᴹ was privileged in comparison to other [verifiable] genocides. However, my sympathy for the Left stops short when, in return for my words of support, I am treated with even more contempt by these Liberal Leftists than I am by our traditional enemy lobbyists.
Hailing from mid-Wales, Mike Sivier is a Labour candidate in next week’s local elections. He also writes a blog Vox Political. Sivier is the latest victim of the Campaign Against Antisemitism’s all-out dastardly scheme to silence anyone they dislike. Alongside the lesser sins of criticising Israel and Zionism as well as voicing support for Livingstone, Sivier had had the gall to quote Gilad Atzmon. Worse still: yesterday in response to a typical CAA smear op, Sivier posted a blog in which he was misguided to the point of including a quote from yours truly. As if citing far right Holocaust denier Atzmon wasn’t bad enough, Sivier now collaborates with a genuine Nazi!
To be fair, Sivier did have the guts to publish my comment and he even replied. However, to all intents and purposes, Sivier must have quickly begun to reflect on what was more important: truth or his own fledgling political career. His final answer to my second comment says it all: Sivier is a Shoahist who believes Jews should be treated differently from the rest of us. My further replies are still awaiting moderation
As Canadian free speech advocate Paul Fromm recently said: if you can’t name the problem, then the problem can’t be solved. The enemies of free speech grow evermore desperate to suppress the truth and the more they try, the deeper the hole they dig for themselves. Revisionism and the truth about what really happened during World War Two can no longer be suppressed. In terms of advertising and marketing, society will soon reach tipping point and the true, verifiable version of history will be adopted by the masses.
Using smear tactics to silence political enemies and the law to replace the concept of true or false with the concept of what is acceptable or unacceptable to Jews – Shoahism or antisemitism – has had the opposite effect to the one originally intended. Sooner rather than later, more people will start to seek the truth and speak out. As always, our traditional enemy could have avoided all this happening. Alas, they never learn.
Reblogged from source.
– by Monika Schaefer, 08 Sept 2016.
~ Exercising My Human Right to Speak Freely!
There is one event in our history which appears to be off-limits to discuss, debate, ask questions, investigate, or ask for evidence. That event is the so-called “Holocaustᵀᴹ”. It has become a belief system, and if you dare to speak something contrary to this belief system, beware! You may encounter “ritual defamation”. You may be viewed as a heretic. Facts become irrelevant; the main objective is that you are punished severely for going against the stream. I have been experiencing ritual defamation in my home town of Jasper, Canada, population 5000. I am the perfect candidate for defamation, in that I have lived here most of my life and have been an active community member, which makes me locally well-known. Some of the elements of ritual defamation are shunning, ostrasizing, shaming, cutting off income, and character assassination.
A strange type of response that I get from many people, is that this topic of #Holocaustᵀᴹ is “off limits” for them, even if they tell me they respect my right to freedom of speech. They tell me outright that they will not discuss or debate this issue, end of story. They refuse to look at any evidence, book, video, or hear any argument from me about why and how I have reached my conclusions. Is this reasonable? Is there any other part of our history which is treated in this way? The unique hold of the #Holocaustᵀᴹ narrative on people’s psyche is what causes me to view it as the new religion of the masses.
Recently I was invited by the Canadian Association for Free Expression to go to Toronto to speak about my experience – how I came to my conclusions on the #Holocaustᵀᴹ , and the aftermath of posting my “Sorry Mom, I was wrong about the #Holocaustᵀᴹ” video. There I met many people with interesting stories of their own, for example, there were several expellees from the eastern former territories of Germany.
Millions of Germans were expelled from those eastern European lands at the end of the war in 1945 in the largest forced migration in all of recorded history. Many were put into camps. It is estimated that 3 million died along the way, either of exposure, starvation, or outright murder. Many were raped and tortured. Where are the monuments to those victims? And why is this part of our history omitted or barely mentioned in school? I certainly never knew about it until very recently. But I do remember learning in school about the evil Germans making soap, lampshades and shrunken heads out of the bodies of Jews, all admitted and proven lies. It has become perfectly acceptable in our society to denigrate the religions of Christianity or Islam, but going against “the #Holocaustᵀᴹ ” has severe consequences, including incarceration. Many European countries have laws which make peaceful expression against the official narrative of the #Holocaustᵀᴹ illegal. Canada does not have explicit laws against “#Holocaustᵀᴹ denial”, but Ernst Zundel was jailed for just that under the notorious hate-speech laws, so in effect, it is illegal to deny the holocaust in Canada. Only lies need to be protected by laws. The truth stands on its own. Is it not possible to have open debate on the #Holocaustᵀᴹ ? What are they hiding?
FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN CANADA IS UNDER ATTACK! CANADIAN PUBLISHER FACING JAIL FOR POLITICAL WRITINGS NOW PURSUING A CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE TO CANADA’S NOTORIOUS “HATE PROPAGANDA” LEGISLATION!
An extremely important court case is coming up soon. Arthur Topham, publisher of radicalpress.com “digging to the root of the issues since 1998”, will be in the Quesnel Court during the week of October 3 to 7, 2016. This case to repeal the Orwellian hate-speech laws is important for all of us, for our freedom of speech. Who decides what is “hate” speech? If we are only free to express politically correct views, then we do not have freedom of speech, period. Without freedom of speech, we do not have a functioning democracy. Instead, we have tyranny.
Holocaust or Hoax by Jurgen Graf p.149-51
A question to which revisionists would like a convincing answer: What is the explanation for the irrational behaviour of an entire people which apparently believes in an absurd (Holocaust) legend (myth)?
The Holocaust – with its gas chambers which constantly change location; its millions of victims who disappear without a trace into blue vapour at Auschwitz, Majdanek and Treblinka, after being murdered by Hitler’s SS butchers, either with Zyklon B insecticide or Diesel exhaust, not to mention mass shootings Babi Yar-style (where the victims also disappear without a trace) – is, and remains, first and foremost a unique proof of the monumental stupidity of our age. In the early 1980s – when the major absurdities of the Holocaust swindle had already been exploded, with the exception of a few details – most revisionist researchers thought it inconceivable that the legend could persist more than a few more years. Since then, more than fifteen years have elapsed, and the Lie continues to drag out its existence, filthier and more luxuriant than ever! Cracks are appearing in the edifice of lies, doubts are appearing – here and there, in the press, in a few articles, in many private conversations – as to the truth of the Establishment version of the fate of the Jews under the Third Reich.
People mention the possibility of minor errors or exaggerations; but almost everyone continues to accept the story as basically correct. It is precisely this general acceptance which is the biggest puzzle to revisionists – and to any reasonable person with a minimum knowledge of history. Really, how can anyone of normal intelligence, for example, view the room which is shown to millions of tourists on the grounds of the former camp of Auschwitz as the “only Nazi gas chamber remaining in original condition”, without immediately realising that the physical capacity of the room – not to mention its immediate surroundings, for example, its proximity to the hospital located nearby – would make any mass execution using a highly dangerous poison gas impossible? The unspeakable atrocity stories spewed forth to visitors by officials of the Auschwitz Museum, deserve only ridicule. But the very opposite occurs: in these shrines dedicated to the Holocaust religion, people become intellectual cripples: awe-struck, their senses paralysed, they gape at everything as if it were plausible, and solemnly swallow nonsensical fairy tales! Even the generation of Germans which lived through the war – i.e., the “generation of criminals”, those who supported the National Socialist system which is now slandered all over the world, who remained true to that system and fought for it to the bitter end, with unprecedented self-sacrifice and devotion of spirit – that generation no longer knows what to believe after half a century of filth and lies.
They confuse their personal firsthand experience, that which they saw and experienced themselves, with that which they think they should have seen or experienced (according to the official version of history). Faced with the accusations and ignorance of succeeding generations, the generation of the war years joins in with the chorus of self-incrimination or takes refuge in resigned silence. And yet, – if the gas chambers were technically impossible and the whole story is therefore a lie; – if no material evidence of the crime remains, since the Nazis “destroyed all traces of their crimes at the last moment”; – if millions of bodies simply disappeared into blue vapour, so that not a single body of a single gassing victim has ever been found; – if the official version of history is based on nothing but contradictory “eyewitness testimonies” of witnesses who were never subjected to cross-examination, and confessions extorted from “criminals”; – if a forensic report, including a reconstruction as is ordinary practice in an ordinary murder case, has never even been attempted; – if expert reports on the technical feasibility of the mass gassings are never performed by the courts, but only on behalf of private parties, and if no technical refutation of these reports can be produced. Then how is it then possible for the world to believe this series of grotesque hallucinations?
