Jamie, since this talks about me, dump it in the archives, please.
In article <[email protected]>,
Michael further embarrassed the National Alliance
of Pork Producers by dumping
another organization’s web page without, apparently, reading it, with
>Please note in the excellent article below the use of the term
>”traditional enemy”. It is illegal in England and most of Europe for
>using the word Jew in ANY context that the jews view as unfavorable to
Cite? Whatever… actually, David Irving says “traditional enemy” because
he likes to deny, when in polite company, that he hates Jews. He made this
clear in his speech in Oakland, which I attended, and in his remarks to a
small Neo-Nazi gathering in New Jersey last year.
>The National Alliance is the leading patriotic organization that is
>fighting to preserve a future for White children.
And all other children as well. For more information on the National
Alliance for Safe Schools, see:
>The German Government is Baffled by the Outside World’s
>Perverse Thirst for Free Inquiry
The URL for this propaganda diatribe, which “Michael” obviously has not
read, is http://www.codoh.com/irving/irvactrprt396.html#zsites
It is dated March 1996, and misrepresents events taking place in January
and February 1996.
>zuendelsites Multiply in Cyberspace
>BERLIN- German government officials and public prosecutors
I.e., one politically motivated state prosecutor in Mannheim. The Federal
Government did not agree. The case was thrown out of court.
>are said to be baffled
I.e., I have no one to quote, so I am making this up.
>by the motivations of scores
>of American computer experts
I.e., anyone who can use a web browser.
>who have thwarted their attempts to blank out
I.e., make inaccessible from one German ISP for a period of ten days
without the use of a proxy server.
>Ernst Zuendel’s Toronto-originated computer page
Fascinating. “Ernst Zuendel’s Toronto-originated computer page.” Doesn’t
Ingrid’s sworn affidavit say that the site has no affiliation with Ernst
Zundel? If I didn’t know better, I’d think that the Nazis are telling their
supporters one thing, the better to raise money, and the rest of the world
another, the better to evade responsibility.
>for German readers, even though they themselves do not share Zuendel’s rare
I object to the term “beliefs.” On information and belief, Zundel is a
professional liar who does not believe a word of what he says.
>While the German authorities were quietly nailing into place their
>old-fashioned, Thirties-look laws to suppress freedom of speech, Ernst
>Zuendel was having a gay time invading them from the rear: from his
>Toronto headquarters he opened up a Web-page on the international,
>globe-spanning Internet system.
Again, it’s interesting how this friend of Zundel’s is calling Zundel’s
webmaster, who denies that the Zundelsite has any affiliation with Mr.
Zundel, a liar.
>Suddenly the traditional enemy, who had for years prided himself that
>he controls the media of the northern hemisphere, while simultaneously
>branding as an antisemite anybody who suggested such a fact, found
>that they had been outflanked: there was a growing new medium, a
>many-headed Hydra which sprouted fresh heads and even longer and more
>sinewy tentacles each time the old ones were hacked off; it was
>mushrooming around the world, like a Hollywood disaster-movie
>virus, running amok and out of control. Worse, they found that the new
>medium was being followed by millions of ordinary citizens: and worse
>still, that it was being believed.
There is absolutely no evidence of this; of the last, certainly not.
[Stuff about the Wiesenthal Center snipped; it’s largely inaccurate, but
then, I don’t support the Wiesenthal Center, so I’ll let them fight their
own battles if they want. Although, for their side of the story, see
. Neo-Nazi propaganda aside,
it is simply a fact that the Wiesenthal Center opposed third-party
blocking of the Zundelsite. The Neo-Nazi line, of course, is that they are
responsible for the blocking.]
>Censoring the Internet is like trying to photograph a dream: it is
>like trying to count the waves: it is like banning people from being
>called Smith (or Schmidt: Hans Schmidt, for example). It is King
>Canute: it is downright stupid: it is an idiocy of such crassness,
>that hundreds of ordinary people, who normally would not give Mr
>Zuendel the time of day, decided to make their computer banks available
>to him, putting up reflectors on their own Web-sites to catch Mr
>Zuendel’s banned transmission, and reflecting it by “mirrors” into
>Germany from around corners and angles where the Germans never
>expected to see him.
This is a quaint fiction. I agree that censoring the net is impossible;
that is why I mirrored Mr. Zundel’s web site. However, the mirrors
numbered not hundreds, and not scores (as he said in an earlier
paragraph), but seven; and the decision to contact him was made by one
>They did it, perversely, in the name of freedom of speech-which, by
>the way, is probably what interests Mr Zuendel far more than the
>Holocaust and all the other things he goes on about.
