Patriot Letter. Dated 2/14/05.

Archived by k0nsl.



Dear Fellow Patriot!

The answer to yesterdays quiz comes from the winner:

“Hitler was born at Braunau, but when he was five,
they moved to Linz.”

Pastor Robert

Linz was the town. The winner is…………… Pastor


The new Quiz:


The winner will receive and original eastercard from
1940 with a stamp portraying Hindenburg inscribed with
the text “Jeder Volksgenosse ist ein Rundfunkhoerer,”
flanked by the SS sign.


Despite all efforts by the German Government, the
Dresden vigil was a huge success. The German police
estimated more than 4,000 people, however, Der Spiegel
says that the number is much, much higher.

It looks like as Chancellor Schroeder was given a
message by the people that they are sick of the guilt
and that they are not taking it anymore.


We continue our coverage of Dresden with the Adelaide
Institute’s Dr. Fredrick Toben.


The Dresden Holocaust in view of  a Book Review

Fredrick Töben Reviews

Robert A Kahn: Holocaust Denial and the Law [A
Comparative Study], 2004, Palgrave Macmillan (St
Martin’s Press), New York. ISBN 1-4039-6476-9.

Preamble and Overview

Sacramento’s Walter Mueller, the dynamo behind the
daily Revisionist email Patriot Letter, headed his 10
January 2005 missive ‘State of Revisionism in the US’,
then regretted how Revisionism seems to be grinding to
a halt because of ‘cowardice’. He notes that
Revisionists such as Hans Schmidt and Dr Robert
Countess have exited the battle field on account of
ill health while Russ Granata has passed away, and
Mark Weber’s output at the IHR has ceased with the
exception of having on 4 February 2005 brought about
25 persons to an Ernst Zündel protest rally outside
the Canadian Consulate in Los Angeles. Zündel’s wife,
Ingrid Rimland attended the protest meeting – but she,
too, has after almost a decade given up on writing her
somewhat famous daily Zgrams, perhaps justified
because of the ever increasing legal cost burden
facing her while husband, Ernst Zündel, languishes in

Germar Rudolf, one of the most productive Revisionists
is facing total uncertainty as he becomes a father and
awaits the results of an appeal application for
refugee status. Should Rudolf fail, then he will
immediately – Schnell! Schnell! – be deported in
chains to Germany where he faces many years of
imprisonment. Others, such a Paul Grubach and Michael
Hoffmann, III, have remained small-scale independent
researchers, the latter’s Weltanschauung embracing a
religious battlefield that makes him an expert on

Walter Mueller concludes that his monthly Community
News and Willis Carto’s The Barnes Review

“are the only ones left with a consistent print-run
…I understand that the social aspect has to be
considered, however, this state of Revisionism can
only be explained with one word – cowardice. It is
sad, but the truth is, those who write anonymously or
speak anonymously, are no help. In fact, they are a
burden and a security risk. If we do use their
writings, then the Jews accuse us of lying since we
are not allowed to give the source. So, we might as
well not use their material…‘Risk free’ is the motto
of the undercover revisionist in America. I think that
we have reached the stage where the Jews have almost
won … they have almost silenced Revisionist activities
in the country that was built on liberty and freedom.”

Mueller also mentions the new Noontide Press website,
a business affiliate of the IHR

Interestingly, the US giant of Revisionism, Professor
Arthur Butz, does not rate a mention in Mueller’s
quick survey. This is somewhat justified because Dr
Butz is not an activist. All the same, there are still
surprisingly many devoted individuals behind the scene
who enable the visible Revisionist warrior to fight
the good fight, to stand at the battlefront and to
face the firing line – now more increasingly through
the Internet. It is therefore a waste of time for
Revisionists to faction-fight on grounds that some
Revisionist is afflicted with hubris, or some other
such personal failing – so long as the Revisionist
produces the goods and continues to challenge the ‘
Holocaust’  believers’ version of historical facts.

Last year when Germar Rudolf re-published Arthur
Butz’s classic of 1976, The Hoax of the Twentieth
Century, the issue raised above clarified itself in
Butz’s own introductory words. He states that the book
he began to work on over 30 years ago is still
relevant to this day – and that the ‘Holocaust’
believers have significantly reacted to his theses,
something that is evident in the way they have behaved
themselves in formulating and structuring their
world-wide attacks against the Revisionists’
historical findings, in particular on the Auschwitz
homicidal gassing allegations.

