Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Sylvia Stolz’ Category

 

 

[In this 2 hour plus interview, Brizer, an Irish co-host of the Graham Hart Show, talks with Monika Schaefer about her journey towards seeking the taboo truth about WWII, the “Holocaust“, and the organized jewish perpetration of 9/11. Monika was arrested in Germany on January 3, 2018, and sentenced, and served, 10 months imprisonment for her 6 minute video that was put up on YouTube in June, 2016.

 

In that video she gave a heartfelt, belated apology to her mother, for blaming her generation of Germans for not doing enough to stop the alleged genocide of jews. She has since come to know that the so-called “Holocaust” is a gigantic, diabolical fraud, in that, yes jews were put into camps, yet there were no plans to exterminate jews, there were no gas chambers, and that far, far, less jews died in WWII than the “magical” number of six million.

 

KATANA]

 

_______________________

 

 

The Graham Hart Show

 

Brizer with

 

Monika Schaefer

 

Dec 2018

 

 

 

Click the link below to listen to the audio:

 

http://grizzom.blogspot.com/2018/12/the-graham-hart-show-with-brizer_10.html

 

Description

 

The Graham Hart Show – With Brizer 2018.12.10

Brizer’s guests: Monika Schaefer

Alfred Schaefer
Stadelheim Prison
Stadelheimer Straße
81549 Munich
Germany

Graham Hart – Hoax Train.mp3

 

 

Published on Dec 10, 2018

 

 

__________________________

 

 

TRANSCRIPT

(131:00)

 

 

[00:00]

 

[INTRO MUSIC]

 

[02:05]

 

Brizer: Okay, ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Graham Hart Show with me Brizer. I’m here on Cornwall Revolution Radio I don’t. And out of grisson dot blogspot dot com, where Mami welcomes you to the best news aggregate site on the World Wide Web! It’s good to have your company folks. Now if you’d like to join us in the Chat Room, click on the HTML 5 link on the top right hand side of the page, just below the player of your choice.

 

So I’ve got that one out of the way. It’s my first time doing that!

 

So, welcome along everybody! We have a great guest on our show tonight, which I’m really looking forward to talking to.

 

She needs no introduction to many of you, I’m sure. Her name, of course, is Monika Schaefer — a sister of Alfred — who was incarcerated in a German gulag for pretty much most of this year, 2018.

 

Thankfully she’s back in her native Canada again. And she’s still quite willing to speak out. Jail didn’t do anything to shut her up, or anything! She’s still going strong, fighting the good fight for our people, for our cause. So, without further ado, I’ll welcome Monika to the show. And Monika please give small introduction to the people who made not have heard about you. But I’m sure most people have.

 

Monika: Thank you so much for having me on! I am just honoured and delighted to be here! And I guess it was the better part of a year ago that Alfred was on your show, and I quite enjoyed that. And I wanted to tell you the song at the end was just fantastic, “The Goyim Know!” I sure enjoyed that! So I’m so happy to be on. And just a short introduction.

 

Yes, you mentioned I spent the better part of a year, that’s 10 months in the German jail in Munich. And that was just as a political prisoner! You know, I didn’t rob a bank, or hit anybody over the head with a sledgehammer, or anything like that! They didn’t like the things I talk about, and they have some pretty draconian laws there. So that’s why it landed me in prison. Did you want me to get it?

 

 

Brizer: It’s all, because of a YouTube video, I believe.

 

That’s, a big crime these days if it’s not got the correct message in there.

 

Well according to the elite was they call the correct message. Well actually, there’s nothing really bad about the video you’re just apologising to your mother.

 

Monika: Yes that’s right the video is called “Sorry mom, I was wrong about the ‘Holocaust’”. 02s ing and it’s just 6 minutes long and I did it in English. I also did an original version in German. And within a few days of it being released, out into the world, other people, who I had never met, or seen, or heard of before, translated into several other languages.

 

I think within the first four days there are already 3 more translations, like where they had to put the — what do you call it — the subtitles, I guess once, onto the English version. And it just kind of took off! It took my breath away at the time. That was June of 2016. I knew when that went out into the Internet that it was a door that I went through. I knew that I was going through a door. But heavens, I certainly did not expect all the things to happen that did happen to me! It’s been quite an education. Yeah.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

 

[In this interview Dennis Fetcho talks with Alison Chabloz about her upcoming court appearance (March 7) after being charged under the Communications Act in the UK, for causing “gross offence” to some jews, by uploading several of her songs to YouTube, that parody the nonsense claimed by some alleged “Holocaust survivors“.

 

Readers are urged to show support for Alison by, if possible, attending her court appearance this Wednesday morning at Central London Magistrates Court   — KATANA.]

 

UPDATE: “A blogger accused of broadcasting anti-Semitic songs has told a court there was “no proof” gas chambers were used to kill Jewish people in World War Two. …

The trial continues and a decision is expected in May [2018].”

Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-derbyshire-43321482

 

 

 

Inside the Eye Live

 

with

 

Alison Chabloz

 

Mar 3, 2018

 

 

Click here for the audio:

https://ia601503.us.archive.org/33/items/ITELRadioFullShow3.3.18/ITEL%20Radio%20Full%20Show%20-%203.3.18.mp3

 

Click here for: Inside the Eye — Live!

 

 

Published on Sat, Mar 3, 2018

 

Dennis Fetcho, Inside the Eye – Live! 2018.03.03

 

 

Dennis Fetcho, aka “The Fetch“, is an American ex-patriot living in Amman, Jordan.  He is the author of the Illuminatus Observor, a blog regarded by many as simply the finest Hermetic Qaballa blog in all of blogdom. The Fetch also has a second site called “Inside The Eye – Live! 

 

Alison Chabloz appeared on Inside the Eye – Live! on Saturday, March 3, 2018. Alison’s first appearance in November of 2016 was greeted the following day with an arrest initiated by an Israeli front NGO/charity known as “The Committee Against Anti-Semitism”.

Alison will be in court on Wednesday, March 7, 2018 in what, hopefully, will bring about a successful closure for the interests of free speech and Western values in the face of Jewish onslaught against Western civilization.

Many items of discussion were raised in this entertaining and delightful interview, including the ongoing social media purges, destruction of social working groups, “anti-Semitism”, and so much more.

Definitely worth a listen for anyone interested in contemporary battles for the heart and soul of Western civilization.

 

Hour 1 – News And Current Events

Hour 2 – Guest: Alison Chabloz

Hour 3 – News And Current Events

 

 

TRANSCRIPT

 

(106 mins)

 

[00:00]

 

Intro: Good morning everyone! Coming from somewhere in the Middle East. It is Saturday morning’s hottest streaming media political talk show! Inside the Eye Live with the Fetch!

If it was up to me I’d dump the Israelis tomorrow!

Hey good idea! Did someone tell us a standing member of Congress, that if it were up to them they would dump Israelis tomorrow?

Sound like something you might hear here on Inside the Eye Live.

