s presented by central television. But Vadim never forgot his first vocation - journalism - and he would often join his colleagues, including a few of us foreign correspondents, on the press balcony of Parliament during the sessions to give us some inside news or highlights of his commission's work. He was our friend, and with his death, our circle has been broken. Many of us - Ukrainian journalists and foreign correspondents, as well as a few of his close friends outside this journalistic fraternity - spent last week trying to come to terms with the tragedy that has struck us. We cannot believe that his death was just pure accident; although it is reported that 8,000 people a year in the former Soviet Union die due to their television sets exploding, we all believe that Vadim would have survived this kind of accident. We have gone through the story over and over. Most of us saw him in Parliament on Wednesday afternoon; he was excited and invigorated by new opportunities: he was applying for a National Foundation internship for the spring in Washington, D.C., he was going to travel on business with Ukraine's deputy prime minister. His dancing blue eyes were smitten with the possibilities of new TV shows and programs in an independent Ukraine. None of us saw Vadim in Parliament on Thursday or Friday, February 13-14; he missed a few meetings he had scheduled on Friday. Currently, there are many rumors flying around Kiev surrounding Vadim's death, based on political, business and personal motivations. Parliamentary committees have promised to work on an investigation, although no special committee has been formed to investigate what many democratic deputies, among them Les Taniuk and Stepan Khmara, have labelled as murder. Some speculate that Vadim's TV work in Chornobyl may have triggered an early death... On Friday, February 14, Nezavisimaya Gazeta (Independent Newspaper) in Moscow ran an interview with Vadim on journalists' responsibilities and cooperation between Moscow and Kiev. "At this time, we (referring to Russian and Ukrainian journalists) can be friends, if we are honest to the end. We are currently living in a commonwealth, the root of the word is found in the word "druh," friend... We will never become true friends, until we journalists understand that we are the ones who can, who have the responsibility to stop our peoples from total degradation, from the catastrophe that can occur between our peoples," he said. "If we cannot prevent this we stop being journalists. We will become persons who today do their work and tomorrow, one by one, are destroyed." Vadim's deep sense of responsibility, his courage and commitment to the truth will always be admired by his friends and colleagues. And we are all committed to learning the truth. Given the suspicious circumstances surrounding his death, I can only hope that his last interview prophecy did not become self-fulfilling. Mr. Safer, you travelled to Ukraine looking for stories of persecution and violence against Jews and Russians, you failed to find the evidence, but you broadcast the story anyway. All the while, you were surrounded by stories of persecution and violence against Ukrainians, but that plentiful evidence you ignored. In other words, you went to Ukraine not to discover its reality, but to confirm your prejudice. You played the role not of journalist, but of propagandist. Given the opportunity to make a contribution toward protecting the lives of journalists in Ukraine by broadcasting the story of Vadim Boyko, you declined. Showing anything on 60 Minutes that might win sympathy for Ukrainians was contrary to your plan. Had you managed to find a Jewish member of parliament and television broadcaster who had died in Ukraine under mysterious circumstances, then you would have had one small piece of evidence for the anti-Ukrainian conclusions that you offered. Had you managed to find a Russian member of parliament and television broadcaster who had died in Ukraine under mysterious circumstances, then you would have had one small piece of evidence for the anti-Ukrainian conclusions that you offered. However, you found neither of these things. In Ukraine, death under mysterious circumstances is reserved for prominent Ukrainians, which conclusion you had no interest in broadcasting. Below, I identify four incidents which I have brought to your attention either in three earlier letters, or in the present one. Although the first two cases occurred before your broadcast of 23Oct94, and the second two occurred after, all serve to support the conclusion that within today's Ukraine, it is