So it surprises somewhat that Robert Kahn, whose book
is the subject of this review, fails to mention Butz
or his The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, but
elaborates on Bradley Smith’s CODOH activities on the
various university campuses, which Mueller does not
mention because this activity has now ceased. But then
Kahn also does not mention Germar Rudolf and his The
Rudolf Report, and nor does he mention Judge Wilhelm
Stäglich’s Der Auschwitz Mythos, and the fact that in
1983 Stäglich had his doctorate revoked from Göttingen
University wherefrom he had obtained it during the

The fact that these three giants of Revisionism, Butz,
Stäglich and Rudolf, are not mentioned in this book
cannot be an accident or oversight. The final draft of
the book was closed in 2002, and even non-revisionist
David Irving’s 2000 London case against Professor
Deborah Lipstadt is mentioned in the book’s final two
pages. Also mentioned in the text, at page 74, is
Hans-Heiko Klein the Mannheim public prosecutor of
Günter Deckert and me, but his name does not appear in
the index.

The 2001 New Zealand Dr Joel Hayward thesis case is
not mentioned either, but had Kahn done so, then he
would have had to tie the Hayward case in with a
mention of the Stäglich case in Germany that served to
send a very clear message: Hands off the ‘Holocaust’.

The case in South Africa involving community
broadcasting station Radio 786 and South African Jewry
is likewise not mentioned, perhaps because it still is
a live issue on account of South African Jewry
pressing for an appeal against a decision that went
against them. To date South Africa, as a first-nation
country in matters ‘Holocaust’, stands alone as the
only country where such things can be disputed.

The Australian scene appears to be uninteresting for
Dr Kahn because neither Mrs Olga Scully’s case nor my
case before the Federal Court of Australia receives a
mention. Both our battles before the courts would have
completed the book’s legal history of how debate is
suppressed by legal means. It would then have to be
mentioned what a hopeless endeavour it was for us as
lay persons to do battle against professional legal
counsel – all because we could not find any legal
persons willing to help us at this factual and
critical level of the trial. Mrs Scully valiantly
defended herself while I resisted defending myself on
grounds that it was a test case involving the
Internet. The other reason lay in the fact that Common
Law generally cannot permit an unrepresented defendant
to win, as became glaringly clear when David Irving
conducted his own case in London.

The Australian legal solution to suppressing
Revisionist debate is still regarded as a civil matter
and results in the handing down of court gag orders, a
breach of which will then attract criminal sanction in
the form of contempt of court charges – thereby
side-stepping the material facts that gave rise to the
legal action in the first place.

Also, I would have thought that if Australia is not
important for Kahn’s world survey of ‘Holocaust’
denial and the law, then at least my German case
should have been mentioned because it involves the
Internet, and it already has spawned two Ph D theses.
The novel idea that German law extends beyond
Germany’s physical borders and reaches to Australia is
established insofar that on 12 December 2000 the
German Constitutional Court ruled it could, but then
it suspended the lower court’s findings and ordered a
re-trial. This was tentatively abandoned on 8 November
2004 because I did not turn up on account of being
subject to a German order banning me from entering

So, why are there these glaring omissions? Let’s look
at the book in a little detail.


The dust jacket follows the typical black-white dour
style that books on this topic have adopted with a
representation of the usual striped prison pyjamas
sporting a number 38641. One may assume that this
numbering is quite a normal procedure in any place
that deals with prisoners or detained persons, the 41
indicating perhaps the year of entering the camp.

Pages i-xi include title page, publication data,
contents and preface. Interestingly, in the Preface it
appears that Dr Kahn did not speak with any
Revisionist, something that marks one of his blind
spots. Revisionists are known not to have a fear of
making contact with anyone, from the so-called left to
the so-called right. Unfortunately the ‘Holoaust’
believers have a habit of excluding Revisionists from
any public debate, usually justified by some dubious
emotional and irrational claim that the Revisionist’s
presence, alone, is too upsetting to ‘Holocaust’
survivors and their offspring. So much for freedom and
democracy when ‘Holocaust’ believers go public to tell
their tale of woe.

This theme of implied suppression of debate is, of
course, what this book is all about. It is, in effect,
a handbook on how to suppress public debate on the

The Contents page informs how the 207-page book
divides into three parts: THE DILEMMA OF PROOF, THE
TOLERATION. This is followed at pages 161-189 with
NOTES that lists 620 references. The BIBLIOGRAPHY at
pages 191-98 lists 175 sources, excluding those
mentioned above. Why? Is this a case of being ignorant
of the facts or lying through omission of the facts?

The INDEX at pages 199-207, likewise, does not mention
Butz, Stäglich or Rudolf.