The Fetch! Oh what a man! Oh my god! You have to listen to that show! He was brilliant! I didn’t know he had gonads of steel, like that! And a mind like a frigging razor! I didn’t realize the was so clear. He cut through that cognitive dissonance that is going on in the whole patriot movement!

Now it’s time for Inside the Eye Live! Intelligent media for the politically aware!

 

[01:20]

 

Fetch: This is the Fetch. And you are live Inside the Eye. Today’s date is Saturday March third, 2018. A good Saturday morning to all of you listening in the United States, and Canada, and a good late afternoon and evening to all of you listening in European and Asian time zones. And, of course, wherever you are listening out there on the worldwide web, or our F.M. and micro F.M. Broadcasting outlets, may all be well with you and yours.

 

The weather here in Riyadh is actually quite a comfortable day. Hitting a high of about seventy-five degrees right now. We’re certain as of the just sunset, just a few minutes ago we’re sitting at what? I don’t know something like seventy-one degrees so it’s really really nice. Got winds about seven miles per hour out of the south-east. And overall just sunny skies, just a beautiful day today. We’re going to be going down to what? Let’s see what the morning lows are going to be tomorrow. It looks like we’re going to go down to fifty-five degrees in the hour before sunrise, and throughout the useful part of the evening looks it like are going to be around sixty degrees, which is going to be about one o’clock in the morning here. So very, very nice weather for sure. So you have very, very nice weather.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

 

 

[Henrik of Red Ice Radio interviews Canadian-German activist Alfred Schaefer on the situation surrounding his sister’s arrest on Jan 3 this year, in Germany, for making a video called “Sorry Mom, I Was Wrong About the Holocaust“.

 

Part of the subversion of Whites has been achieved through the diabolical lie known as the “Holocaust” that is used by organized jewry as a “shield and sword” to draw attention away from its massive crimes against humanity, such as the instigation of the World Wars, 9/11, etc., while also instilling guilt and shame in Whites for their very existence.

 

Alfred is a tireless and impassioned “man on a mission” to alert all to the reality of our dire situation and the forces behind our looming racial and cultural destruction, if we fail to act! I would urge all readers to support Alfred in his work and to help him in exposing the Orwellian situation that his sister, Monika, finds herself in as a “thought criminal“, now locked up in a maximum security prison in Germany.

 

In Part 2 here (Part 1 is here), Henrik explains his thinking on how Red Ice should present such taboo topics as Revisionist material, and the role of organized jewry in our racial and cultural destruction, that Alfred discusses. Since Red Ice has a large and growing audience on YouTube, Henrik rightly concludes that despite wanting to get the truth out, they must avoid getting banned by YouTube by publishing certain material discussed here in the members section.

 

Alfred then talks about the use of “control words“, such as “extreme right wing“, “racist“, “anti-semitism“, etc., by our enemies to frame the debate in their favour. Organized jewry through its media domination have been relentless lying to us for the purpose of effectively genociding the White race through mass invasion of non-Whites, miscegenation and other means to drive the Whites into minority status.

 

He then talks about how the advert of digital technology has enable us to reclaim history and expose the lies that we have been feed. Despite the availability of the true history it is a traumatic process for most people to go through as they rid themselves of the lies that they have been brainwashed with all their lives. Alfred talks about how he overcame his fears to eventually come to conclude that Adolf Hitler was one of the greatest leaders that we have ever produced.

 

Henrik talks about how he has become “skeptical” about the so-called “Holocaust“, because of the many things that simply don’t add up, and as such is very interested to hear about what “Holocaust deniers” have to say. He goes on to say how the “Holocaust” is always talked about in an emotional way by the main stream media, leading him to conclude there is something “fishy” with the story.

 

Alfred goes on to explain how the people of the West have been, through psychological manipulation, reduced to the level of spiritual, emotional cripples, that have prevented them from resisting, so far, from being flooded with millions of the Third Word.

 

Henrik tells how that Red Ice has put everything on the line in talking about migration, the JQ, White genocide, etc., wherever the truth leads them. How jews like Barbara Spectre, Noel Ignatiev, Gregor Gysi, talk about the desirability of White population replacement.

 

Alfred describes how technological development has been used by jews to further their plans, for example with their control of Hollywood, the media, etc. The World Wars and what is happening now is the final phase of the “War of the jew” to dominate the world. And how our empathy, our jew induced feelings of guilt, pathological altruism, and so forth, is being used against us.

Much more is discussed, with Alfred and Henrik ending by urging listeners to write letters of support to Monika.

 

I would add that Monika’s imprisonment is a real expression of the war being waged against us and our freedom to exist. Her situation is symbolic of the repression that will only get far worst unless we stand up and fight back in any way we can, however small or large. So start sending cards and letters to Monika, and anything else towards helping her and our cause.

Write to Monika now, at:

 

Monika Schaefer
Stadelheim Prison
Schwarzenbergstr. 14
81549 München,
GERMANY

 

KATANA.]

 

 

 

 

Red Ice TV

 

Alfred Schaefer

 

Thought Criminal

 

Monika Schaefer

 

Arrested and Imprisoned

 

in Germany

 

 

PART 2

 

 

 

 

 

Click here for the video:

 https://wir-sind-monika.com/2018/02/01/alfred-schaefer-red-ice-part-2/

 

Published on Jan 27, 2018

 

 

Red Ice Radio Description

 

 Alfred Schaefer is a German producer whose videos are aimed at exposing the propagandistic nature of the mainstream media. His videos outline how the hostile elite that are in control of much of Western Civilization have managed to subjugate entire populations and their political leadership through psychological conditioning.

 

Alfred Schaefer joins Henrik for a discussion about the consequences of challenging the accepted view of the Holocaust. The program begins with Alfred describing what it was like to grow up in Canada with German ancestry amid an accusatory climate of Holocaust remembrance. He describes his sister Monika’s newly found skepticism of the prevailing historical view of the Second World War and her subsequent video productions. Alfred recounts how Monika was arrested in Munich because of her videos that challenged the prevailing mainstream consensus concerning the Holocaust while attending the trial of Sylvia Stolz, a lawyer on trial for so-called Holocaust denial. Henrik and Alfred discuss with incredulity how pursuing historical inquiry can lead to criminal charges and imprisonment.

 

[Please support Red Ice by becoming a member. It’s only through paid membership that they can continue to do their work, and cover such controversial topics such as the Holohoax — KATANA]

 

In the members’ hour, Henrik and Alfred talk about the fractured nature of facts surrounding the nature of the Holocaust itself and the need for further research. The conversation then addresses the migrant crisis and how it constitutes a threat to Western civilization and how it can be viewed as a destructive companion phenomenon to Holocaust guilt and other Leftist propaganda. The conversation turns to the free fall of the mainstream media, how people crave alternative media sources, and the importance of outlets like Red Ice. Henrik speaks to the risk involved with pursing the truth about the migrant crisis, its origins, and underlying motivators. The discussion then turns to the seeming contradictions of population replacement.

 

Henrik and Alfred go on to discuss the severity of the current geopolitical situation as an existential crisis; the importance of pursuing moderate solutions to avoid widespread conflict; and much more.