Ukrainians who are the targets of violence: Date of my letter Subject of my letter Date of Attack Violence that you should have reported in your 23Oct94 The Ugly Face of Freedom 15May99 Who murdered Volodymyr Ivasiuk? April 1979 30Jun99 Who murdered Vadim Boyko? February 14, 1992 Violence that you might have caused by your 23Oct94 The Ugly Face of Freedom 09Apr99 Who blew the hands off Maksym Tsarenko? Summer 1995 17May99 Who murdered Volodymyr Katelnytsky? July 7-8, 1997 As the first two of the above attacks occurred prior to your 23Oct94 broadcast, then your fault is that you neglected to report them. And as the second two attacks occurred after your 23Oct94 broadcast, then your fault is that you may have helped cause them. That is, your 23Oct94 broadcast, The Ugly Face of Freedom, served to demonstrate to Ukraine's assassins not only that violence against Ukrainians would go unreported in the world press, but also that even as Ukrainians continued to be butchered, the world press would portray them - the victim Ukrainians - as themselves butchers. You did not yourself wield any knife or pull any trigger or tighten any garotte, but you informed those that were predisposed to do so that they might expect impunity if they did. For this reason, I consider you to have blood on your hands, some of it Maksym Tsarenko's, and some of it Volodymyr Katelnytsky's. Lubomyr Prytulak cc: Yaakov Bleich, Ed Bradley, Jeffrey Fager, Don Hewitt, Steve Kroft, Andy Rooney, Lesley Stahl, Mike Wallace, Simon Wiesenthal. Morley Safer Letter 12 01Jul99 Who murdered Borys Derevyanko? The plainest moral to be drawn from the Derevyanko-Hurvits story is that when a muckraking Ukrainian editor takes on a corrupt Jewish politician, the Ukrainian editor ends up dead. July 1, 1999 Morley Safer 60 Minutes, CBS Television 51 W 52nd Street New York, NY USA 10019 Morley Safer: The Committee to Protect Journalists described the contract killing of Ukrainian editor Borys Derevyanko thusly: Borys Derevyanko, Vechernyaya Odessa Date of Death: August 11, 1997 Place of Death: Odessa Derevyanko, editor in chief of Vechernyaya Odessa, a popular and influential thrice-weekly newspaper, was fatally shot at point-blank range on his way to work on the morning of August 11 near the Press House, where the newspaper's offices are located. Colleagues believe the killing of Derevyanko, who was editor of Vechernyaya Odessa for 24 years, was related to the newspaper's opposition to the policies of Odessa's mayor. The chief regional prosecutor declared the murder a contract killing and launched an official investigation. Local authorities announced in September that they had arrested a suspect, described as a professional assassin, who confessed to killing Derevyanko, but they gave no details about his confession. I would add that the Odessa mayor which the above account neglects to name was the corrupt Eduard Hurvits, who was particularly threatened by Borys Derevyanko's opposition because of municipal elections that were coming up in 1998. The comment concerning the arrest of an assassin gives a misleading impression - in today's Ukraine, contract killings are never solved, and those who order them are never punished. Today, Borys Derevyanko is dead, and Eduard Hurvits, barred by his corruption from holding the office of mayor of Odessa, continues his criminal career as a member of the Ukrainian parliament. Photographs of Derevyanko and Hurvits are shown below: Newspaper editor Borys Derevyanko Odessa Mayor Eduard Hurvits The table which I began in my letter to you of 30Jun99 can now be elaborated with another entry: Date of my letter Subject of my letter Date of Attack Violence that you should have reported in your 23Oct94 The Ugly Face of Freedom 15May99 Who murdered Volodymyr Ivasiuk? April 1979 30Jun99 Who murdered Vadim Boyko? February 14, 1992 Violence that you might have caused by your 23Oct94 The Ugly Face of Freedom 09Apr99 Who blew the hands off Maksym Tsarenko? Summer 1995 17May99 Who murdered Volodymyr Katelnytsky? July 7-8, 1997 01Jul99 Who murdered Borys Derevyanko? August 11, 1997 As the conclusion of your 23Oct94 60 Minutes story, The Ugly Face of Freedom, was that Ukraine is a place in which Ukrainians practice violence against Jews, it is highly relevant that Borys Derevyanko is Ukrainian and Eduard Hurvits is Jewish. You went to Ukraine looking for evidence of Ukrainians harming Jews, you failed to find such evidence, but you broadcast your conclusion anyway. The true story that you would not broadcast, and that was readily documentable, is that Ukraine is a place in which Jews harm