Dr Kahn’s Introduction reveals the mind-set and
premise on which his whole argument rests, and the
problems that arise in order legally to enshrine this
Weltanschauung in the Statute Books of Canada, France,
Germany and the United States.

“The book focuses on the 1970s, 1980s and early 1990s,
a time when legal systems and societies were adjusting
to the emergence of Holocaust deniers on the social
and political landscape. The countries were chosen
because they have each experienced a major scandal
relating to the conflict between law and respect for
the Holocaust.” (p 2)

The temptation for me is to re-think what I wrote
about Kahn not mentioning Butz,  Stäglich or Rudolf
because here we have a partial explanation why the
1993 Rudolf Report is not mentioned. But it doesn’t
quite make sense because the 1993 Hayward thesis
erupted in 2000 at the time of the Irving trial, and
Kahn does mention the latter’s London legal case
against professor Lipstadt. Perhaps Kahn mentioned
this matter because it is considered a victory for
Holocaust’ believers and a defeat for Revisionists.

But this kind of reasoning does not follow because
Kahn extensively reports on the Ernst Zündel case in
Canada – and Zündel had a vital victory over the
‘Holocaust’ believers. This, by the way, makes
Zündel’s current predicament a pure act of ‘Holocaust’
believers’ revenge far divorced from any sense of
legality. It could be said that the Zündel case
illustrates the use of naked, uninhibited political
and financial power.

And Kahn does not object to admitting that the
‘Holocaust’ needs to be protected both legally and
politically, thereby admitting that truth as a defence
in any legal battle becomes irrelevant.

In any case, finding out the truth of a matter is not
the object of Common Law but rather ensuring that
procedural fairness is given to the accused. The rules
of hearsay usually determines who can present the
soundest and most truthful argument to a judge.
Unfortunately this is not guaranteed anymore since the
common law countries have adopted the various forms of
human rights legislation where a mere hurt feeling or
suspicion of committing a hurt is enough to guarantee
a conviction.

We have arrived at the Soviet Union show trials
mentality, and also the witch trial mentality that
devastated the legal systems of Europe and America in
the past. Hence no legal system protects the
Revisionists from vicious legal prosecution.

In the European Inquisitorial legal system – civil law
– the judge participates in the act of finding the
truth. But because judges are subjected to
political-ideological pressures, as the Deckert case
reveals so well, this looking for truth has been
subverted by that all-embracing legal principle:
“Offenkundigkeit” – taking judicial notice of an
event, such as the ‘Holocaust’, and thereby
eliminating the need to test the claims made by the

Kahn clearly elucidates what a tight rope judges have
to walk when the Jewish-generated public outrage takes
hold and influences so-called independent judicial
decisions. Kahn does not point out what an
interference such public outrage is in the due process
of the law because he shares the view that
Revisionists must be silenced.

In France, as Professor Robert Faurisson knows so
well, there is a special law that guns down
Revisionists with the argument that they must not
contest anything that emerged from the Nuremberg War
Crimes Tribunal. Special laws are generated to silence
those who refuse to believe in the ‘Holocaust’ story –
the Gayssot Law. Instead of questioning the validity
of such arbitrary legal constructs – law formulation
on the run, as I would call it –  Kahn supports such
oppressive measures. As Kahn notes at page 108,
Faurisson will not be silenced, and in September 1990
gave an interview to Le Choc du Mois:

“One will not make me say that two and two are five,
that the earth is flat and that the Nuremberg Tribunal
is infallible. I have excellent reasons for not
believing in the policy of extermination of the Jews
or in the magical gas chambers … I do not seek to
evade the new law, I face it in the front … I wish
that 100% of the French would recognize that the myth
of the gas chambers is a fairy-tale, ratified in
1945-46 by the victors of Nuremberg and made official
by the current government of the French republic, with
the approval of the court historians.”

Although not mentioned by Kahn, no doubt because of
his 1996 cut-off point for his research, Horst
Mahler’s 2004/5 Berlin court case assumes monumental

Mahler brought along new evidence that the ‘common
knowledge’ aspect of the numbers killed at Auschwitz
was revised downwards by Fritjof Meyer, the latter
also distinctly stating that Auschwitz and
Auschwitz-Birkenau were not the death centres, but
that two (fictitious) farm houses served as the
infamous homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz. Meyer
has not been prosecuted for his statements, something
that is quite significant. Unfortunately, Judge Peter
Faust simply rejected Mahler’s fresh/new evidence, and
sentenced Mahler to a nine months non-suspended prison
sentence. Judge Faust’s decision is being appealed,
and one may hope that Mahler’s presentation will bear
fruit. He offered the court a most detailed
Weltanschauung-world view representing those that
Mahler labelled in the quip: Deutsche die noch Deutsch
sein wollen – Germans who still want to be Germans.