 

Help keep us ad free, sign up for a membership at https://redicemembers.com

You’ll receive full access to our extensive archives.

Stream or download over 1400 programs, including radio shows, videos TV segments & our live show Weekend Warrior.

♥ SHOW US SOME LOVE ♥ HELP US GROW

Donate: https://paypal.me/redice

Donate Bitcoin and other Cryptocurrencies: BTC: 15GFG2CVA6Ftq4w7dRuug9CQCsyrpeN1XG BCH:

1KVGWkLd5YuRxKNrVhExX8WiPCi4pGtey8 ETH:

0x90a0F323F58412eBfe086055831655A1c0D9E3B4 LTC:

Lc8aHwQ91EMr4dTcCcdNVLhBxTf5GUhPjP

More Red Ice TV & Radio: https://redice.tv/

Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/redicetv

Like us on Facebook: https://facebook.com/RedIceCreations

Listen to us on Spreaker: https://www.spreaker.com/show/red-ice…

Subscribe to our YouTube: https://youtube.com/user/RedIceRadio

RSS feeds: https://redice.tv/rss

 

 

 

 

 

TRANSCRIPT

(64 mins)

 

 

 

[00:00]

 

 

Henrik: All right ladies and gentlemen, thank you for joining us here in the second segment at Red Ice Members dot com. We’re talking with Alfred Schaefer.

 

And I just want to take a moment and kind of explain a few things, not only about the topic, but kind of about the way that we have to think about how we address these kinds of topics now, as well. The first thing is, of course, that we were mentioned, Red Ice TV was mentioned by name in the British Parliament. It was a couple of weeks ago now, by a lady who brought us up, we’re in the record of the UK parliament right now in reference to, I think there had a discussion about hate and violence and how people turn to terrorism and stuff like that. And we came up as a horrible right-wing example of a channel that should be censored! And this lady [Yvette Cooper], I forget her name, now even. She was literally calling, she was sitting there with a representative from Google and talking about us specifically how, you know:

 

What do we need to do to make you censor these kinds of channels?

 

And not only since that point, but around that point, we realized that okay, what we have here with the YouTube channel, I think we just broke 170,000 subscribers recently. So it’s a good, you know, it’s a good platform. It’s a good way to get the message out. And just to be frank with everyone, I also feel at the same time that I know that certain topics are just a “third rail”! I know that they would lead to censorship. Part of me feels, I don’t want to hand their reasoning to them, or the way that they just can basically say, “Okay, let’s censor it! ” Because they’re talking about these “nonsense” topics.

 

(more…)

Read Full Post »

 

[Henrik of Red Ice Radio interviews Canadian-German activist Alfred Schaefer on the situation surrounding his sister’s arrest on Jan 3 this year, in Germany, for making a video called “Sorry Mom, I Was Wrong About the Holocaust“. In Part 1 here, Alfred explains the intellectual journey that both of them took to arrive at the position that Western Civilization is being destroyed by organized jewry through a long term strategy of psychological and physical subversion, with them, for example, being the power behind the invasion of Western countries by non-Whites.

 

Part of the subversion of Whites has been achieved through the diabolical lie known as the “Holocaust” that is used by organized jewry as a “shield and sword” to draw attention away from its massive crimes against humanity, such as the instigation of the World Wars, 9/11, etc., while also instilling guilt and shame in Whites for their very existence.

 

Alfred is a tireless and impassioned “man on a mission” to alert all to the reality of our dire situation and the forces behind our looming racial and cultural destruction, if we fail to act! I would urge all readers to support Alfred in his work and to help him in exposing the Orwellian situation that his sister, Monika, finds herself in as a “thought criminal“, now locked up in a maximum security prison in Germany — KATANA.]

 

Write to Monika now, at:

 

Monika Schaefer.
Stadelheim Prison.
Schwarzenbergstr. 14
81549 München,
GERMANY.

 

 

 

 

Red Ice TV

 

Alfred Schaefer

 

Thought Criminal

 

Monika Schaefer

 

Arrested and Imprisoned

 

in Germany

 

 

PART 1

 

 



 

 

Click here for the video:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VfMVqDs-WA&bpctr=1517666289

 

 

 

Published on Jan 27, 2018

 

 

YouTube Description

 

 Alfred Schaefer is a German producer whose videos are aimed at exposing the propagandistic nature of the mainstream media. His videos outline how the hostile elite that are in control of much of Western Civilization have managed to subjugate entire populations and their political leadership through psychological conditioning.

 

Alfred Schaefer joins Henrik for a discussion about the consequences of challenging the accepted view of the Holocaust. The program begins with Alfred describing what it was like to grow up in Canada with German ancestry amid an accusatory climate of Holocaust remembrance. He describes his sister Monika’s newly found skepticism of the prevailing historical view of the Second World War and her subsequent video productions. Alfred recounts how Monika was arrested in Munich because of her videos that challenged the prevailing mainstream consensus concerning the Holocaust while attending the trial of Sylvia Stolz, a lawyer on trial for so-called Holocaust denial. Henrik and Alfred discuss with incredulity how pursuing historical inquiry can lead to criminal charges and imprisonment.

 

In the members’ hour, Henrik and Alfred talk about the fractured nature of facts surrounding the nature of the Holocaust itself and the need for further research. The conversation then addresses the migrant crisis and how it constitutes a threat to Western civilization and how it can be viewed as a destructive companion phenomenon to Holocaust guilt and other Leftist propaganda. The conversation turns to the freefall of the mainstream media, how people crave alternative media sources, and the importance of outlets like Red Ice. Henrik speaks to the risk involved with pursing the truth about the migrant crisis, its origins, and underlying motivators. The discussion then turns to the seeming contradictions of population replacement.

 

Henrik and Alfred go on to discuss the severity of the current geopolitical situation as an existential crisis; the importance of pursuing moderate solutions to avoid widespread conflict; and much more.

 

Help keep us ad free, sign up for a membership at https://redicemembers.com

You’ll receive full access to our extensive archives.

Stream or download over 1400 programs, including radio shows, videos TV segments & our live show Weekend Warrior.

♥ SHOW US SOME LOVE ♥ HELP US GROW

Donate: https://paypal.me/redice

Donate Bitcoin and other Cryptocurrencies: BTC: 15GFG2CVA6Ftq4w7dRuug9CQCsyrpeN1XG BCH:

1KVGWkLd5YuRxKNrVhExX8WiPCi4pGtey8 ETH:

0x90a0F323F58412eBfe086055831655A1c0D9E3B4 LTC:

Lc8aHwQ91EMr4dTcCcdNVLhBxTf5GUhPjP

More Red Ice TV & Radio: https://redice.tv/

Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/redicetv

Like us on Facebook: https://facebook.com/RedIceCreations

Listen to us on Spreaker: https://www.spreaker.com/show/red-ice…

Subscribe to our YouTube: https://youtube.com/user/RedIceRadio

RSS feeds: https://redice.tv/rss

 

 

 

 

 

TRANSCRIPT

(54 mins)

 

 

 

[00:00]

 

Henrik: Welcome ladies and gentlemen. Henrik here with Red Ice TV. Thank you so much for tuning in. It’s always a pleasure having you with us. Today we have a issue of free speech coming to you a little bit over a year ago we had a gentleman called Alfred Schaefer on the show. I think we had him on twice actually, and his sister as well, Monika. We did a show with her. She had actually done a five-minute video that was called, “Sorry Mom, I was Wrong About the “Holocaust”. Which was a very good video. It was an honest, very down-to-earth video about her own kind of personal and emotional experiences growing up in Germany [Canada], all the things that she was taught, etc. And [01:01] her basically waking up to a kind of a different story, if you will.