Yeah, right. https://nizkor.org/hweb/people/z/zundel-ernst/censorship/
[broken link 2]
>So who were these maniacs? Interestingly, it started with a news item
>in the Rhein-Neckar Zeitung, a leftwing German newspaper which has
I have no information on why the Mannheim prosecutor decided to ask
Deutsche Telekom to block access to the Zundelsite, so I cannot say with
confidence that Irving’s conspiracy theorizing is utter crap. However,
that would be my presumption.
>Germar Rudolph) or a $22,000 fine (Mr David Irving-for declaring that
>the gas chamber shown to tourists at Auschwitz is a post-war fake:
>which the Auschwitz museum authorities have now admitted is true).
Mr. Irving is still lying about that.
[broken link 3]
>Like an A.A. Milne children’s poem (the King told the Chamberlain, the
>Chamberlain told the Parlourmaid), the buck was passed around the
>German bureaucracy: the newspaper complained to Herr Hans-Heiko Klein,
>the formidable Mannheim public prosecutor
Here Mr. Irving finally admits that it’s not a government-wide conspiracy;
it was a local prosecutor.
>Deutsche Telekom could have told the Lord High Executioner, Herr
>Klein, to b*gger off. Instead, it solemnly asked him to threaten them
>in writing with prosecution (for “slandering the memory of the dead”:
>that being the absurd German law under which innocent people with
>incorrect opinions are prosecuted).
In fact, “We will not act without a court order” is the proper way to say
“bugger off.” That’s what all the good guys say. But Deutsche Telekom
apparently has some Jews in management, and Mr. Irving will take any
excuse to talk about that…
>Why should Telekom have asked for this? Well, one theory is connected
>with the fact that the Chief Mikardo of DT is Aaron (Ron) Sommer, an
>Israeli-born American citizen recently downsized to DT from being
>chief executive officer of the American Sony corporation.
>Yes, the story gets more incredible as it proceeds: why should
>Germany, presumably a sovereign nation now, put in charge of DT, its
>most sensitive telecommunications position a man who is not once, but
>twice a foreign national? It would be like putting that nice Mr
>Jonathan Pollard in charge of Britain’s GCHQ; or making Mohammed
>Ghaddafi boss of the National Security Agency.
Heaven forbid anyone should ever think Mr. Irving was a touch antisemitic.
>Pleading force majeure, DT was now enabled to inform the little Web
This is amazing. It *was* force majeure. The only reason that Mr. Irving
doesn’t recognize Deutsche Telekom as the good guys is that they’ve got
a Jew in management. I wonder how this would have read if Mr. Irving had
believed, as Ingrid Rimland did, that the president of Webcom was Jewish.
Which he isn’t .
>The sum looked perfect; but things did not work out like that.
>Webcom’s (Jewish) company president Chris Schefier put freedom of
Oops, Irving did “know” that he was Jewish. I guess I’m at a loss to
explain why Irving makes out DT to be the bad guys and Webcom the good
>speech first. Although his grandmother died in a Nazi concentration
>camp, he refused to buckle under, giving DT no choice but to pull the
What Neo-Nazi apologists and antisemitic propagandists like Mr. Irving
fail to recognize is that the Nazis did not kill only Jews.
Webcom refused to buckle under, while Deutsche Telekom did, because the
latter was under court order, and the former wasn’t. Duh.
By the way, access was restored by February 6th, a fact that both Irving
and other demagogues fail to recognize. Ingrid even announced this in her
ZGram on that day.
>Australia. This was when the other freedom crusaders, all unknown to
>Zuendel, plugged him into their computers around the United States, by
>installing the “mirror pages”, where by a simple mouse-click anybody
>could without a nanosecond’s delay pick up the Zuendel site where he
>had left off, as though DT and Ron Sommer had never existed. Now that
>was force majeure.
This is a pretty significant distortion of what happened. The mirrors were
not and could not be instantaneous. What happened was that I contacted
ingrid (thinking [email protected] went to Zundel), she got permission from
Zundel, then had Marc Lemire upload the files to my machine. It was several
days later that Declan McCullagh, to my horror, created a gzipped archive
of the Zundelsite files from my directory.
>First off was Rich Graves, a networking consultant (and staff member)
>at Stanford University, just over the Los Gatos mountains from Santa
>Cruz. He was determined to slay the dragon of Internet censorship
>before it could outgrow them all.
This is true. It is odd, then, that Zundel and Rimland, not to mention
some other so-called free-speech activists, have changed their stories.