Ukrainians. The plainest moral to be drawn from the Derevyanko-Hurvits story is that when a muckraking Ukrainian editor takes on a corrupt Jewish politician, the Ukrainian editor ends up dead. That is the reality of Ukraine. It was the reality of Ukraine when you visited it in 1994, it was the reality of Ukraine before 1994, and it has been the reality of Ukraine since 1994. As in earlier letters, I fault you for not reporting such incidents as are in the above table that took place before 1994, and I fault you for precipitating such incidents that took place after 1994. Thus, to the blood that is already on your hands, I add the blood of Borys Derevyanko. You had the opportunity in your 1994 broadcast to come out on the side of the victims against the butchers, but you preferred to side with the butchers against the victims, and Borys Derevyanko has been one of the casualties of your decision. Lubomyr Prytulak cc: Yaakov Bleich, Ed Bradley, Jeffrey Fager, Don Hewitt, Steve Kroft, Andy Rooney, Lesley Stahl, Mike Wallace, Simon Wiesenthal. Michaud refuses to apologize, Bouchard facing PQ split WebPosted Thu Dec 21 08:51:59 2000 QUEBEC CITY - A controversy within the Parti QuÙbÙcois has escalated and could threaten the leadership of Premier Lucien Bouchard. It began last week when an influential member of the PQ, who wants to run in a byelection, made comments about the Holocaust. Bouchard demanded the comments be withdrawn. Yves Michaud refused. Now people within the PQ are taking sides. On Wednesday, as the National Assembly was wrapping up for the Christmas break, the controversy took a sharp turn for the worse. Michaud said he has no reason to apologize. "I have never said or written anything that minimizes the Nazi horror against the Jews," he said. "What you are doing to demonize a member of your party is a dishonour and not worthy of a premier." "Michaud said he was fed up with Jews always saying they're the only people to have suffered, and I won't have it," said Bouchard. Michaud has been around the PQ a long time. He is a committed, hardcore sovereigntist, part of a faction in the party that's often doubted Bouchard's commitment. Last week, on radio, and at a commission studying the French language, he said Quebec's Jews were intolerant, voting as they do en masse against sovereignty, and they believe they're the only people to have suffered throughout history. Michaud wants to be a PQ candidate in an upcoming byelection, but Bouchard's answer came Tuesday after a meeting with his caucus. Withdraw either your remarks, or your candidacy. Michaud will do neither. And now, he's gathering powerful support. He has the backing of Bouchard's predecessor, Jacques Parizeau, and some influential sovereigntist groups. They say his remarks were inelegant, inopportune, but not anti-Semitic. Bouchard in the meantime says the sovereignty movement must show the world it will not tolerate Michaud's opinions. He has the backing of his caucus, but in some cases, it sounds almost reluctant. Now, an emerging question: Can a split become an irrevocable rupture costing Bouchard the leadership? He asked his party to think about it over the holidays. But there's no apparent solution. In February, the party must choose its byelection candidate and right now, both sides seem locked into their positions facing a deadline they cannot avoid. POSTED AT 4:04 AM EST Wednesday, December 20 Bouchard courts confrontation By RH¹AL S¹GUIN Globe and Mail Update Quebec - Premier Lucien Bouchard is prepared to put his leadership on the line if the Parti QuÙbÙcois fails to support him on several contentious issues, including his intention to ban a prominent PQ member from running in a by-election next spring. "He is prepared to take on the party," said a senior party member. "We get the sense that if the party executive goes against him on the Yves Michaud affair, on language or on his strategy for achieving sovereignty, the party will shatter. The mood is such that we may be looking at a confrontation between the leader and the party. He warned us it could be fatal." The source said this means that Mr. Bouchard could resign. Shareholder-rights activist and party member Yves Michaud, who had hoped to stand for the PQ in a by-election next spring, caused a furor earlier this month with his comments about Jews and ethnic voters. The party executive will meet in the new year to hear Mr. Michaud defend himself and decide whether to bar his candidacy. It will be the first in a number of showdowns within the party. In February, it must take a position on toughening the province's language