 

And this has, in hindsight, caused a ruckus not only, of course, in Canada where she and Alfred was living, but now they’ve gone back to Germany. And they’re it’s, you know, this has intensified, if you will. So we have Alfred back with us on the show here today. And I shall go through some of this and talk a bit more in detail about what actually happened. And I want to Alfred. Welcome first of all, but I want everyone, kind of don’t assume that people know the case. Let’s talk about it from the beginning and what actually happened Alfred.

 

Alfred: Good. I’ll just go back to the summer of 2016. Monika was here with Professor Tony Anthony Hall and we did a number of video productions. And what really rocked the boat here was a five, or six minute video that Monika did, one in German, one in English. It’s called “Sorry Mom, I was Wrong About the Holocaust”. And in this video, a very heartfelt video, she explained how she [02:02] growing up in Canada as a German. And how the propaganda, when we started being indoctrinated with the propaganda, the people in school like back at that time, the Germans were vilified, really vilified, to the max!

 

That was like twenty years after, well that was in the 60s so that was 20 years after the end of hostilities, of what we call World War Two. And Monika described how she experienced that as a youngster in school, when she wore her traditional German dress and how the people mocked her. And then she started reproaching, to she eventually reproached our parents, particularly her our mom, for what the evil Nazis did., because when you are told as a little child these kinds of stories you just assume that you’re being told the truth, you just would not imagine that you would be lied to by those people who you trust who you look up to.

 

[03:02]

(more…)

Read Full Post »

 

 

[In this interview Andrew Hitchcock talks with Canadian-German Alfred Schaefer again, this time about the sudden arrest of his sister, Monika, in Germany, for the “crime” of making a 5 minute YouTube video entitled, “Sorry Mom, I was Wrong About the Holocaust“. Alfred makes an impassioned plea for people to support Monika and to spread the word about this ongoing  tyranny being brought about by organized jewry and their shabbos goy minions — KATANA.]

 

 

 

 

 

Andrew Hitchcock

 

with

 

Alfred Schaefer

 

How YOU Can Help

 

Monika Schaefer!

 

 

 

Click here for the audio:

https://cldup.com/8XDyvXPqQo.mp3

 

Click here for: Andrew Carrington Hitchcock webpage for this interview

 

 

 

Published on Jan 11, 2018

 

 

Andrew Hitchcock’s Description

The Andrew Carrington Hitchcock Show (534)

Alfred Schaefer – How YOU Can Help Monika Schaefer!

 

 

 

In today’s show originally broadcast on January 11 2018, EuroFolkRadio’s Andrew Carrington Hitchcock interviews Alfred Schaefer, for a show entitled, “How YOU Can Help Monika Schaefer!

 

We discussed:

— the circumstances surrounding Monika’s arrest at the Sylvia Stolz trial last week on January 3rd; how when Monika protested that she was a free Canadian citizen the state prosecutor said:

If you wanted to remain free you should have stayed in Canada!”;

— Monika’s experiences in Germany prior to her arrest; how Alfred has received absolutely no information from the German authorities regarding Monika’s condition, and has been unable to see or speak to her;

— how the German (((media))) are celebrating the abduction and persecution of Monika;

— how we can turn the abduction and persecution of Monika to our advantage;

— how Monika will be coping in prison; examples of the Jewish persecution of the White race;

— how Alfred is thrilled with the support Monika has been getting from around the world since her abduction and persecution;

— how there is no point raising the issue of Monika’s abduction and persecution with any political parties as they are all controlled by the same group;

— what YOU can do to help Monika;

— how YOU can contact Monika;

— Monika’s YouTube video, “Sorry Mom, I Was Wrong About The Holocaust,” which I played in its’ entirety on the show;

— how this YouTube video undid the hundreds of millions of dollars the Jews have spent over the years in indoctrinating the White race with their lies;

— how Adolf Hitler was incarcerated at the same prison as Monika in 1922;

— and many other topics.

 

You can write to Monika at the following address:

 

Monika Schaefer
Stadelheim Prison
Stadelheimer Straße
81549 Munich
Germany

 

Click Here To Listen To The Show

Click Here For Monika’s 5 Minute YouTube, “Sorry Mom, I Was Wrong About The Holocaust,” Which Is The Reason For Her Being Held in Solitary Confinement In Stadelheim Prison

Click Here For Stadelheim Prison’s Facebook Page

Click Here For The New, “We Are Monika,” Website

Click Here For Monika’s Website

Click Here For Alfred’s YouTube

Click Here For The Andrew Carrington Hitchcock Show Archive Where You Can Listen To Or Download All My Shows

 

 

 

TRANSCRIPT

(57 mins)

 

 

[00:25]

 

You are listening to TBR radio, brought to you by The Barnes Review.

Now the Andrew Carrington Hitchcock Show with your host, Andrew Carrington Hitchcock.

 

 

Andrew: Hello everybody. Today’s show was booked to record, and it was booked to record with my good friends, Alfred and Monika Schaefer. Now unfortunately Monika can’t be with us, because she has been jailed in Germany, for producing the video, which was an apology to a mother, entitled, “Sorry Mom, I was Wrong about the Holocaust”. So I just have Alfred with me today. Now, I’m recording this January the tenth, and I’m actually broadcasting the very last show I recorded with Alfred and Monika, tomorrow, January eleventh. Now that might change and I might end up broadcasting this show tomorrow, and delaying that one, depending on how it goes. I’ve had a discussion with Alfred before hand. We’re going to see.

 

So I’m going to bring him up right now. Alfred are you with me?

 

Alfred: Yes Andy, and thanks for calling me up and I’m glad this is taking place now.

 

Andrew: Absolutely! Well either way, I mean, if we decide to put this out in a couple of weeks like we have been doing, then I can always release this. I’ll think of a way that I can release this early anyway, so, … Yeah, I’m all up in the air with this folks, because we don’t know where it’s going to go., but I think the best thing to do now is to hand over to you Alfred, and can you explain exactly what happened, from where Monika was staying with you for Christmas, and just after, and now is suddenly in jail in Munich.