The fact that so-called democratic and freedom-loving
Switzerland is not mentioned here is not
understandable either as it should have rated a
mention because it uses so-called racist laws to
stifle ‘Holocaust’ debates. Jürgen Graf and René-Louis
Berclaz have felt the full force of this law, the
former escaping to Russia and the latter currently
languishing in a Swiss prison. A century ago it was
different then because composer Richard Wagner fled
from Germany to find political freedom in Switzerland.

A Challenge to America’s James Randi Education
Foundation –

Also, that long-time Revisionist from Flanders,
Siegfried Verbeke is not mentioned. Only recently he
succeeded in resisting a German arrest warrant that
demanded Belgium extradite him to Germany on the usual
charges. A Belgium court refused on grounds that
extraditions cannot occur between European Union
member states if the country from which extradition is
sought has the same law under which the extradition is
requested. Belgium has the same Holocaust laws but it
does not apply them as viciously as does Germany.

I now wonder whether the following had anything to do
with the sudden Verbeke arrest because only a few
weeks before, on 25 October 2004,  he had filled in
and sent an Application for Status of Claimant to the
James Randi Educational Foundation, 201 SE 12th
Street, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33316-1815, USA. Perhaps
Siegfried had forgotten that America’s skeptics, nay
the western world’s skeptics are believers in the
‘Holocaust’ story, in particular in the mass gassing

Statement of the paranormal ability. Limits of the
proposed demonstration.

Hundreds  of thousands (even millions) of Jewish
people are killed in the Auschwitz gas chambers by
hydrogen cyanide (HNC) in the form of Zyklon B. The
effect of HNC is based on the fact that it paralyzes
the respiration of every individual cell in the body.
Oxygen can no longer be transported from the blood
through the cell walls into the cells. As the vital
cell functions are thereby starved of oxygen, the
human being suffocates.

This proceeding has been depicted by thousands of
eye-witnesses and by the confessions of the German

Among them: the testimonies of camp commandant Rudolf
Höss, Dr Charles Sigismund Bendel, Henryk Tauber,
Michael Kupa, Pery Broad, the Frane-Grksch Report, the
Vrba-Wetzler-Report, the testimonies of Rudolf Vrba,
Jerzy Tabeau, Claude-Vaillant-Courtier, Alter
Feinsilber, Szlama Dragon, Dov Paisikovic, Filip
Müller, Michael Majlech (alias Milton Buki), Miklos
Nyisli, Olga Lengyel, and many others.

All these testimonies conform that the death came in
between 2 and max. 15 minutes of exposure to Zyklon B.

Moreover, in many trials these gassings have been

During the I G Farben Trial Dr Herbert Rauscher,
Zyklon B expert of the Company Degesch (Deutsche
Gesellschaft für Schädlingsbehämpfung, which provided
Zyklon B to many customers in Germany and Europe) was
shown a can of Zyklon B, and testified under oath.

After been submitted a can of Zyklon B he was asked by
judge Telford Taylor how much Zyklon B was needed to
kill the people in the gas chamber. He answered: “If
you open this 500 gr box, it will easily kill all the
people in this courtroom in 2 minutes”.

The applicant is ready to be exposed to Zyklon B at
least 15 minutes in the same architectural and
atmospheric conditions as witnessed by perpetrators
and victims. Because the gas chamber of Auschwitz I is
still intact and shown to hundreds of thousands of
tourists as the original gas chamber, it would be
obvious to do the test there.

If this would be impossible, the applicant is ready to
undergo the test in a building similar to the original
1941-1944 Auschwitz gas chambers and in the same
atmospheric and other conditions.

The test will be in favour of the applicant, if he is
still alive after 15 minutes. Moreover, the applicant
will stay in the test-room as long as possible and
under medical assistance.

The applicant    Siegfried Verbeke

Siegfried Verbeke informs me that James Randi refused
to accept his application. More on this at a later
date. Now back to Dr Kahn’s work and a final word from


Kahn’s analysis is a reasonable presentation of what
happened in the Deckert case in Germany, to Faurisson
in France, to Zündel in Canada, to the IHR-Mermelstein
and the Bradley Smith CODOH  matter in the USA. But it
is all rather wearying because it is so transparent
that he is himself an upholder of the ‘Holocaust’
story-ideology-myth-lie that anyone interested in
following it up in any more detail, may do so. I am
out of it.