laws and define a strategy to achieve sovereignty. Mr. Bouchard has made it known that he will not tolerate any radical position on language, and has warned members to be patient about another referendum. He has also said he favours blocking Mr. Michaud's candidacy. The Premier will have to deal with the mounting frustrations or face a confrontation. The split within sovereigntist ranks blew up in public this week as prominent separatist leaders, including former premier Jacques Parizeau and Bloc QuÙbÙcois Leader Gilles Duceppe, said Mr. Bouchard's PQ caucus had no right to support a motion in the National Assembly reprimanding Mr. Michaud. "The Parti QuÙbÙcois is divided in the same way Quebec society is divided," party vice-president Marie Malavoy said Tuesday. "The party didn't close the door on his candidacy ... but we have to discuss it as soon as possible." Mr. Michaud outraged the Jewish community for stating that Jews were not the only ones in the history of humanity to suffer. He also said there is an anti-sovereignty ethnic vote, pointing to 12 polls in the Montreal suburb of Cäte-Saint-Luc, which has a high concentration of Jewish residents, where everyone voted against sovereignty in the 1995 referendum. He also called the B'nai Brith, an influential Jewish-rights organization, extremist and anti-sovereigntist. Mr. Duceppe said Tuesday that he disagreed with Mr. Michaud's comments, but that the National Assembly had no business condemning him for them. "It could be very hazardous, if not dangerous, for the National Assembly to hand out blame like that," he said. "It is one thing to ask a member of the National Assembly to apologize or withdraw what he said, like we do in Ottawa. But when it's not a member of that assembly, I think there are tribunals that can judge whether it was correct or not." In a full-page letter in Le Devoir Tuesday, 30 prominent sovereigntists, including Mr. Parizeau, accused the National Assembly of attempting to gag Mr. Michaud and denying him his right to freedom of speech. "We the undersigned, consider there is a real misuse of the role of the National Assembly, a serious attack on the rights and freedoms of citizens and a violation of the Charter," they wrote in French. It is "a flagrant act of injustice and a stunning show of arbitrary authority of which every citizen can from now on fear of becoming the victim." In interviews Monday, Mr. Parizeau compared Mr. Bouchard's defence of the National Assembly's position to the type of authoritarian actions taken in the era of premier Maurice Duplessis. "When I was young the Duplessis regime was in place. And a system that demands that you either believe or die with pressures to adopt this or that, you can be sure that I can see a throwback to that era. And that is why I protest," he said. "What Mr. Michaud said was clumsy, especially from someone who wants to be a candidate. But there is nothing in what he said to make a fuss about." At least two PQ caucus members, Diane Barbeau and Jean-Claude St-AndrÙ, have expressed regret about supporting the motion in the National Assembly. However, cabinet ministers and most caucus members refused to comment. Mr. Bouchard staunchly defended the National Assembly's reprimand Tuesday. "My view is that he [Mr. Michaud] should not be a candidate for the Parti QuÙbÙcois," Mr. Bouchard said after a caucus meeting. "If he withdraws [his remarks], it will clear the air and we could take a second look at it." He condemned Mr. Michaud's comparison of the suffering of Jews and the plight of Quebec sovereigntists. "When we know how an entire people was treated, how they were treated worse than cattle, people who were separated from their families, their children taken from them, jammed into trains and transported like garbage to concentration camps where after incredible suffering they were thrown into gas chambers and the ovens, we cannot speak lightly of these matters," he said. Although Mr. Michaud said he did not mean to make light of the Holocaust, Mr. Bouchard said perception was created. He also criticized Mr. Michaud for "resurrecting the spectre of the ethnic vote", in effect denouncing remarks made by Mr. Parizeau on the night of the 1995 referendum. Mr. Parizeau blamed "money and the ethnic vote" for that loss. "I am convinced this is an attack against people who don't deserve to be treated this way," Mr. Bouchard said. ==================== <><><><><><><><><><> ++++++++++++++++++++ ==================== "Someone who has provoked the Jewish community for years should expect this sort of thing [a vicious, near-fatal