 

Alfred: Yes, okay. It’s been precisely one week ago, that’s on the third of January, that Monika was arrested, as a quiet observer watching the bizarre Inquisition hearings against Sylvia Stolz in Munich. And that was done, … First of all, to get into the courthouse we had to pass all kinds of security clearances. And we went in there and watched the proceedings, and then within about forty minutes into the proceedings, the snake of a state prosecutor ordered an unplanned break, and said:

 

We’re going to reconvene here in the about twenty minutes.

 

So we say, “Oh well, let’s go out and stretch our legs a little bit, in the hallway.” So we step out into the hallway, and there was another snake of a state prosecutor, came up with three heavily armed thugs and they say:

 

[03:04]

 

Monika Schaefer?

 

In German, of course, and she says “yes” and she [state prosecutor] says:

 

You are herein detained”.

 

And they took her off to the side a bit, and slapped handcuffs on her. And when she protested:

 

Wait! You can’t do that! I didn’t do anything wrong! I’m from Canada. I’m a free citizen!

 

Then the snake of a prosecutor said:

 

If you wanted to stay free, you would have stayed in Canada!

 

So that was how the arrest proceeded. And then after going back into the court room, Sylvia Stolz’s lawyer came to me and he whispered in my ear, and he says:

 

Alfred, you had better get out of this room here, because we don’t know what they’re going to do to you.

 

And so I just got my jacket and left the courtroom. Waited outside, it was raining pretty miserably and then Henry Hoffenmyer came out after a while, and we just waited, basically in this car, until the proceedings ended. And then we could communicate with Sylvia Stolz and her lawyer, and a few other people.

 

(more…)

Read Full Post »

 

Video:  AZK – Sylvia Stolz

 

Lawyer Who Was Jailed for Presenting

 

Evidence in the Zundel Trial (full)

 

 Sylvia Stolz 030

Video published on Jan 18, 2013

CLICK TO VIEW >>   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoJY5cBxmdw

 

(English Subs) Sylvia Stolz, a German lawyer who was jailed for presenting evidence in the defence of her client in the criminal court trial in Germany of so-called holocaust denier Ernst Zundel, tells her story at the AZK (Anti-Zensor-Koalition) Conference in Switzerland, in November 2012. In 2008, she was banned from speaking during the trial, barred from presenting evidence, and criminally charged with contempt of court, and with inciting contempt, and charged under the same section of the German Criminal Code as her client, and subsequently imprisoned for 3 years. She is also barred from practising law. After giving this presentation in Switzerland, she is now again facing criminal charges, as is the host and organizer of the AZK, Mr. Ivo Sasek.

 

NOTE: For a translation of the short interview at the very end, please go here (contains C.C.Engl. Subs) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gJvE_

 

Source of the following transcript: http://www.toben.biz/2013/05/sylvia-lionheart-stolz-2/

 

Transcript of Speech

 

Sylvia “LionHeart” Stolz

 

 

Holocaust®, Issue Banned Speech, banned evidence and banned legal defence. The reality of “Free Speech”.

 

Ivo Sasek (AZK)

 

 Sylvia Stolz 031

[Image] Ivo Sasek at the AZK Conference, Nov, 2012

 

Our last speaker of the day will be lecturing on banned speech, banned evidence and even a ban on legal defence in court. On top of everything else, being banned from defending yourself in court constitutes a particularly disturbing problem. This speaker is a fully qualified lawyer and throughout her lecture I find it of particular importance, that we don’t let our judgement be influenced by what our eyes and ears have already been shown or told.

 

She really made the headlines a few years ago, as a defense attorney. So let me briefly explain with whom we are dealing with. This defense attorney has the courage of the lion. She is stronger than a man, and I have never met a woman with such a profile. She bravely stood up and took it upon herself to defend Ernst Zündel in the famous case against him, for so-called “holocaust denial” She was the trial lawyer of Ernst Zündel.

 

 Sylvia Stolz 032

[Image] Ernst Zundel sits in a court in Germany in 2005 at the beginning of a trial where he was accused of incitement.

 

During the legal proceedings she provided evidence to the court, which could raise doubts regarding the official account of history. This caused furor in the courtroom. And she was prohibited from speaking any further. This speech-ban was ordered as she was presenting the arguments of the defendant. She was not allowed to argue the case, and barred from listing more evidence.

 

She ignored the speech-ban and continued to submit evidence. And was then threatened on pain of penalties if she persisted. As it became too much for the authorities, she was arrested right there in the courtroom during her defence of the so-called “holocaust denierErnst Zündel. But not even this could silence her, as she continued to speak the case of her defendant while being forcefully removed from the courtroom. For this she was imprisoned for almost three and a half years, in spite of her having no previous convictions.

 

Arrested in the courtroom and directly into prison. On top of this, she had to face 5 years of “berufsverbot” through cancellation of her license to work as an attorney, and was removed from the Association for German Lawyers. They threw her out, but we would like to carry her into our midst. I urge you to help her along. We are talking about a legend here. Making headlines across Europe.

 

Welcome Sylvia Stolz. If they won’t let you speak there, we will let you speak here. We trust you to know the limitations. I am sure you do.

 

 

Sylvia Stolz’s Speech

 

Thank you for the warm welcome. Ladies and Gentlemen, dear friends. I’ll say it again, thank you for the warm welcome.

 

Sylvia Stolz 037

 

I would like to begin my presentation with one sentence, with which I also intend to end it. I believe that in this sentence, the very essence of being human is unfolded.

 

To think what is true, to sense what is beautiful and to want what is good, hereby the spirit finds the purpose of a life in reason.

 

This is a quote from Johann Gottfried von Herder, To think what is true, to sense what is beautiful and to want what is good”. Regardless of your religion, your world-view or philosophical orientation this sentence encapsulates the essence of human life, in my opinion. The alpha and omega.

 

One of the important topics we will be discussing, is “Freedom of Speech”. One hears from many places, that people who have certain opinions get into trouble. And this is not confined to political discourse. I am sure you know of quite a few areas, without me listing them. But to give an example, say, the issue of vaccines. There are doctors out there, who have been banned from practicing, because they warned against vaccination. This is just one example out of many within medicine. Or journalists who are ostracized because they have a differing view of the events of 9/11, 2001 and report on this. Such journalists are also bound to get in trouble. However, these people are not punished by criminal law, but find themselves punished in their respective occupations.

 

These examples should suffice to show, that the highly praised “Freedom of Speech” in reality isn’t all, that it is made out to be. And now to the issue of banned evidence, banned legal defence within the area of “holocaust denial”. Much could be said about this, one hour is far from sufficient. My job here is to omit that, for which there is no time. But there are certain points, which I think are essential to emphasize.

 

First of all, it must be said, that the principle of the “defined penal code” has not been fulfilled. It has been downright violated. This principle dictates, that the accused, must be allowed to know, what he did wrong. And what he should have done otherwise If someone takes a bicycle, that does not belong to him, then this of course constitutes “theft”, as we all know. In cases of libel, where a person says something negative, causing reputational damage, then the question of the court is, whether or not, what was said is true or false. And if true, it does not constitute “libel”, because in theory one is allowed to speak the truth. In the case of “holocaust denial” the first problem we are faced with is that the holocaust isn’t defined anywhere. That is the problem of a “defined penal code” An authoritative definition cannot be found anywhere. I’ll get back to this later.