If you ask these questions, most people are either surprised or shocked. But some people, particularly, young people – who often react spontaneously and emotionally – immediately and spontaneously declare their conviction that the Holocaust is absurd. One hears remarks like the following: “How could I have believed such nonsense for all those years?” The revisionist may perhaps be pleased in the belief that he has won a new adherent. But in most cases, this is a great mistake. When the shock wears off – the shock which sets in following the discovery of a new truth – the new convert returns to his old environment, where it is almost impossible to find any information on the subject other than all-pervading Holocaust propaganda. The average person lacks the courage to deviate from his environment; the mass media, of course, are all around us. Upon the slightest expression of doubts, the inevitable reply will be that he has spoken with a horrid, lying Nazi, that he has heard a load of lies, and that he had better forget everything he heard. This is particularly true, unless the convert is a hero willing to jeopardise his social and professional position for historical truth. Since even the crudest lie can be obfuscated and explained away, the heretic falls away from his new belief and returns to the shrine of the incredible. Credo quia absurdum est. What at first seemed absurd – in comparison to reasonable information about the absurdity of the Holocaust religion – once again seems convincing. In a society in which propagandists control the media, those who stray from the fold are quick to permit themselves to be persuaded once again that the unanimous opinion (Vox Populi, Vox Dei) which confirmed the reality of the mass extermination of the Jews for over a half a century, bears incomparably more weight than the statements of a single “Nazi”.
This abandonment of the elementary duty to seek the truth can, however, have unexpectedly unpleasant results. Today, even re-educated Germans – despite their anti-fascist fanaticism – are regarded with mistrust, even hostility, by many people in all parts of the world.
The Zionists and their stooges are skilful at ensuring the perpetuation of this hostility, for example, through hundreds of films, largely produced by Jews, which depict German soldiers either as simple fools or sadistic beasts.
The passivity and cowardice of the majority of the German people today is their decisive contribution to the perpetuation endless hatred. All of German contemporary history has been turned into a sort of crime sheet by the Allied victors. The Germans swallow everything in complete passivity.
A person who refuses to defend himself, ought not to wonder if he is found guilty. He deserves no respect, and should expect none. Germans compete with each other in vomiting upon their own people and themselves at the same time. Do they really expect to gain any sympathy abroad in this way?
Let us nevertheless attempt to understand the reasons for this apparently illogical behaviour on the part of the German people.
Perhaps the main reason for it is the knowledge, or instinctive sense, that any critical discussion of the so-called Holocaust is dangerous; it can cost the victim his job, his position in society, and even destroy his family. In addition, many people don’t want to know much about the Holocaust, which is the principal accusation against the German people, since they intuitively feel that many things about it simply cannot be true. They are afraid to know whether the Holocaust is a pack of lies, or just a lie or two; anyone doubting the details of the official version of history runs the risk of being compelled to question the story as a whole.
And that is just what our contemporaries, set on their peace and quiet and comfort at any price, do not want. On the other hand, it is not easy to live with a lie which one should long ago have recognised as such, and, at the same time, to act as if it were no lie at all. For example, how should the mother of a family, who knows to a certainty that the gas chamber yarn is a lie, answer a child who asks, eyes wide-open with wonder: “Mama, teacher told us that German soldiers gassed the Jews. Did Grandpa gas the Jews, too?” The best way to evade a question like that, which is complex and painful, is simply to know nothing. So the mother simply tells the over-curious child, “I don’t know, ask your teacher.”
The information in this blog post is taken from the fourth in a series of videos by French revisionist, Vincent Reynouard, on the Einsatzgruppen – German action squads sent behind the Eastern front in 1941 to ‘clean up’ the threat posed to Hitler’s Third Reich by Bolshevists and Jewish Partisans.
In the first three episodes (as yet without English subtitles) Reynouard builds up to his grand finale with an exposé on the reasons why this most bloody and gruesome chapter of World War Two came about. With characteristic passion and aplomb, he details events which preceded the outbreak of war in 1939 and analyses Hitler’s decision to invade Russia. Using original documents, photographs and film footage, Reynouard then goes on to describe deployment of the Einsatzgruppen .
At the beginning of Part 4, Reynouard thanks contributors who, by their kind donations, have allowed him and Belgian revisionist colleague, Siegfried Verbeke, to buy copies of the official Einsatzgruppen reports (which are the result of collated Einsatzgruppen field reports) made at the Reich’s Berlin headquarters. Verbeke studied the 3,000 pages in order to calculate the number of executions carried out by these so-called ‘mobile death squads’.