beating]." - Nazi-hunter Serge Klarsfeld on the savage attack against Professor Faurisson Questioned Holocaust, historian badly beaten Toronto Globe and Mail | Monday, Sept. 18, 1989, p. A5 Reuter CLERMONT-FERRAND, France A leading French revisionist historian who denies that millions of Jews were killed in the Holocaust was recovering from surgery yesterday after a savage beating. Robert Faurisson, 60, suffered a broken jaw and ribs and severe head injuries in the attack by three youths while he was walking his dog in the town of Vichy. A hospital spokesman in Clermont-Ferrand, the central French city where he was transferred for surgery, said Mr. Faurisson's condition was stable. "He was conscious, but he couldn't speak," said a fire fighter who gave Mr. Faurisson first aid. "His jaw was smashed. They destroyed his face." A previously unknown group, The Sons of the Memory of the Jews, took responsibility for the attack, saying those who deny the Holocaust should "beware." Veteran Nazi-hunters Serge and Beate Klarsfeld said they were not surprised by the attack. "Someone who has provoked the Jewish community for years should expect this sort of thing [a vicious, near-fatal beating]," Serge Klarsfeld said. This page is dedicated to the hundreds of people who have put their lives, reputation and freedom on the line to bring truth to the world. Dr. Fredrick Toben - latest victim! Though German in origin, Dr. Fredrick Toben was raised in Australia as an Australian citizen, and speaks both English and German. Becoming interested in exonerating the German people from the anti-German racism of the Holocaust legend, he at first edited a revisionist journal called Truth Missions, which was later renamed Adelaide Institute Newsletter. He then broadened out to establish Australia's revisionist website, Adelaide Institute. He has personally visited the site of Auschwitz and burrowed under the ruins of the alleged gas chamber, being unable to find the four holes in the roof which were supposedly used to throw in gas pellets. He conducted regular dialogue with Exterminationists, and did not expect to be arrested when he visited Prosecutor Klein in Mannheim, Germany, for a private discussion on the Holocaust laws in Germany, which make it mandatory to accept the entire Holocaust story. Nevertheless, he was arrested by Klein and police chief Mohr in Mannheim, Germany, in April, 1999, and is currently in Mannheim Prison awaiting trial for being a "holocaust denier". His trial is to start November 8, 1999, and he may face up to five years in prison if found guilty! Paul Rassinier Barred from entering Germany for trying to give testimony for the defense in political trials. Background and contribution: Born in 1906, Rassinier, a school teacher, is seen as the Father of modern European Revisionism. A French resistance fighter and friend of the Jews, he was imprisoned by the Germans for his illegal activities in Buchenwald and Camp Dora where he worked in the underground rocket factories. He was elected after the war as a member of the French National Assembly for the Socialist Party. Rassinier nonetheless wrote groundbreaking Revisionist books. Dr. Robert Faurisson At least 10 times physically assaulted by Holocaust Enforcers; on several occasions nearly killed. Jaws broken. Teeth knocked out. Hospitalized for weeks. Persecuted mercilessly in endless legal battles. Background and contribution: Known as the "Dean of the world-wide Revisionist movement" and principal teacher of Ernst Zìndel, Dr. Faurisson first discovered the technical and architectural drawings of the Auschwitz morgues, the crematories and other installations. He was also the first to insist that only a U.S. gas chamber expert could unravel the technical impossibility of the Auschwitz homicidal gassing story - as falsely told to the public for over half a century. Zìndel mentor, advisor and trial witness in the 1984 preliminary hearings and in the 1985 and 1988 Great Holocaust Trials. Slated as expert witness for the 1991 Munich trial of Ernst Zìndel. (The prosecution dropped the Anne Frank Diary part of the charge in mid-trial after they learned that Dr. Faurisson was going to testify to that point.) Thies Christophersen Forced to flee from country to country. Hounded to death after numerous acid attacks, arson, and attempts on his life and property. Background and contribution: As a German agrarian expert, Christophersen was stationed at Auschwitz in the critical period 1943-44. As a German expert, he had access to the entire camp. He took valuable photographs at the time. He was the first Revisionist eyewitness