 

Let’s turn to to the legal passages. First of all the ones within German Law. In paragraph 130 section 3 according to which so-called “holocaust deniers” are fined or imprisoned up to 5 years for each singular offence. In this paragraph there is no mention of the holocaust itself. It is not defined in the law as such. Instead it refers to paragraph 6 section 1 of international law. And here we find a definition of “genocide”. And whoever denies that such a “genocide” has occurred, commits an offence, provided that additional criteria are met, such as “disturbance of the public order”. But what I would like to emphasize is the definition of “genocide” in paragraph 6. It is very brief. I’ll give an excerpt. It is defined as “genocide” when “ONE member” of an ethnic, religious or other group is “killed with the intention of causing the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious or national group”. This means that if just one member of say, a religious group is killed, and the perpetrator intended to kill a part of or the whole group. Then it constitutes “genocide”, according to this definition.

 

Let us now turn to the question of how it should be defined in order to clear. Normally in cases of murder, a verdict contains the established facts of the police investigation, such as where and when , which weapon was involved, the name of the perpetrators and so on. All this is included in the judgment, after being demonstrated by the prosecution that, say “this was the murder weapon” because it carries the fingerprints of the perpetrator and so on. These things must be stated in the judgment. In cases of “holocaust denial”, we are dealing with a criminal denial of murder, and then of course we would expect to find the details of that murder spelled out too. Otherwise we have no idea, what the accused actually denied. This is the problem, there is no clarity when it comes to what was denied specifically. There should be at least one case against a holocaust denier in which the specifics of the related crime have been demonstrated and specified. I know of no such verdict.

 

There are no details concerning the crime-scenes, the method of killing, the number of victims, the time-frame of the killings, the perpetrators, the corpses. We have no physical trace of a killing. The testimonies are not specified, neither are the documents or similar kinds of evidence. The intention to destroy all or part of jewry under national-socialist rule has not been demonstrated anywhere. There are no documents showing any prior decisions, plans or orders. When it comes to the trial of holocaust deniers, we do not find these things specified. Neither do we find any references to other verdicts, in which all these things could have been stated. This is the problem. As long as the court will not commit to certain specified crime-scenes on which these mass-killings are supposed to have happened As long as the court will not commit to at least one specified piece of evidence As long as this remains the case, these mass-killings simply cannot be demonstrated. And even less so the “denial” of said mass-killings.

 

Now some people might say, “What about the Nuremberg-trial? It’s probably in there somewhere, the details?” This is not the case. Let me read you the relevant passage of the Nuremberg verdict, where gas-chambers are mentioned. Here it says and I quote:

 

A certain number of the concentration camps were equipped with gas chambers for the wholesale destruction of the inmates, and with furnaces for the burning of the bodies. Some of them were in fact used for the extermination of Jews as part of the ‘final solution’ of the Jewish problem. Most of the non-Jewish inmates were used for labor, although the conditions under which they worked made labor and death almost synonymous terms. Those inmates who became ill and were unable to work were either destroyed in the gas chambers or sent to special infirmaries, where they were given entirely inadequate medical treatment, worse food if possible than the working inmates, and left to die.

 

That is all it says about gas-chambers in the Nuremberg verdicts.

 

Nuremberg - Harwood 007

[Image] The International Military Tribunal (IMT) at Nuremberg 1945/6

 

It is all stated in general terms such as “a certain number of concentration camps”. It is not mentioned where the gas-chambers were. This means that a defense attorney is left with no place to begin. It is also important to emphasize that the rules of evidence where nullified in the Nuremberg trials. Very important parts of them at least. It says here, in the London statutes which were written specifically for this military tribunal. Here in Article 19 it says:

 

The Tribunal shall not be bound by rules of evidence”.

 

That is a sentence which is worth pondering. That a military tribunal, from its inception is given a free hand when it comes to rules of evidence. And furthermore in article 21:

 

The Tribunal shall not require proof of facts of common knowledge, but shall take judicial notice thereof.”

 

Interesting, right? It shall not require proof of facts of common knowledge, but what are “facts of common knowledge”. It is usually the job of the courts to establish the facts, not presume the facts.

 

 Sylvia Stolz 038

[Image] Robert H. Jackson, chief US prosecutor at Nuremberg, during his closing address to the Tribunal at Nuremberg 1946

 

It all becomes somewhat clearer in the words of the American chief prosecutor Robert H. Jackson. He stated in the Nuremberg protocols vol. 19 p. 440:

 

As a military tribunal, this Tribunal is a continuation of the war effort of the Allied nations.”

 

I’ll repeat, the Nuremberg tribunal is “a continuation of the war-effort of the Allied nations” Does a nation engaged in a war-effort need rules of evidence, as it seeks to burden its opponent with guilt?

 

I would now like to read you a passage from another verdict, in which one might assume to find the details of the holocaust specified. This is from the so-called “Frankfurt Auschwitz Trials”. Here it says in the final verdict, and I quote:

 

The court lacked almost all the means of evidence of a normal murder trial and necessary for gaining a truthful image of the events at the time of the murder. There were no bodies of the victims, no autopsy reports, no expert reports on the cause and time of death, there was no evidence as to the criminals, the murder weapons, etc. Verification of the witness testimonies was only possible in rare cases

 

And further below:

 

The court was therefore in the clarification of the crimes of the accused almost solely dependent upon witness testimonies. Additionally, there were barely any of the witnesses, who could be described as neutral observers of the occurrences of the Auschwitz concentration camp”.

 

From this verdict we are forced to conclude … or simply take in what is written to see that:

 

the court was in the clarification of the crimes of the accused almost solely dependent upon witness testimonies”.

 

Sylvia Stolz 039

[Image] The Frankfurt Auschwitz Trials (1963 – 1967) was a series of trials charging 22 defendants under German law for their roles as low-level officials at the Auschwitz camp complex.

 

This is the starting point of a trial for holocaust denial, and it is also the end-point of a trial for holocaust denial, because nothing ever changes. One never gets to know, neither as defence attorney nor as prosecutor what actually has been established as fact. One cannot know from the prior verdicts, old of new. Surely there is a lot in the media and much can be read in books about it, but obviously, we need to hear what has been determined by the courts. We want to know.

 

At this point I would like to add a very telling statement by 34 French historians. In 1979 these 34 historians issued a statement in response to the technical evidence presented by revisionist historian Robert Faurisson who sought to disprove the existence of gas-chambers. These 34 historians all hold to the official account of the holocaust and put forward the following as a counter-argument to Robert Faurissons line of reasoning. I quote:

 

It must not be asked how, technically, such a mass murder was possible. It was technically possible because it happened. That is the required point of departure of any historical inquiry on this subject. It is incumbent upon us to simply state this truth: there is not, there cannot be, any debate about the existence of the gas chambers.”, end quote.