I have said enough about this matter, and bearing in
mind my Australian Court Gag Order that prevents me
from questioning the fundamentals of the ‘Holocaust’
believers’ claims, let me exit this book review and
get into the basics and fundamentals that operate at
this moment –  and conclude by giving you Walter
Mueller’s vigorous and racy commentary about the
Dresden Holocaust, which he penned on Saturday, 12
February, a few hours before the Germans will awake to
the 60th Dresden Holocaust Memorial Day on Sunday,
13th February 2005..

From: “Walter Mueller”

It is 2:00 am, February 13th, in Germany. I am pretty
sure by the time we all go to bed, the Young Sachsen
and the NPD will be busy to prepare for the Memorial

Sometimes you think that you’ve said everything about
an issue, however, you feel like there is still more
to say. Remembering Dresden and the bombing holocaust
is one of these issues. My close friends know that my
family on my mother’s side originated in Dresden but
more about that later. Every year, I write a memorial
piece and remind people to remember. For the last
three years I’ve bought the Dresden Memorial Cards,
and this year also bumper stickers, all to support the
Young Sachsens, who organize every year the Dresden
vigil. In the past, I felt I had done a good enough
job. However, this year, it feels like it is
different. The recent election of 12 delegates from
the NPD to the Saxony State House brought out the
worst in the political establishment in Germany.

The humiliating and outrageous comments by German
Chancellor Gerhard Schröder make this year’s Dresden
Memorial the most controversial of them all: The rat
that roared on behalf of the Jewish community. He
threatens to fight any “Gleichsetzung” – which means
“making equal” – equating the Dresden Holocaust with
the “Jewish Holocaust.” The justification why the
German people have no right to remember their dead is
sickening. Schröder frantically promises to eliminate
the NPD, and his behavior reminds me of the propaganda
that was made about Iraqi President Saddam Hussein
being a dictator.

All of the 141 cities that were bombed to smithereens
and where hundreds of thousands of people were killed,
mostly women, children and elderly, are still crying
to the heavens.

Discussions about the numbers are okay when we are
talking about murdering Germans. Whenever we question
the numbers of the “Jewish holocaust” we are
automatically evil, insulting the memory of the dead
and of those who suffered.

Did I miss something here? Doesn’t the same go the
other way around? It is way beyond outrageous what is
still being done to the victims of Allied war crimes.

Dresden in particular was a catastrophe. People seem
to forget that the flaming inferno not only took the
lives of so many, but also the history and remembrance
of the family tree. No documents, no pictures, and not
even a grave remains of all the loved ones that were
lost during that bombing holocaust.

Tonight at 11pm, we will talk with our sister, who
lives not too far from Dresden, and travels there
every year to imagine the house, the street, and the
school our mother went to.

The discussion will center around the Dresden Memorial
Day, since our mother was born there in 1923. Married
at 16, to a German Oberst Leutnant in 1939. My mom’s
family was a usual large, German family of 12
children, all involved in music, theatre, and art; my
mom’s family was truly Dresdners.

I wasn’t there, because I wasn’t born. But as
children, we listened to many of her stories of her
fleeing Dresden. I do not like to talk about this as
openly as I do today. Only close friends know about
this. I have a problem writing up emotional stories
like this.

By the time my mom, who was pregnant in 1945, left
Dresden, not much was left of the city and her family.
Out of 12 children, only Franz, Egon, Hilda, Willi and
Herbert made it out, along with my mom.

I won’t bother you with the long journey until their
arrival in Linz, Austria, where they were arrested,
because of my mom’s first marriage. Her husband had
died on the Russian front towards the end of the war.

These times were chaotic. Survival was the only thing
that was important. Medical attention was non-existing
and being pregnant as a German woman did not generate
any sympathy from the Allies. In early 1946, my mom
and my newborn half-sister Ingrid, were released,
after a thorough investigation.

They moved to Vienna, where my mom met my dad. During
the escape of Dresden, my mom contracted a lung
disease, and without any medical help, it progressed
and progressed, until it was too late to cure. She
died when she was 47.

Her brothers and the sister who survived went on to
live a pretty acceptable life. Uncle Herbert became a
“Kammersänger” at the State Opera in Heidelberg. Willi
became a contractor, Franz a farmer. Hilda married a
farmer in Tyrol, and Egon became a mason.

But whenever they got together on holidays, it was an
incredible picture to see them, trying to remember the
rest of the family, which they had lost in Dresden.
The worst is that there was nothing but the memories
left. Most of them have vanished without a trace – no
paperwork, no photos, not even a grave. And as long as
I can remember, that was the burden that the family of
my mom had to deal with.