to come forward stating categorically that there were no gas chambers for killing humans in Auschwitz. He wrote the famous booklet, "Die Auschwitz-Lìge", (The Auschwitz Lie) translated into many languages. Zìndel witness in the 1985 and 1988 Great Holocaust Trials. Judge Wilhelm StÔglich Was tried and convicted in post-war German courts. Had his doctorate stripped from him and his pension cut for speaking out. Background and contribution: Judge StÔglich, stationed during WWII in the Auschwitz area with an anti-aircraft unit, published a groundbreaking book "Der Auschwitz Mythos" (The Auschwitz Myth) - seized, forbidden and destroyed by West German court order. Joseph Burg (Ginzburg) Persecuted and beaten by Holocaust Enforcers of Jewish Defense League type thugs. Denied burial in the Munich Jewish cemetery. (Ernst Zìndel and Otto Ernst Remer gave the eulogies.) Background and contribution: Author of many books ("Schuld und Schicksal", "Zionazi", "Das Tagebuch der Anne Frank", "Auschwitz in alle Ewigkeit" etc.) as well as many pamphlets and two documentary interviews with Ernst Zìndel. Chief Jewish advisor, mentor and Zìndel witness in the 1988 Great Holocaust Trial. Professor Arthur Butz Vilified and persecuted for almost three decades. Background and contribution: An American electrical engineer and university professor, Butz wrote the "Bible" of modern Revisionism titled "The Hoax of the 20th Century". This book, which deals with most details of Holocaust lore from "shrunken heads" to "Jewish soap" and "gassing" claims, more than any other influenced Ernst Zundel in his Revisionist research. Haviv Schieber Driven to attempted suicide Background and contribution: A Polish Jew and former mayor of Ber Sheeba in Israel, Schieber taught Ernst Zìndel much about Israeli reality. He was an Israeli Revisionist, wanting to revise Israel's attitudes, institutions and borders. He fled Israel to find safety in the USA, was denied political asylum at first, and tried to take his life by slashing his wrists at Washington, D.C. airport on the day of his deportation. He was finally allowed refuge from Israeli persecution in the US in the early 1970s. Francois Duprat Killed for distributing the French language version of "Did Six Million Really Die?" Background and contribution: A French writer, historian and educator, Duprat had introduced the booklet "Did Six Million Really Die?" in France by publishing the first French translation. He also published "The Mystery of the Gas Chamber." He was only 38 years old when his car was blown up by a bomb and he was assassinated on March 18, 1978. His wife, who was with him in the car, lost the use of her legs in this terrorist act. Two Jewish groups took credit for the assassination - the "Jewish Remembrance Commando" and another group who identified itself as ". . . Jewish Revolutionary Group." The assassins were never found. Ditlieb Felderer Charged, tried, convicted and jailed in Sweden. Vilified in the press. Forced to live in exile. Background and contribution: Felderer, at one time a prominent Jehovah's Witness, is known as an early researcher into the physical evidence in every major concentration camp in then Communist Eastern Europe. Felderer took over 30,000 photographs of every conceivable detail in the camps. He discovered that there was a swimming pool for the inmates in Auschwitz, modern hospital facilities, including a gynecological section, as well as an orchestra, live theatre, well-stocked library, and sculpting classes. He discovered the musical score of the "Auschwitz Waltz" in the secret archives accessible only with special permission. He found that an intimate role was played by Jehovah Witnesses in the camps, who cooperated with the SS-Administration, and he exposed the lie of the 60,000 Jehovah's Witnesses killed. (On his initiative and insistence, the inflated number was reduced to 203) [Trial Transcript Vol. 18, 4226 to 4229; 4645]. For his Revisionist work, Felderer was excommunicated - that is, drummed out of the Jehovah Witnesses' sect. He has been persecuted by the Holocaust Enforcers ever since. Felderer is known for his weird sense of humor and outlandish, offensive cartoons. He believes that deliberate Holocaust liars and history falsifiers should not have their sensibilities spared. This idiosyncrasy of Felderers is being exploited by Holocaust propagandists in counter-attacks against him. Zìndel advisor and witness in the 1985 and 1988 Great Holocaust Trials. Professor Austin App Persecuted for his courageous and tireless truth campaign for two generations on behalf of