 

This also belongs to the point of departure of a trial for holocaust denial, because this is how the judges, the prosecutors etc. are behaving. Through their actions they are clearly letting you know, that you are not allowed to ask. This has had immense consequences.

 

I am in no way the first lawyer to be punished for “holocaust denial”. Not by a long shot. I might be the first lawyer to be imprisoned for it though. But for years lawyers have been accused of holocaust denial, because they submitted evidence regarding details of the holocaust. When submitting evidence, one necessarily have to phrase it as statements of facts. Otherwise it will not constitute evidence, and will be dismissed. That means you have to claim as fact, that which you want to demonstrate to the court. Otherwise it is not valid, and can be dismissed on formal grounds.

 

But when submitting evidence on behalf of a holocaust denier, asking the court to establish that “so-and-so is the case, by expert testimony or in accordance with earlier reports”, etc. Then the evidence is not admitted by the court, and the lawyer is then accused and sentenced for holocaust denial. The general public know very little of this, because the lawyer in question seldom wishes to attract any attention. They simply pay the fine, and tell themselves that they will stay out of trouble in the future. There are a great many cases like this.

 

But I thought to myself, why should this remain unknown to the public. The way the accused are being treated, the way justice is miscarried. To punish lawyers simply for doing their job. I felt it was important to me, that the public get to feel this too I will now turn to the Bavarian court for prosecution of attorneys, who was to decide whether or not I should lose my license. Here again i submitted evidence regarding the presupposed “obviousness” of the holocaust.

 

The evidence again was not admitted, and the reason given was, that the court in light of the available books and pictures hold no doubt as to the “obviousness” of the holocaust. I as well as my lawyer then requested that the court point out, which books and which pictures gave them certainty with regard to the “obviousness” of the holocaust. These requests were dismissed because: “the holocaust and the national-socialist violent crimes against the jews were ‘obvious’”. So, we did not receive an answer as to which material, formed the basis for the certainty of the court. All we got was a very general reference to “newspapers, radio and television, lexicons and history books”. End quote.

 

In other words, if you want to know why you are being punished, then you should go and look it up in the newspapers. It will not appear in the judgment. Go look it up in the “Bild-zeitung” (german tabloid). This is of course an important point they have, about “the newspapers”. What does the newspapers say?

 

A French historian Jacques Beynac ,was quoted in Le Nouveau Quotidien de Lausanne, a Swiss newspaper in September 1996. He said:

 

When it comes to the existence of nazi gas-chambers, all one can do is, to point out the absence of documents, of physical traces and similar types of material evidence”. According to him, “all one can do is, to point out the absence of documents, physical traces and similar types of material evidence

 

This is the opinion of a French historian, who by the way supports the official account of the holocaust. Does this not show that the “obviousness” could and should be questioned in court?

 

Another historian, Ernst Nolte wrote in his book “The Causal Nexus”:

 

The witness testimonies are for the most part based on hear-say and assumptions. The few eye-witness testimonies we have, are in partial contradiction with one another, and raises questions regarding overall credibility

 

The historian Hans Mommsen was quoted in the “Süddeutsche Zeitung”, saying “The holocaust was not ordered by Hitler”. Again statements showing that questions regarding the “obviousness” of the holocaust are valid.

 

The last statement I would like to read to you is from Fritjof Meyer. In the journal “Osteuropa” he had an article entitled “ The number of Auschwitz Victims. New insights from newfound archival documents” He wrote the the following with regard to the crime-scene. He is editor at “Der Spiegel” by the way… In may of 2002 this journal came out in which he states that the genocide did not happen within in the concentration camp Auschwitz. Instead the genocide happened: “In the two farmhouses outside of the camp, probably”… so the genocide did not happen inside the camp, but “probably” in two farmhouses outside of the camp?

 

Again this shows, that evidence concerning the “obviousness” of the holocaust should be allowed in court Now, let us see where the supreme court stand with regard to the criminalisation of holocaust denial. Because the law here prohibits a specific kind of speech it is regarded as a “special statute” within the law. This special statute is acknowledged as “unconstitutional”, by the supreme court, because it goes against the constitutionally guaranteed “freedom of speech”. This was determined by the supreme court in a rather recent decision from 2009. The official acknowledgment of paragraph 130 as a “special statute” is a small step forward. If they would just take the consequence and repeal the law criminalising holocaust denial due to its unconstitutionality… However, I will not spare you their reasons for not doing so. The justifications given by the supreme court for upholding the special statute.

 

In the so-called Wunsiedel-decision of the supreme court of 2009, the court declared that Germany is by way of exception allowed to keep special statutes such as paragraph 130. That is the statute criminalising one particular kind of speech, with the inherent criminalisation of evidence and legal defense… Germany is by exception allowed to keep this special statute because of “the unique historical identity of the Federal Republic of Germany shaped through contrast to national-socialism” In other words, they are allowed to keep the exceptions to free speech, because it is the “Federal Republic of Germany”?

 

This is very well put. It brings out the arbitrariness rather well. The second justification is not stated as clearly and is found elsewhere in this supreme court decision. Here they speak of “unique” crimes and seem to suggest that, because we are dealing with this “unique” crime, then by way of exception demonstration of evidence is both superfluous and criminal. Giving evidence is both superfluous and criminal, when dealing with a “unique” crime. Does this seem logical to you?

 

At the end of the day, these are the two pillars upon which the criminalisation of holocaust denial rests. It is the justification within legal-theory, so to speak.

 

The unique historical identity of the Federal Republic of Germany” and the “unique crime” itself, are the reasons given for not allowing the demonstration of evidence.

 

Revisions and constitutional complaints are regularly dismissed as “obviously unjustified” Which again entails, that their decisions need no justification. When something is “obviously unjustified” it of course needs no justification… How neat, that is.

 

Again the answer is not given with regard to questions such as, “What are we allowed to say, then?” There is no answer. I heard the following statement by judge Meinerzhagen myself in court, during the trial of Ernst Zündel. But if I had simply told you, you would probably not believe me. And it is of course not stated in the transcripts. However the “Berliner Tageszeitung” (Berlin Daily) the socalled “TAZ” had the honor of reporting this statement by Judge Meinerzhagen. I now quote the Berlin daily newspaper “TAZ” from 9th of February 2007 reporting on the trial against Ernst Zündel:

 

Towards the end, and much to the surprise of the anti-fascist groupings present, the court dismissed all the submitted evidence. For the short and simple reason, that it is ‘completely irrelevant whether the holocaust really did happen or did not happen. It is illegal to deny it in Germany , and that is all that counts in court.”. Close quote from TAZ.

 

I will now return to the sentence with which I began this lecture, “To think what is true, to sense what is beautiful and to want what is good”. This implies the ability to identify and label lies the ability to identify and label the inhumane the the ability to identity and label injustice It also implies character traits, which is of particular importance in our age. The knowledge of our immortality, of steadfastness and incorruptibility. With such character we might be able to shape a world for the many children who were up here earlier today. A world in which we are allowed to speak the truth without punishment.

 

Thank you.

 

Ivo Sasek:  Thank you. Sylvia Stolz

 

Sylvia Stolz 041

 

Sylvia Stolz 043

 

——————————-

 

Transcript of short interview given after the AZK speech

 

Sylvia Stolz 036

 

BREAKING ∞ NEW CHARGES AGAINST Sylvia Stolz

 

 CLICK TO VIEW >>  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gJvE_1HQPg

 

I would like to add something to my presentation, one thing which I could not mention for time reasons. I mentioned that everybody who does something reasonable, beneficial, something healing, … runs the risk of being called a “Nazi”. And if you want to avoid being called a “Nazis”, you MUST ignore the crucial topics and thus you become ineffectual.

 

However this is not the only reason why I don’t mind being called a “Nazis”. If you know what is behind it, if you dealt with the subject, it’s not an insult. If someone calls me a “Nazis” I don’t consider it as an affront.

 

There is the story of a late, senior lawyer, he was in a bakery and while he was queuing he overheard talks of “Nazis”, in the usual way, ill of course, and finally he said: “Did you ever actually encounter a ‘Nazi’? Look at me!

 

I think this is the right attitude to deal with this matter.

 

——————————-

 

 

Sylvia Stolz’s

 

Last Words in Court

 

http://iamthewitness.com/doc/Sylvia.Stolzs.Last.Words.in.Court.htm

[Image] Heroic German lawyer Sylvia Stolz (with heroic German lawyer Jürgen Rieger), who was disbarred and served three years in prison for debunking the Holocaust and vigorously defending Ernst Zundel.

 

German Patriot Defence Lawyer Sylvia Stolz was sentenced to 3 and-a-half years in prison and disbarred for 5 years.

 

Below Sylvia’s comments to the court.

 

She says the Court is perverting and repressing the truth with the cudgel of “Holocaust,” making a mockery of justice. Her trial has made clear the criminal absurdity of prosecuting “Holocaust Denial.” How can one deny something that never existed? She says these entire proceedings began as a show trial in a kangaroo court and never progressed beyond that point. The main proceedings were projected with smoke and mirrors and the official fairy tale of “Holocaust” was enforced by undisguised force. She observes that the political intent of the Court is the ultimate eradication of the German Nation and its replacement by a mongrelized and deculturated population of mindless consumers.

 

Sylvia says she is confident that she has succeeded in exposing this Court to the whole world as an agent that is hostile to the German Nation. By openly and flagrantly violating the law, this Court flees before the truth. Incessantly, like turning a prayer wheel, it has rejected her every evidentiary motion with the cynical pretext of “abuse of court procedure.” ….. She has hope and faith that the German Nation will someday bring this treacherous Court to justice.

 

Sylvia describes how the Defense was forced to accept the contents of the indictment, and this caused the Court’s desired verdict to be the inevitable consequence. In the absence of material evidence, the Court relied on its infantile rulings that “Abuse of Procedure = Criminal Act.” Thanks to this judicial sleight of hand, there was no assumption of innocence and the Court did not have to prove guilt.

 

Sylvia asks: to what is Grossmann referring when he mentions “domestic and foreign” court verdicts? Could he be referring to the Nuremberg show trials? The Allied Military Tribunal was nothing but a postwar Talmudic Inquisition conducted by Germany’s enemies. It featured witnesses with “built-in credibility” and Jewish testimony that could never be questioned or authenticated.

 

She asks: what would people like Grossmann do without the official obligatory fairy tale of “Holocaust?” Her trial has again demonstrated that world political powers are players in the “Holocaust” game (or “Holocaust Industry” as Prof. Norman Finkelstein calls it, he should know, since both of his parents were interned at Auschwitz during the War.) This explains why objective historical research is still suppressed, sixty-three years after the end of the War. As an example of ongoing intellectual repression in Germany Sylvia refers to the “Hermann Case” in which a popular commentator was fired for referring to such positive aspects of National Socialism as its family policy and the construction of Autobahns.

 

Sylvia demonstrates that the Court’s procedural system is very, very simple. It consists of disallowing all evidentiary motions as “abuse of Court procedure,” which is a criminal act. She says that the District Attorney’s closing tirade was beneath all legal criticism, nothing but purest slander and abuse…..Then Sylvia shows how powerful interests profit greatly by inculcating a negative self-image into German society, with their incessant propaganda and brainwashing. If Germans were as evil as Grossmann depicts them, they would long ago have skinned him alive.

 

She points out that under the present Talmudic Inquisition, anyone who calls attention to the destructive nature of Judaism can be punished. Glenz tells the Court Reporter to write that remark down as well. Sylvia observes that today, no one is allowed to say anything the least bit derogatory about Jews, and yet the necessary first step toward changing and improving conditions in Germany is recognizing the cause of our malaise. She says that Horst Mahler’s writings provide the proof for this, and she will stand by this assertion. Glenz orders the Reporter: “Put that in too!

 

Sylvia continues and remarks that Germany now stands under the yoke of world Judaism. Glenz threatens: “We are going to cut off your final address if…” But Sylvia ignores him and says that following World War II, the real criminals took over the world. Glenz growls “I’m warning you!” but Sylvia again urges the public to consider the causes of Germany’s plight and continue gathering and considering the material evidence. She tells the Court that National Socialism is not dead, regardless of how much Grossmann and his ilk wish it were dead. She says that National Socialism represents what is good and enduring in the German spirit. Idealism and patriotism are rigidly suppressed at this time but they cannot be suppressed forever.

 

Turning toward Grossmann and the Court, she asks:

 

Is he German? Or is he perhaps related to that Moshe Grossmann who for four years following the end of World War II continued torturing and murdering German slaves in the East, as the Jewish author John Sack reports in his book An Eye for an Eye?

 

Then she turns to the Bench and asks:

 

What about you — are you Germans? ‘German’ stands for honor and steadfastness! Think of Deutsche Treue! Nobody can call what is going on in this court as ‘honorable.’ In this court, the only ‘justice’ is inspired by the Talmud!

 

Sylvia expresses her faith that history will take its inevitable course and “the truth will win out.” She says that since the trial began she has been prepared for her preordained conviction — she told them at the beginning that she knew her verdict was handed down, even before her indictment. To the Bench she says:

 

And you, my high-and-mighty judges, will never again experience inner peace… Your depiction of National Socialism as a criminal system will see to that. You are willing accomplices to the brainwashing and degradation of the German people…. Adolf Hitler accurately recognized the Jewish problem, the malevolent power of the Jews in certain respects… Yes, I share the values of National Socialism!

 

Sylvia replies,

 

If my actions bring a little more light into this dark hour for Germany, then I will gladly go to prison! It does not bother me that I am officially ridiculed and insulted by this despicable court and atrocious government … My high and mighty judges, you are convicting yourselves, not me.

 

 

 

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

 

 

PDF of this post. Click to view or download (2.4 MB). >> Sylvia “LionHeart” Stolz

 

 

Version History

 

Version 2: Dec 2, 2018 — Improved formatting.

 

Version 1: Published Aug 10, 2014

Read Full Post »