Now imagine this is only one of the millions of
stories of loved ones who don’t even have a grave to
go to. Today, they have to listen to their Bundes
Chancellor humiliating and degrading speeches.

Questioning the Jewish holocaust is a crime in
Germany. Mourning the victims of the Allied atrocities
will soon be too!




It is one of the greatest triumphs of modern emotional
engineering that, in spite of the plain facts of the
case which could never be disguised or even materially
distorted, the British public, throughout the Blitz
Period (1940 – 1941), remained convinced that the
entire responsibility for their sufferings rested on
the German leaders.”

Advance to Barbarism, F.J.P Veale

It may be Inconvenient History but England rather than
Germany initiated the murderous slaughter of bombing
civilians thus bringing about retaliation. Chamberlain
conceded that it was ‘Absolutely contrary to
International law’.

“It began in 1940 and Churchill believed it held the
secret of victory. He was convinced that raids of
sufficient intensity could destroy Germany’s morale,
and so his War Cabinet planned a campaign that
abandoned the accepted practice of attacking the
enemy’s armed forces and, instead made civilians the
primary target. Night after night, RAF bombers in ever
increasing numbers struck throughout Germany, usually
at working class housing, because it was more densley
packed.” –The Peoples’ War, Angus Calder. London,
Jonathan Cape, 1969.

“Hitler only undertook the bombing of British civilian
targets reluctantly three months after the RAF had
commenced bombing German civilian targets. Hitler
would have been willing at any time to stop the
slaughter. Hitler was genuinely anxious to reach with
Britain an agreement confining the action of aircraft
to battle zones.

Retaliation was certain if we carried the war into
Germany. There was a reasonable possibility that our
capital and industrial centres would not have been
attacked if we had continued to refrain from attacking
those of Germany. We began to bomb objectives on the
German mainland before the Germans began to bomb
objectives on the British mainland. Because we were
doubtful about the psychological effect of
propagandist distortion of the truth that it was we
who started the strategic bombing offensive, we have
shrunk from giving our great decision of May,11th,
1940, the publicity it deserves.” – J.M Spaight., CB.,
CBE., Principle Secretary to the Air Ministry, Bombing

“The attack on the Ruhr was therefore an informal
invitation to the Luftwaffe to bomb London. The
primary purpose of these raids was to goad the Germans
into undertaking reprisal raids of a similar character
on Britain. Such raids would arouse intense
indignation in Britain against Germany and so create a
war psychosis without which it would be impossible to
carry on a modern war.” – The Royal Air Force, 1939 –
1945, The Fight at Odds.p.122. Dennis Richards, Her
Majesty’s Stationery Office.


The eminent British war historian and strategist,
Captain Sir. Basil Liddell Hart declared that through
this strategy victory had been achieved “through
practising the most uncivilised means of warfare that
the world had known since the Mongol invasions.” The
Evolution of Warfare. 1946, p.75: “Was absolutely
contrary to international law.”

Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain: “The inhabitants
of Coventry (Liverpool), for example, continued to
imagine that their sufferings were due to the innate
villainy of Adolf Hitler without a suspicion that a
decision, splendid or otherwise, of the British War
Cabinet, was the decisive factor in the case.” – F.J.P
Veale. Advance to Barbarism, P.169.


“I am in full agreement (of terror bombing). I am all
for the bombing of working class areas in German
cities. I am a Cromwellian – I believe in ‘slaying in
the name of the Lord!” Sir. Archibald Sinclair,
Secretary for Air.

Chiefs) argued that the desired result, of reducing
German industrial production, would be more readily
achieved if the homes of the workers in the factories
were destroyed; if the workers were kept busy
arranging for the burial of their wives and children,
output might reasonably be expected to fall.”

It was concentrated on working class houses because,
as Professor Lindemann maintained, “A higher
percentage of bloodshed per ton of explosives dropped
could be expected from bombing houses built close
together, rather than by bombing higher class houses
surrounded by gardens.” Advance to Barbarism, F.J.P


“One of the most unhealthy features of the bombing
offensive was that the War Cabinet – and in particular
the Secretary for Air, Archibald Sinclair (now Lord
Thurso), felt it necessary to repudiate publicly the
orders which they themselves had given to Bomber
Command.” R.H.S Crossman, MP. Sunday Telegraph,


During the war, more bombs by weight were dropped on
the city of Berlin than were released on the whole of
Great Britain during the entire war.