Indeed, it seems that, to date, there has never been any study or research based on these original, official documents by conventional historians. Moreover, here you can see screenshots of court transcripts of the Nuremberg statutes concerning presentation of these same documents at the Einsatzgruppen trial. Only the accusation – the victorious Allies – was granted full access to the Einsatzgruppen reports. The defence – the losers – was kept in the dark and only shown extracts from 15 of the thousands of reports – extracts indicting them of ‘war crimes’. Verbeke and Reynouard’s work reveals not only the gaps left by historians, it shows us how the prosecution at Nuremberg managed to have the defence convicted by way of lies, fraud and deception.
The Einsatzgruppen were divided into four units of roughly 500 men each and were spread out from north to south along the Eastern occupied territories. We learn from the Nuremberg court transcripts that their mission – as well as ‘cleaning up’ Bolshevik enemies of the Reich – was to concentrate all Jews into cities and large towns, Jews being the natural allies of the Bolsheviks.
Squads would enter a town, find the local notables and officials who would then be interviewed by the Einsatzgruppen resident Gestapo – the German secret police. If the officials were found to be useful – say, as informants – their lives would be spared. If not, they would be shot and the execution would be duly reported, giving date, time, place as well as the reason for the killing.
It was a bloody war, without rules, without honour and without mercy. A war which would decide the future of the Reich, now fighting on two separate fronts. The German soldiers were constantly under threat from terror attacks by Jewish partisans who were also spreading anti-German propaganda amongst the eastern populations. If German soldiers were found to have been tortured and killed in an ambush, the Einsatzgruppen would then be ordered to retaliate by rounding up and executing civilians – mostly Jews. With strict German military formality, these mass executions would also be recorded in field reports which would then be sent to Berlin by the squad Kommandants to be collated into the official documents, as studied by Verbeke. These reports were copied 62 times before being circulated to party officials, suggesting that they must be authentic.
Verbeke’s research of the 3,000 pages found only a small fraction of reports relating to mass executions. At Nuremberg, the number of deaths 1941-1942 cited is 1,000,000. Verbeke’s calculations show a maximum total of 450,000 of which 357,000 were Jews. The greater part of the Einsatzgruppen reports relate to more banal matters of schools, hospitals, food supply, welfare, as well as ghettoisation of Jews, etc.
We learn that mass executions sometimes took place out of sheer necessity. Food sources were becoming increasingly scarce. Locals were starving which caused further unrest. Reports show that the worst-affected patients of at least two mental institutions were liquidated in order to relieve the situation and improve the lives of local residents. A mass execution took place in another town where Jews had been stealing food and then selling it on the black market.
Several reports inform us of the local population’s satisfaction over these killings. Jews were widely hated and seen as collaborators. They often held top positions in local administration because of their allegiance with the despotic Bolsheviks.
As with the magical six million figure and the fantastical gas chamber murder weapon, a shroud of deception has been placed over the verifiable functioning of the Einsatzgruppen. They were not sent out to systematically kill all Jews. If this were the case, then why bother to concentrate Jews in ghettos built specially for them, where they had their own officials and were generally left to their own devices?
Mass executions were not carried out indiscriminately, but were done for reasons of retaliation against Partisan terrorism or out of absolute necessity during a time of war. Horrific though this might seem, the official records confirm that there was no systematic extermination policy concerning Jews. Conventional spin on the Einsatzgruppen is yet another ruse intended to elevate Jewish suffering to a quasi-religious belief which cannot be equalled. How can a single crucifixion compare to six million souls being sent to their deaths just because they happen to be Jewish?
Times are changing, and at last the mist is dissipating and the full picture is about to be revealed. Jews suffered no more and no less than other groups during World War Two. Jews were not the only ones to be rounded-up, sent to camps or indeed shot and buried in mass graves by the Einsatzgruppen. We know that Jews also fought in the German army and gave orders as Sonderkommandos in the camps.
Vincent Reynouard is still alive, but the persecution he has suffered for what he describes as “the cause” is far from being imaginary. Like Siegfried Verbeke and other revisionists, he has even been imprisoned for his opinions in a so-called ‘democratic’ and ‘free’ Liberated Europe! Recently, Reynouard was forced to flee France and – like myself and so many other dissident voices – has lost work, been separated from his family and is obliged to be on constant guard vis-à-vis the immoral deception of our common enemy: Zionism. Please support him if you can.
Our enemy is also the enemy of humanity. It’s time to wake up, to open your eyes and resist Zionism’s evil oppression.
Free speech. Free access to information. Free Palestine.