German-Americans. Background and contribution: A German-American community leader and author of many booklets and tracts - among them "The Six Million Swindle," "Action on a War Crime," "The Bombing Atrocity of Dresden," "Ravaging the women of Conquered Europe," and many others - Professor App was an early guide of Ernst Zìndel. Ernst Zìndel Three documented assassination attempts by fire and pipe bombs. Endless legal harassment leading to repeated jailings and bankrupting of his graphic arts business. Background and contribution: Nicknamed the "Revisionist Dynamo" or the "Revisionist Renaissance Man" for his untiring Revisionist Truth Campaign and his comprehensive grasp of complex political issues, Zìndel - more than any other Revisionist on earth - caused the Holocaust Hoax to become a mainstream topic of discussion. Extensive chronological biography on the Zundelsite. Jim Keegstra Lost his job and his reputation was destroyed. Prevented an arson attempt against him. Was convicted to a $3,000 fine after 10 years of costly litigation. Was financially ruined by his ordeal. Background and contribution: A Canadian school teacher of Dutch background, Keegstra taught both sides of the Holocaust and other questions of history. He was charged under Canada's infamous "Hate Laws", and was tried and convicted. He appealed - and was re-tried and re-convicted. Three times, his case went to the Supreme Court. He ultimately lost. Zìndel witness in the 1985 Great Holocaust Trial. Frank Walus Attacked seven times by Jewish assailants; nearly killed in an acid attack. Lost his US citizenship and his home to pay for his defense. Background and contribution: A Polish German-American auto worker, Walus was targeted and accused falsely by Simon Wiesenthal to be a "Nazi War Criminal." Vilified by the US media in a vicious campaign as the "Butcher of Kielce", Walus fought bravely against his tormentors of the Office of Special Investigations, also known as the US "Nazi Hunters". He ultimately won his case against them in a costly appeals process but died after several massive heart attacks - a bitter, financially ruined man. He refused to be buried on US soil because he felt the country had betrayed and failed him. Zìndel witness in the 1985 Great Holocaust Trial. Emil Lachout Mercilessly hounded by Austrian authorities and the Austrian lapdog media for over a decade. Forced to undergo a humiliating psychiatric assessment. Background and contribution: An Austrian school teacher, former military police man and Boy Scout leader, Lachout's name is associated with the famous Mìller-Lachout document. He ultimately won his case in the European Court of Human Rights. Austria must pay him compensation but hasn't done yet - so far. Never a man to do things by halves, Lachout is demanding an apology from the Austrian State. Zìndel witness in the 1988 Great Holocaust Trial. Henri Roques Had his doctorate revoked. Background and contribution: Henri Rocques is a French author and researcher who exposed the Myth of Pope Pius XII's complicity in the Holocaust. His doctoral thesis made world-wide headlines in 1986 when, for the first time in the nearly eight-century history of French universities, a duly awarded doctorate was quickly revoked on French government's orders, after an outry by the Leftist-Jewish media in France. In a tightly argued dissertation, Rocques came to the stunning conclusion that the allegations of mass gassings of Jews made by SS officer Kurt Gerstein were groundless, and that the supposed Roman-Catholic coverup of this "slaughter" are false. He further concluded that postwar academics deliberately falsified key parts of the already tortured Gerstein testimony. His dissertation was eventually published by the Institute for Historical Review in book form under the title "The Confessions of Kurt Gerstein." Tjiudar Rudolph Imprisoned in Germany for lengthy stints for "doubting the Holocaust", even though he was in his mid-eighties at the time. Background and contribution: A former German Security Service member, fluent in five languages including Yiddish and Polish, Rudolph was involved with organizing Red Cross inspection tours of Auschwitz and other camps during the war. He wrote numerous Revisionist articles. He accompanied Fred Leuchter as translator to Auschwitz and Maidanek in 1988. He was charged and convicted for publishing a newsletter disputing the "Six Million" story. Zìndel witness in the 1985 and 1988 Great Holocaust Trials. Udo Walendy Convicted and imprisoned in Germany for 15 months, even though already in his seventies and in poor health with a serious heart