All German towns and cities above 50,000 population
were from 50% to 80% destroyed. Dresden, an
unprotected city, was incinerated with an estimated
135,000 civilian inhabitants burned and buried in the
ruins. Hamburg was totally destroyed and 70,000
civilians died in the most appalling circumstances
whilst Cologne was likewise turned into a moon-scape.
As Hamburg burned the winds feeding the three mile
high flames reached twice hurricane speed to exceed
150 miles per hour. Trees three feet in diameter on
the outskirts of the city, were sucked from the ground
by the supernatural forces of these winds and hurled
miles into the city-inferno, as were vehicles, men,
women… and children.

Between 1940 and 1945, sixty-one German cities with a
total population of 25 million souls were destroyed of
devastated in a bombing campaign initiated by the
British government. Destruction on this scale had no
other purpose than the indiscriminate mass murder of
as many German people as possible quite regardless of
their civilian status. It led to retaliatory bombing
resulting in 60,000 British dead and 86,000 injured.


The strafing of columns of refugees by both American
and British fighter planes was par for the course:
“…. it is said that these (zoo) animals and
terrified groups of refugees were machine-gunned as
they tried to escape across the Grosser Garten by
low-flying planes and that many bodies riddled by
bullets were found later in this park.” Der Tod von
Dresden, Axel Rodenberger, February, 25th, 1951. In
Dresden, “Even the huddled remnants of a children’s’
choir were machine-gunned in a street bordering a
park.” David Irving, The Destruction of Dresden. “I
think we shall live to rue the day we did this, and
that it, (The bombing of Dresden) will stand for all
time as a blot on our escutcheon.” Richard Stokes,
M.P. “What we want to do in addition to the horrors of
fire is to bring the masonry crashing down on the
Boche, to kill Boche and to terrify Boche.” ‘Bomber’
Butch Harris, Sunday Times, January, 10th, 1993.


“Its horror is revealed in the howling and raging of
the firestorms, the hellish noise of exploding bombs
and the death cries of martyred human beings as well
as the big silence after the raids. Speech is impotent
to portray the measure of the horror, which shook the
people for ten days and nights and the traces of which
were written indelibly on the face of the city and its

No flight of imagination will ever succeed in
measuring and describing the gruesome scenes of horror
in the many buried air shelters. Posterity can only
bow its head in honour of the fate of these innocents,
sacrificed by the murderous lust of a sadistic
enemy….”The Police President of Hamburg. ˆ
“Three-hundred times as many people died in Hamburg
during the ten-day blitz as died in Coventry during
the entire course of the war. “Not even Hiroshima and
Nagasaki, suffering the smashing blows of nuclear
explosions, could match the utter hell of Hamburg.”
Martin Caidin, The Night Hamburg Died, Ballantyne


“Of the children these dreadful nights, what can be
said? Their fright became horror and then panic when
their tiny minds became capable of grasping the fact
that their parents could no longer help them in their
distress. They lost their reason and an overwhelming
terror took over. Their world had become the shrieking
centre of an erupting volcano from which there could
be no physical escape. Nothing that hell offered could
be feared more.

By the hand of man they became creatures, human in
form but not in mind. Strangled noises hissed from
them as they staggered pitifully through the streets
in which tar and asphalt ran as streams. Some of these
tiny creatures ran several hundred feet. Others
managed only twenty, maybe ten feet. Their shoes
caught fire and then their feet. The lower parts of
their legs became flickering sticks of flame. Here
were Joans of Arcs…. thousands of them. All who had
perished unjustly on the fires of the Middle Ages were
as nothing when compared with what was happening that

The sounds of many were unintelligible and undoubtedly
many more called for their parents from whom they were
parted by death or by accident. They grasped their
tortured limbs, their tiny burning legs until they
were no longer able to stand or run. And then they
would crash to the ground where they would writhe in
the bubbling tar until death released them from their
physical misery.” Martin Caidin.


“The long suppressed story of the worst massacre in
the history of the world. The devastation of Dresden
in February, 1945, was one of those crimes against
humanity whose authors would have been arraigned at
Nuremberg if that court had not been perverted.” Rt.
Hon. Richard.H.S Crossman, M.P., Labour Government


“Men, women and children too, ran hysterically,
falling and stumbling, getting up, tripping and
falling again, rolling over and over. Most of them
managed to regain their feet and made it to the water.
But many of them never made it and were left behind,
their feet drumming in blinding pain on the overheated
pavements amidst the rubble, until there came one last
convulsing shudder from the smoking ‘thing’ on the
ground, and then no further movement.” Martin Caidin,
The Night Hamburg Died. “Phosphorous burns were not
infrequent.” U.S Strategic Bombing Survey ˆ
“Phosphorous was used “because of its demonstrated
ability to depress the morale of the Germans.”
Official British source ˆ