They have now rewritten history to make me into a sneaky Jewish censor.
>His Website, still active, is called
This is untrue. That was Michael Loomis’s third-generation site, which
went online based on the tarfile Declan created from the files that Marc
Lemire had uploaded to my machine. I think Loomis’s “mirror” went online
*after* Deutsche Telekom restored access to the original site. Loomis
refused to recognize that access to the original site had been restored,
even though he received the February 6th ZGram announcing the good news,
and left his files, including a personal anti-Wiesenthal Center diatribe
full of glaring errors and omissions, online through early April 1996.
Because I considered this highly unethical, and said so, I was and still
am barred from Declan McCullagh’s “fight-censorship” mailing lists.
Let’s hear it for freedom of speech.
>Another site sprang up on the computer at Carnegie Mellon University
>in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; this one, installed by student Declan
>McCullagh, bragged, “Start your own Zuendelsite in five minutes or
>less!” and provided a quick guide to others on how to set up identical
“Bragged” is the correct word. Even today, you can download Declan’s
braggadocio from KKK leader and convicted international terrorist Don
Black’s web site, http://www.jbx.com/~ezundel/
>NOT EVERYBODY HAD THE same love of freedom. The site started by
>graduate student Lewis McCarthy at the University of Massachusetts at
>Amherst was ordered shut down by the panicky computer science
The sole reason was that he used a research workstation for political
purposes. Lewis McCarthy did not object, and in fact flamed Declan for
passing on private email and manufacturing the story that he had been
censored. There was no “panic” except in the mind of the moderator of
the “fight-censorship” list, who blocked my commentary on the affair from
reaching his readers.
>(His name? David Stempel, as in Gummistempel-rubber stamp;
>be out of a job).
…and here we have some random name-calling for good measure.
>The links to the Zuendel site appeared at the Masschusetts Institute of
>Techology, the University of Pennsylvania, and a private provider at
This last was C2Net. Sameer took down the files in short order on learning
that there was more to events than meets the eye.
>The Federal Ministry of Justice, hideously embarassed by Mannheim’s
>blunder, disowned the step and said it was not involved.
My. How… accurate and honest of them.
>A German spokesman quoted by the Independent in England stammered,
>baffled: “I don’t understand I believe in free speech, but I really
>hate your attitude that you know what is right for Germany to do. We
>are a democracy and we have reasons why we did certain things.” (He
>did not give those reasons.)
It’s certainly hypocritical for the United “Secrets Act” Kingdom to be
lecturing Germany on freedom of speech. Wasn’t it illegal even to broadcast
Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams’ voice at the time?
>Newspapers around the world like the San Jose Mercury in California,
>and Der Spiegel in Hamburg innocently printed pictures of Zuendel’s
>Web-page, and gave its computer address.
The headline in the Merc was “Computer users back rights of Neo-Nazi.”
Best story and most accurate headline of the whole affair, in my opinion.
Front page of the February 8th edition, with my picture. I don’t recall
whether there was a picture of Zundel or his web site.
>The loser: the German government and the people pulling the strings.
I agree. Due to the way the story was spun, there has been an increase in
anti-German and anti-Jewish bigotry among net users, especially self-
described free-speech activists.
It is incredible, but true, that because the Nazi propagandists and other
irresponsible parties successfully managed the flow of the story, that the
Federal Governemtn of Germany, which opposed the blocking of the
Zundelsite (which was ordered by a state prosecutor), is almost universlly
portrayed as a villain; and the Wiesenthal Center, which also opposed the
blocking of the Zundelsite (though they would like to disrupt it at its
source; they’re no friends of free speech), is almost universally portrayed
as the chief villain. For example, while Charles Platt’s book *Anarchy
Online* doesn’t exactly say that the Wiesenthal Center ordered the German
government to restrict access to the Zundelsite, it clearly encourages
that absolutely false interpretation.
>They had egg all over their face, hands – and strings. The winner:
>Ernst Zuendel? In a sense, yes, because thousands of outsiders suddenly
>became interested in what he had to tell them. Telekom’s action was
>”every dissident’s dream,” he said.
With this I agree as well. However, much of this publicity was negative;
Brock Meeks’ “Boil on the Ass of the Internet” characterization, for
>The outright winner: the truth, and Freedom of Speech.
With this I strongly disagree, because the real story has still not been
told. But the day is still young.
From: Rich Graves
Subject: Re: Ernst Zundel and the Baffled German Government
Date: 22 May 1997 15:00:04 -0700
Organization: Dogbert’s New Ruling Class
Sender: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
Xref: szdc2 alt.revisionism:105461