condition. Background and contribution: A prolific German researcher, writer and publisher of numerous books and a series of popular booklets called "Historische Tatsachen"- ("Historical Truths") including the German version of "Did Six Million Really Die?" and the German language version of the Leuchter Report #1 - Walendy was dragged before the courts numerous times. His home and offices were frequently raided by the police. Business files, books, printing plates and computers were confiscated. Zìndel advisor and witness in the 1985 and 1988 Great Holocaust Trials. Fred Leuchter Arrested and jailed in Germany. Financially ruined. Background and contribution: An American execution expert, Leuchter designed and maintained gas chambers for several US penal institutions. He was sent by Ernst Zìndel to investigate Auschwitz, Majdanek, Dachau, Hartheim and other alleged "Nazi Death Camps" and "gassing facilities." Author of the devastating series of Leuchter Reports. (I, II, III, IV) and many articles and videotaped presentations that resulted from these investigations, Leuchter was blacklisted in the US and hounded by the Holocaust Promotion Lobby and the world's lapdog media. He was arrested and jailed in Germany for giving an anti-Holocaust lecture for Gìnther Deckert, a well-known political party leader. Allowed out on bail, Leuchter returned to the US. and chose not to go back to Germany to stand trial. Nonetheless, he lost his livelihood as a result. Sensational Zìndel witness in the Great Holocaust Trial in 1988. Leuchter, although present in the courtroom in Munich, was not allowed to testify about his research findings in Auschwitz for Ernst Zìndel in the German (Munich) Trial in 1991. David Irving Convicted, jailed, fined, deported and barred from numerous countries - and hounded world-wide by Holocaust Enforcers. Background and contribution: A prolific British author of approximately 36 books and recognized authority on Hitler and World War II, Irving pretty much believed and accepted the standard Holocaust version - until he read the Leuchter Report. He agreed to testify as the last witness for the defense in the 1988 Zìndel Trial. His appearance was a sensation! In the following years, he went on widely publicized and acclaimed Canada- and America-wide lecture tours. He traveled as a speaker through several European countries, with headlines and controversy dogging his every step. He drew packed houses and infuriated the Holocaust Lobby, which reacted with vicious smear campaigns and managed to have Irving arrested and convicted in Munich, Germany, for "defaming the dead." This conviction caused Irving to be ultimately banned from Canada, Australia, Italy, New Zealand and South Africa. He was deported in handcuffs from Niagara Falls, Ontario, after a farcical Immigration hearing, during which he was held and treated in jail like some common criminal - for weeks! He has been hounded by the Holocaust Enforcers ever since. A combative man, Irving has lately gone on counter-attacks and is suing the British Board of Jewish Deputies and American Jewish Holocaust Promoter, Deborah Lipstadt and her publishers. Zìndel witness in the 1988 Great Holocaust Trial. Ivan Lagace Became the target of several Royal Canadian Mounted Police raids. Resigned from his job as crematory director after receiving endless threats by anonymous callers and from thugs claiming to be the Jewish Defense League. Background and contribution: A crematory expert from Calgary, Alberta, who had been responsible for the disposing of 10,000 bodies in his career, Lagace finally sorted out - publicly and in open court - all the fanciful lies about the Germans supposedly "cremating multiple corpses in single corpse retorts" in Auschwitz, Birkenau and elsewhere. Lagace's testimony put an end to the wild claims by so-called "death camp survivors" about ". . . cremating bodies in five minutes" etc. His testimony - together with Fred Leuchter's findings as well as the lab results presented by Dr. James Roth of Alpha Laboratories from the soil and rock samples Leuchter had brought from Auschwitz to the USA - spelled the death knell of fanciful "survivor" claims. Lagace was raided by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in his crematory office where he was making notes and keeping photographs taken for future court cases hidden in a container for human ashes. Zìndel witness in the Great Holocaust Trial of 1988. Gerd Honsik Convicted, fined and driven into exile. Background and contribution: Honsik, an Austrian writer and poet, wrote several devastating books - one exposing