“Even the senseless and highly culture-destroying
terror acts, against for example, Lubeck and Dresden,
carried out by the Allied pilots, should have been
investigated and brought before a proper court of
justice.” Major General H. Bratt, Royal Swedish Army ˆ
“A nation which spreads over another a sheet of
inevitably deadly gases or eradicates entire cities
from the earth by the explosion of atomic bombs, does
not have the right to judge anyone for war crimes; it
has already committed the greatest atrocity equal to
no other atrocity; it has killed – amidst unspeakable
torments – hundreds of thousands of innocent people.”
Hon. Lydio Machado Bandeira de Mello, Professor of
Criminal Law; author of more than 40 works on
law/philosophy ˆ

“As for crimes against humanity, those governments
which ordered the destruction of German cities,
thereby destroying irreplaceable cultural values and
making burning torches out of women and children,
should also have stood before the bar of justice.”

Hon Jaan Lattik. Estonian statesman, diplomat and

The full account and others in WITNESS TO HISTORY

Available @ £4.00 ($10) From HRP, PO Box 62, Uckfield,
Sussex, TN22 1ZY






today in Dresden:
Dresdens Kirchenglocken läuten zum Gedenken an

Dresden (dpa) – In Dresden haben am Abend die Glocken
aller Kirchen zum Gedenken an die Zerstörung der Stadt
vor 60 Jahren geläutet. Nach dem Gottesdienst in der
Kreuzkirche strömten Zehntausende mit Kerzen zur
Frauenkirche. Sie ist erstmals seit dem Wiederaufbau
zum stillen Gedenken geöffnet.




From Norway:


The New Stürmer – Volume 7

Quote for today: Lest we forget!!!

Roosevelt: “we must be hard with Germany, I mean the
German people, not only the Nazis. One must see to it
that the German people are kastriert, or thus treat
them that they do not produce again people, which want
to continue and remember the past.!” …

He agreed with the extermination program of Theodore
Kaufman GERMANY MUST PERISH….’… Roosevelts
extermination program was not caused by the German
“Jew pursuit.” These plans (genocide of the German
nation) were already in place before 1938 (!!!),
before the “crystal night”…… plotted long

Never forget that Roosevelt was a JEW!!!

Visit my website at:

If you have views regarding this article please feel
free to contact me at:

Please forward this article to all your friends.

Dear kindred and fellow Aryans

In Memory of Dresden

Possessing no military value, the old Saxon city of
Dresden lay like an island of tranquillity. Dresden,
known as the ‘Florence on the Elbe” before its nearly
total destruction towards the end of WWII, was among
the most beautiful cities of the world. Famous as a
cultural center and for its great art treasures,
architecture, including the former royal palace,
Georgenschloss, and ancient churches.

Dresden had been spared the terror that descended from
the skies over the rest of Germany. It was declared by
the leadership of the Third Reich as a hospital city;
a city without any air defence, an open city. Dresden
was a city where refugees from the east and wounded
soldiers were gathered before they were sent westward.

AND THEN…on February 13 and 14, 1945 the real
holocaust of WWII happened. American and British
airplanes dropped 2,659 metric Tons of bombs,
including 350,000 firebombs, on the beautiful German
city of Dresden, killing nearly 600,000 innocent
German children, young and old women, the sick and
elderly men.

In just 24 hours Allied planes rained death and
destruction over this old Saxon city. Dresden lay in
island of ruin. The destruction of Dresden was an orgy
of genocide and barbarism against a defenseless German
city, also famous for its learning in scientific and
technical fields, besides one of the greatest cultural
centers of northern Europe.

Who ordered the destruction of Dresden? And why? It
was Winston Churchill. And yes: Churchill was a Jew,
his mother was a Jewess and according to Ezra
Churchill, he was a thoroughbred Jew. We MUST never
forget the unprovoked killing/Holocaust of fire bombs
that happen in Dresden.

So friends, on this coming day, February 14th, let us
remember the real holocaust of WWII which happened in

In the face of Chutzpah , Jewish audacity and outright
lies, resistance must be a national duty.

Heil og sael





Suggestion! The reading of the “SlaughterHouse Five”
should be required on this day. Dresden seen by an US
POW in 1945.














To order, please send a check or money order to:

Community News
PO Box 191677
Sacramento, CA 95819

or e-mail us and we will send you an e-mail bill
through PayPal.


Walter F. Mueller
“The truth is back in business”

The “Patriot Letter” is a free news service of
Community News, a monthly publication with a
circulation of 20,000. To subscribe to Community News
please e-mail for more information.

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *