How to Begin Practicing Asatru, Today!

How to Begin Practicing Asatru, Today!
by Stephen A. McNallen

Suppose you have decided that you are ready to begin practicing Asatru. How can you start?

First of all, you don't have to get anyone's permission, or join any organization. Nor do you have to be an expert in the traditional lore of the Germanic peoples at this point in your development. Academic knowledge is important, but it can come later. You can start following our ancestral spirituality right now, today.
How? Here are some suggestions:

Begin living by the moral code of our ancestors. You'll find a list of appropriate virtues listed elsewhere on this site, in the article titled " Twelve Traits ." Memorize them, or copy them and put them where you will see them every day. Compare your deeds to the standards of the Germanic Way and begin shaping your life along a nobler path!

Honor the Holy Powers . Walk outside, and somewhere where you have privacy, raise your arms in greeting, look skyward, and say something like:

"I salute you, the Holy Powers of my people! Not as a slave or servant, but as a freeborn member of the Folk and as your younger kin. Nor do I come to you on my knees, but standing proud and tall. Speak to my soul, that I may grow in wisdom. Be my inspiration as I strive to grow wiser, stronger, and larger of spirit. May my feet walk the way of my noble ancestors, as I continue my journey!"
Later you will want to honor the deities in a more individual way, but a simple declaration like the one above will get you started.

Honor the ancestors. Make a simple shrine for them in your house - on a small table, or your night stand, or on a shelf, for example. On it, place photos of your forefathers and foremothers and perhaps items that belonged to them. Remember them daily, talk to them, share your life with them. Placing flowers on this shrine every now and then would be a nice touch. Recall them on their birthdays.

Bless your meals. You can say something like -

"In the names of the Holy Powers may this food be blessed, and may it bless us who partake of it. May it connect us with the Earth and Sky from which it came, to the Holy Powers, and to each other. Let it help us to live, to grow, and to work our will in the world!"
All these things are simple, but they are things you can do right now, today. In the following section we will consider some of your next steps.

Following Asatru: After the First Step

The guidelines given in the previous section were pretty elementary, but they will get your feet planted on the Way of our ancestors.

What now?

Now it's time to start learning.

More Resources

There is a vast amount of information on the AFA web site, and most of it will be useful in your quest. In particular, visit the Resources page and examine the growing list of items archived there.

Then, purchase and read some of the essential works on Asatru. You will find our suggested reading list elsewhere on this site.

The AFA's Living Asatru is a good guide to day-to-day living of our ancestral religion. Also useful is A Book of Uncommon Prayers , which offers some simple and non-submissive ideas for talking with the Gods and Goddesses. In addition, the AFA produces two videos providing a broad overview of our religion; these are Steve McNallen on Asatru and Asatru: A Native European Religion . All these, and more, can be ordered directly from us.

Northern Magic by Edred Thorsson gives information on Asatru and on some of our traditional magical lore, as well. The Rites of Odin by Ed Fitch also contains much of value. It is important we make clear that Fitch's book in particular does not depict Asatru as practiced in the AFA, but there is still a wealth of information contained in its pages.

Two volumes of mythological lore and heroic tales are The Poetic Edda by Lee Hollander and The Prose Edda by Snorri Sturluson. The Eddas are available in several different translations, and you may want to investigate several of these.

Of the books that relate to the practice of native European religions in ancient times, almost anything by H. R. Ellis Davidson can be recommended without hesitation. Gods and Myths of Northern Europe is the best starting place, though Myth and Symbol in Pagan Europe is also superb. For an introduction to the culture of our tribes as seen through Roman eyes read The Germania and Agricola by Tacitus, available in Penguin paperback.


Certainly you can practice Asatru all by yourself - but it was meant to be shared with others! You can contact Asatruar in your area through The Grove , a feature on the AFA's web site. If there's no one in your area, please feel free to contact the AFA directly.


The items listed above will give you a firm theoretical basis in Asatru. But only actual practice will bring true development. Asatru is defined not by what you know or even what you believe, but by what you DO! The way of our ancestors is meant to be lived, not dryly dissected by people who have lost the passionate essence of the Gods and the ancestors.

In particular, it is important to honor the main seasonal festivals to consider yourself Asatru. Winter Nights, Yule, and Easter are usually considered the essential three holy times that must be celebrated.

You have embarked on an adventure - the journey back home, to your ancestral heritage. Congratulations, and may your reward be rich!

Nationalist Socialism, Nationalist Communism and National Bolshevism

The following article is one man's interpretation of what has became known as 'National Bolshevism' or the 'Red and Brown Axis.' It does not purport to be an official version of Edward Limonov or the National Bolshevik Party's views any more than it is's views. As with any and all articles on the site, feedback and intelligent dissent is fully welcomed. Offer an intelligent rebuttal and it may get put up on the site as well. As with all other political theories given space on this site, please recall that this is just an alternative view to the mainstream political view.

Nationalist Socialism, Nationalist Communism and National Bolshevism

by Andrew Webb

I've written this essay on the demand of the owner of this site, in order to make clear some vital distinctions between three ideologies: national socialism, national communism and National Bolshevism. (A note: when I refer to 'the movement' in this essay, I am referring to the large number of anti-'Semitic' and racialist groupings traditionally associated with the Far Right, in North America, Europe and European colonies such as South Africa and New Zealand).


National Bolshevik Party Flag Russian National Socialist Flag
Flag of Edward Limonov's National Bolshevik Party Russian National Socialist Flag

What is National Bolshevism?

To answer this, we must look at the development of the socialist idea.

It was generally agreed, in the patriotic and anti-Semitic circles in Europe at the time, that the Russian Revolution of 1917 (and the aborted revolutions in Hungary in 1919 and Germany in 1918) were Jewish affairs. Jews had been fomenting subversion against the absolute monarchist regimés of Europe since the days of the Enlightenment and the French Revolution, and had appropriated the socialist idea for use as a means of gaining power. This subversion culminated in the Russian Revolution.

The Slavic racial element played a role, of course. Contemporaries of the revolution such as Hitler, Spengler and Lothrop Stoddard noted that Russia, since Peter the Great, had been divided into two: on one side, the Westernised Petrine aristocracy, mostly of German stock; on the other, the Asiatic residue possessed of a deep, primitive religiousness and a hostility to anything Western. The Revolution saw an uprising among the Asiatic racial element against the Westernised aristocracy.

What the Jews did was harness the Asiatic maelstrom and used it as a stepping-stone to power. Jewish Bolshevists exterminated the Petrine ruling class, and killed and starved millions of Russian supporters of the old regimé, in particular the peasants (who, as a class, have always been despised by Jews everywhere).

When does the 'national' in National Bolshevism enter the picture?

With Stalin's ascent to power to in 1924, Trotsky's exile in 1928, and the purges of the communist party rank and file (which, as we know, mostly consisted of Jews) in the 1930s, some anti-Semites claimed at the time that this saw the end of Jewish influence in the Soviet Union. Therefore, Hitler and other fascists were mistaken in detecting a Jewish component in Stalinism. This doctrine is one version of National Bolshevism.

As well as this, Stalin was condemned by the (Jewish) Trotskyists, for restricting socialism to 'one country', for not fomenting subversion elsewhere. Stalin had made socialism too nationalistic - a 'national socialism', in fact -when socialism, at bottom, is incompatible with nationalism. Stalinist 'national socialism' of this kind is often called National Bolshevism as well.

(Wartime Russian propaganda never referred to the Nazis as 'national socialists': that was the term used by the Stalinists to describe their own communism. The communists testifying at the International Military Tribunal always referred to the Nazis and the Wehrmacht as 'Hitlerians' or 'fascists').

In Weimar Germany, some communists, such as the Jew Karl Radek, advocated an alliance between Germany and Communist Russia, as early as 1919. It was felt that were Germany to take such a course, it would be resisting the West, which had imposed the Versailles Treaty upon it. In other words, Germany would turn Bolshevist out of nationalist and geopolitical reasons. That idea survived into the 1930s and could be found in the left-currents of German National Socialism, as represented by Goebbels, the Strasser Brothers, and Ernst Röhm and his communist Brownshirt faction.

So far, we have identified three National Bolshevisms: one, anti-Semitic, pre-war Stalinism; two, nationalist communism (or what I call national communism); and three, the advocacy of an alliance between Germany and a Bolshevism which may or may not be Jewish.


Did an anti-Semitic Stalinism of the 1930s exist?

In my opinion, no: the notion that Jews had been purged by Stalin in the 1930s is a falsehood. This is proved by the Holocaust Revisionist Walter N. Sanning's The Dissolution of Eastern European Jewry (1983), a study of Jewish demography in Europe and the Soviet Union before and after the "Holocaust".

Sanning's figures showed that from 1926 to 1939, the Jewish population in the Soviet Union increased from 2.6 million to 3 million - a jump of over 12%. Furthermore, the Jewish population of Leningrad increased from 84,000 in 1926 to 200,000 in 1940 and the Jewish population of Moscow increased from 131,000 to 400,000 in the same years.

As for the war, 200,000 Jews died as servicemen in the Red Army and 130,000 Jewish civilians died in the Nazi-occupied areas of the Soviet Union. An unknown but high percentage of the latter were killed as partisans, or in retaliation for partisan atrocities; others were killed by the Soviet natives for their role in the slaughter and deportation of tens of thousands of Slavs.

Added to this, there is plenty of anecdotal evidence concerning Jewish commissars, Jewish partisans, Jewish collaborators with Soviet occupiers, and so on. Jewish communists, and Jews in general, supported the Soviet Union's war against fascism, and certainly the very Jewish Roosevelt administration did.


Nevertheless, the Soviet Union stopped, at some point, being Jewish. Historians of international relations would agree that the Soviet Union had become an enemy of America (and hence Jewry) sometime around 1948. Stalin, of course, armed Israel in its "war of independence" against the Arabs in 1948, funnelling arms through Czechoslovakia, and the USSR was one of the first States to recognise Israel diplomatically. But 1948 also saw the breakdown of amicable relations between America and the USSR. And by 1953, the year of the 'doctor's plot' and Stalin's aborted plan to exterminate Soviet Jewry, the love affair between the Jews and Soviet communism was over.

The question is: why did the Jews fall out with Stalin? The answer, I think, is to be found in Sanning's statistics.

The USSR incorporated 2 million Jews in 1940 (with the annexation of Eastern Poland, the Baltic States and North-Eastern Romania), raising its Jewish population from 3 to 5 million. But it lost 1 million Jews in the war, many of those in senior positions in the communist hierarchy. The majority of those fatalities - 700,000 - had died in labour camps in the Siberia and the Urals alongside millions of other Soviet citizens.

Stalin had been prepared years in advance for a European assault on the USSR. Before and during the Nazi attack, he deported millions of Soviet citizens (Sanning gives the figure of 25 to 30 million) away from the front line and to Siberia and the Urals. There they were put to work manufacturing arms and electricity.

The production of arms and electricity required skilled personnel. Jews occupied the leading administrative positions in the Soviet Union and formed the most educated class, standing at the top of the social pyramid in the Soviet Union, just as they do in America now. Stalin deported them for this reason. (A large number of women and their children were deported because many women were employed in Soviet industry, thanks to feminist reforms).

Sanning estimates that of the 3.6 million Soviet Jews living in areas which later came under Nazi control, 80%, or 2.9 million, were evacuated. Five million people alone from the Ukraine were deported, a high proportion of whom were Jews or ethnic Russians (both of whom occupied the leading professional and administrative positions in Ukraine, to the detriment of Ukrainians).

Because of the losses in the labour camps, and in combat with European armies, the élite Soviet Jewish class was gutted. Although a large number of Jews remained in the Soviet Union - over 4 million - the power of the Jews there had been broken.

(For more on the implications of Sanning's work, see Yggdrasil's essay Princeton Tries to Explain a Drop in Jewish Enrollment; or "What is Communism?"

This is why neo-fascists who were more sensitive to geopolitical developments, such as Francis Parker Yockey and Jean-Francois Thiriart, proposed an alliance between post-war fascism and Soviet communism. They believed that were the Russians to win the Cold War and overrun Europe, Europe would be dejudaised as well. Therefore, an opening could exist to mobilise the Continent for a war against America (and Israel).


After the war, and the breakup of the European empire, a new phenomenon emerged: national communism, or more accurately, national liberation communism.

Yockey held that ever since the First World War, the 'Outer World' (the non-European colonial world) had been agitating against the colonial powers Europe and America. He called the desire of the coloured races to overthrow the white man 'Bolshevism' (although of course, the anti-colonialist tendencies were not restricted to the communism of the USSR).

It was Europe's defeat at the hands of America in WWII, Yockey argued, that saw the downfall of the European colonial empire - the largest in history. 'Bolshevism' stood triumphant. Although America, by winning the war against Europe, inherited Europe's empire, it showed no interest in maintaining it, giving the most valuable possessions away (China and India in particular).

Many of the 'Outer World' countries did not win their independence at once, having to overthrow colonial rulers like Britain and France by force. The national revolutionaries adopted communism as an anti-colonialist ideology, as communism is uniquely suited to that purpose. But they gave it a different slant from orthodox Soviet Marxist-Leninism, a more 'national' flavour. Hence Maoism, Castroism, Ho Chi Minhism and the rest.

This independence from Soviet communism, however, was only ideological. After achieving independence, a country like Vietnam or Cuba would have no option but to join forces with one of the two communist superpowers, China and Russia.


By 'National Socialism', I am not referring to the German variety, of course, but a post-war variant of national communism. More or less, other anti-colonialist tendencies in the 'Outer World' did not want to go the whole route towards communism, opting instead for 'socialism', which would see the retention of some private property.

In addition, they differed from the national communists in that they followed the policy of non-alignment. This refers to the practice of neutrality in the Cold War: non-aligned countries went with neither the East nor West, choosing instead a 'Third Position'.

The most famous exponents of the 'Third Way' were Juan Peron (Argentina), Nassar (Egypt), Sukarno (Indonesia), and a host of other Third World demagogues. Yockey writes, in his essay The World in Flames (1961):

No estimate would be complete which leaves two great political developments out of account, both of recent years. The first is the Arab Revolt, led by a great and vigorous man, Gamal Abdul Nasser. The second is the formation of nationalist, neutralist regimes by such brilliant statesmen as Marshal Jozef Broz Tito of Yugoslavia, Nehru of India, Field Marshal Ayub Khan of Pakistan, General Ibrahim Abboud of the Sudan, Sekou Toure of Guinea, Sukarno of Indonesia, Nkruniah of Ghana, and others. These personalities embody an Idea, none are out for money or publicity. They live simply, work for and live for their ideas. One such man, in a position of leadership, is a world-historical force. All lead weak political units, and cannot by themselves fight either of the great world-powers. But all want independence for their people; Nasser, for example, for some 300,000,000 Moslems. Each is a symbol to great human masses. Their significance, in each case, in this Estimate, is that they diminish the Jewish-American power without augmenting the Russian-Chinese power. By their Palestine policy, the Zionists may even succeed in driving the Arab world to fight for Russia. Eventually responsible leadership for a restive mass of some 180,000,000 Latin Americans will evolve. Already the seeds of revolt against Jewish-American economic domination have been sown. Witness Cuba.

Nowadays, the surviving national socialist regimes include Libya, Iraq, Syria, and Burma. The Burmese junta are the authors of a manifesto called 'The Burmese Path to Socialism;' Iraq and Syria both subscribe to the Arab nationalist and socialist ideology of Ba'athism.

The national socialist regimés mentioned by Yockey have either crossed over into the American sphere of influence or have become irrelevant. Indonesia, India, Pakistan and Egypt now serve as vassals to the West; the African nations have become insignificant - which is another way of saying that they are so strife-torn that no superpower can be bothered gaining a foothold there. (I am speaking of the black African states, of course, not the Arab ones in North Africa: Libya, Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria, because of their proximity to Israel, occupy important places on the geopolitical chessboard). For the most part, the West has regained control over all its errant colonies - except that the Jews of Washington and Tel Aviv, and not Europeans and Americans, now rule 'the West'.


Up to 1948, we could say that all Jews were united in support of two causes: 'Bolshevism', as defined by Yockey, and the destruction of fascism and monarchism in Europe. Jews, in America and elsewhere, were Stalinist communists or liberal supporters of communism.

Then, after 1948, Jewish-controlled America became the biggest enemy of communism. All at once, we saw: former Jewish communists, such as Sydney Hook and Irving Kristol, leading an ideological assault on communism and founding the neoconservative movement; the Red Scare; the coming to American consciousness of the extent of Stalin's cruelty; accusations that the USSR was 'anti-Semitic'; and so on. Why?

Yockey's answer was as follows: in 1917, the Jews gained control of the Soviet Union; in 1933, the Jews gained control of America upon the election of Roosevelt; in 1945, the Jews, through the USA, controlled Europe and the entire colonial world; but by 1948 or thereabouts, the Jews had lost control of the Soviet Union, for the reasons described above.

At the end of the war, the Jews, possessed a vast European colonial empire; but, with the onset of the Cold War, they had to fight the colonial subjects who wanted 'Third Positionism' or an alliance with the Soviet Union.

But Jews are inherent Bolshevists, motivated by one desire: to destroy European-Western civilisation. Their quarrel is not with the peoples of the coloured races, but Westerners. They do not hate Russia with the same intensity that they hate the Germans.

As Yockey writes, in The World-:

Most of the cinema in North America treats Russia and Russians as interesting and admirable, human and good. The cinema's purpose in the general scheme of propaganda is to control the emotional attitudes of the population. Control of the intellectual attitudes is the work of the press, and here Russia is treated negatively. Why this duality? Every ruling regime gives perforce in its propaganda a picture of itself, and the Washington Zionist regime itself suffers from this quality. Russia is not a total enemy, but a rival. The Korean war, 1950-1953 expressed the limited hostility of the Washington regime toward Russia and its official war-aim was not "victory" or "unconditional surrender" [as per against Nazi Germany], but "a just truce". When the Germans in Russia make some new technical advance, Eisenhower congratulates the Moscow regime. Roosevelt never congratulated Hitler on such occasions. The Russian flag is flown in the United States on all festive, "international" occasions. Never did the German flag appear, nor does it today. The fundamental ineradicable Jewish hatred of Germany appears in the fact that even the Germany they control directly is not permitted to sit among the United Nations, on a par with the other puppets. The spate of anti-German films in the theatres and on television continues unabated. The anti-Russian films are few indeed. One conclusion emerges, of military-political significance: in the Third World War, the Washington regime will list Germany among its enemies. Already the radio propagandists say "Russia and Red Germany." The intention here is, not only that the German rifle battalions be slaughtered by the Russian advance, but that the way be opened for the bombardment of Germany again, this time with more destructive bombs.

To a certain extent, Jewry considered communist Russia and China to be friendly rivals, not deadly enemies, like Nazi Germany, which had to be destroyed at all costs. And, certainly, Jewry sympathised with the Bolshevist aims of the Russians and Chinese- eg, the goal of the liberation of the Third World from European and white domination.


One of the most common objections to anti-Semitism is that anti-Semites lump all Jews together, making them out to be a monolithic conspiracy, when clearly Jews disagree on a good many questions - Israel for instance.

Most rational non-Jews, who are not completely deluded by philo-Semitic and Zionist propaganda, will agree that Israel and its supporters in Diaspora Jewry are a vicious bunch. But, say the incorrigible philo-Semites, 'Not all Jews support Israel. Why, my friend Greenburg hates Israel, and he's a Jew'.

The fact that Bush Jr (like every American president before him) is a slave of Israel, and that his foreign policy is written for him by hard-right Zionist Jews like Richard Perle, is an open secret. But we all know, too, that Jews such as Noam Chomsky, Israel Shamir, Israel Shahak, Norman Finklestein and even mainstream Jewish reporters such as Suzanne Goldenberg (of the British newspaper The Guardian) and Orla Guerin (of the BBC) number among the biggest boosters of the Palestinian cause.

The dichotomy is explained by the fact that Jewry now is in the possession of the mightiest military and political power in history - the United States - and all the vassal states which the US has conquered through force or diplomacy. As the ruling élite of the Jewish-American State, it is under an obligation to maintain the empire if it does not wish to surrender it. At the same time, it feels sympathy for the 'Third World', even for the Palestinians in their national liberation struggle against Israel.

Jewry is divided into two factions: on the left, we find the liberal Zionist or anti-Zionist Jews who feel that the Arabs are their natural allies in the struggle against European civilisation; on the right, the neoconservative hawks - a tendency represented now by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz - who want to use goyim armies to annihilate the enemies of Israel.

Yockey, describing the factional split in Jewry, writes in The World- that:

It is a psychological riddle, decipherable only thus: the Zionists have two minds, which function independently. As Zionists, they are committed to the destruction of the Western Civilization, and in this they sympathize with Russia, with China, with Japan, with the Arabs, and as such they anathematize Germany, which is the mind and heart of the Western Civilization. As custodians of the United States, they must half-heartedly remain at least the technical and political domination of that Civilization even while destroying its soul and its meaning. In a word, they are working simultaneously for and against the Western Civilization. Quite obviously they are thus doing more damage than conferring benefit! If a commander of a fortress sympathizes with the enemy, but yet insists in defending the fortress rather than surrendering it, he has surely found the highest formula of destruction.


William Pierce, in a radio talk, once spoke of the factional divisions in the (2002) coalition government in Israel: on one side, Shimon Peres, the leader of the Labour Party, the "dove"; on the other, Ariel Sharon, the leader of the Likud, the "hawk". Peres and Sharon, Pierce said, were 'good cop and bad cop', or at least hoped to present themselves as so to the goyim of the West.

Clearly one could not find two Jews more dissimilar than, for instance, radical leftist Noam Chomsky and extreme Likudnik Richard Perle - but are they that dissimilar?

Both the Zionists and anti-Zionists only differ in the field of foreign policy. The Zionist Right in America generally agrees with the social program of the anti-Zionist Left. That is, both favour: more forced immigration of non-whites; more multiculturalism; more MTV; more pornography; more cultural nihilism; more permissiveness towards Negro and Hispanic crime; more attacks on the cultural heritage of Europeans and Americans; and so on. Certainly neither Jewish faction can abide any Nazism, fascism, anti-Semitism or "racism" of any sort (although the neoconservative Right is sympathetic to anti-Muslim "racism"). Holocaust Revisionism is definitely out.

The truth of the matter Jewish-American "liberals" and "conservatives" are working towards the same Jewish-Bolshevist goals: they only disagree on how these are to be implemented.

The neoconservatives believe that 'democracy' and 'free markets' will do the trick and should be imposed upon recalcitrant Muslim nations, by force if necessary. The radical Jewish-American left, on the other hand, focuses on domestic policy: it wants to eliminate 'capitalism'.

That 'capitalism' is not, of course, Jewish capitalism (Jews are the wealthiest economic group in America), but the capitalism of the Rockefellers and Fords and other Yankee, WASP, East Coast plutocrats - the kind who ruled America before the ascent to power of Roosevelt and his gang of Jewish liberals and crypto-communists.

The America before 1933, as Pierce wrote, was, for all its faults, healthy and white, and for this reason the American Jews of both the Right and Left hate it and want to extirpate it. The neoconservatives may not be as obsessed with destroying European culture and civilisation from within as the liberal and anti-Zionist Jews are, but this is because they give the political destruction of enemies of Israel more priority than anything else.

Even so, the neoconservatives are not completely indifferent to domestic politics. They will use the opportunity of a civil state of emergency, like the present one that exists in America, to crack down on white nationalists, anti-Semites, Holocaust Deniers, and so on.


The Bush administration, since 9-11, has been a godsend for anti-Semites: America, as a power, has become completely Israelised; it emanates the obnoxiousness, the self-centredness, the solipsism and the bullying arrogance of the Jew. As a result, it has alienated the Muslim world and not a few independent-thinking Europeans, of all political persuasions, as well. (At this rate, we can only hope that Bush and his neoconservative coterie win re-election in 2004).

It is possible that Jewry will win its war against the Muslim enemies of Israel: after all, it won the war against Nazi Germany, and against post-Stalinist Russia - both of whom were tougher opponents than the Arabs. But the world has become tired of Jews. One can say that Jewry has long been the chairman of the board of the 'Bolshevist' corporation, but now the shareholders - the coloured peoples of the Third World countries the USA rules or seeks to rule - are becoming disgruntled. Perhaps the coloured peoples will look for, and find, a new leader in the person of Russia or China.

What of the peoples of European descent? Should they join forces, like the National Bolshevists of old, with the Third World enemies of Jewry - ie, China, Russia and the 'rogue states'?

Obviously, the National Bolshevism of Yockey, Thiriart, Otto Remer ended in failure: by the 1980s, it was apparent to all that any alliance between European nationalists and the USSR would fail to deliver the goods. The world economy had been torn apart in the 1970s, and the USSR's brand of socialism - unlike China's - was incapable of weathering the storm. The USSR, then, was placed in a position of extreme weakness, with the results we all know. We in the movement sided with a loser; it is possible that, by siding with the Arabs, we are siding with another loser, and that the Arabs will be defeated just as the Russians were.

One of the problems with Arab nationalism and Islamic fundamentalism is that neither of them possesses a true antagonism towards the Jews and Israel. The truth is that Judaism is part and parcel of the Arabic-Middle Eastern culture, history and civilisation. At bottom, the quarrel between the Arabs and the Jews is nothing more than a brother's quarrel - like, for instance, a quarrel between French and Germans. The Muslims really only make two demands on America and Israel: that Israel withdraw from the Occupied Territories, evacuate the settlements, and allow the formation of a Palestinian State; and that Israel withdraw from the Golan Heights. Were Israel to do so, it would guarantee peace with the Palestinians and with Syria, and the entire Muslim world, and we in the West would lose an ally in the Arabs.

On the other hand, we in the West who are aware of the Jews' true character have grievances against the Jew too numerous to mention. At bottom is our visceral disgust for the Jew: we do not see him as a wayward brother, as the Muslims do, but a total enemy who is completely foreign to us and who is responsible for the most terrible crimes in history. We will not be satisfied by a mere Israeli withdrawal from the Territories and the Golan - what good would that do us?

Eventually, we in the West will need to wage war against the Jew - a total, no-holds barred, war. The Arabs and the rest of the coloured world will have no stomach for that: their opposition to the Jew is merely political, not racial, cultural, spiritual.

Furthermore, the Arabs and the rest of the Third World will oppose the revival of an America and a Europe under a white, as opposed to Jewish, leadership. The three superpowers today are China, Russia and Israel-America. The coloured races have no real objection to this arrangement: they much prefer that America and Europe be ruled by Jews than by whites, for Jews are fellow members of the 'Bolshevist' club, and victims, like them, of Western "racism" and oppression.

Suppose that the Negroes of America were given a choice between the present Jewish-controlled politicians - who at least can be counted upon to give them plenty of welfare - and a government of white separatists: who would they choose? The question answers itself.

FNF NOTE: At this point I must object. Why should they have to choose between either? Why not give them a government and a community/land of their own which they and they alone are responsible for its success or failure?

It is true that Westerners who want to overthrow Jewish rule are in a vulnerable position, that we need all the help we can get - and that means help from the Russians, Chinese and the Arabs. American nationalists should not even spurn offers of assistance from disaffected Negroes and Hispanics.


Whether or not one adopts a National Bolshevist stance - and by that I mean a stance of anti-Semitic socialism - depends on one's economic views. Some in the movement see capitalism as a degrading, exploitative, unstable economic system which must be replaced with socialism at all costs; others have no problem with it. Clearly, socialism, at the present, is further away from realisation in the Western world more than ever. Despite the recurring financial and economic crises which have occurred since 1970, capitalism still endures. I would venture to say that, at this point in time, socialism - or even corporatism, which has been championed by many distinguished theorists of post-war fascism - is an unrealistic option.

At any rate, we in the movement should strive for product differentiation: that is, offering prospective recruits something they will not find in, for instance, the ideologies of anarchism/Marxism, environmentalism, conservatism, and so on. Our strength lies in our willingness to address racial politics, and, above all, our willingness to name the Jew.

Certainly anti-Semitism is compatible with a wide variety of ideologies: there is no reason why the Green parties around the world should not stand on anti-Semitic, anti-Israel platforms and espouse Holocaust denial. Likewise, there is no reason why a 'pink' liberal cannot be racialist: after all, the Democrat Party in America was the bastion of Southern racialism for many years.

But it just so happens that only our movement is left to take up cudgels on the race question and the Jew question. The Jews and their vassals have seized control of all the disparate political factions of the West - on both the Left and Right - and succeeded in removing any "racist" and anti-Semitic ideological elements. The movement, on the other hand, has been left alone. Part of this is because our movement, in the post-war years, has been too small and unimportant for the Jews to infiltrate and take over; but mostly it is because we have deliberately fostered an environment in which no Jew could ever feel welcome.

As a result, we in the movement have the monopoly on racialism and anti-Semitism, and, in these present times, when the Jewish domination of American and European policy is becoming clear to even the most imperceptive individuals, we should be exploiting that monopoly as much as possible. That means, then, putting our doctrines on economics and social policy on the back burner for the time being. The movement, at the present, is incapable of steering the Western world towards socialism: but it can foment anti-Semitism, which will do more to destabilise the Jewish (and Masonic?) political and financial power structure more than any socialist polemics.

Russian National Unity and National Bolshevik Flags provided courtesy of FOTW. For further information on the flags of the rising 'Red and Brown Axis,' visit:NAT. BOLSH. FLAGS

FNF NOTE: The author's conclusion that for now, we must place all other Social Justice issues and environmental concerns aside are entirely disagreed with. Our greatest strength is that we are not just simple minded racists like the majority of the "movement" he speaks of. Our strengths are given to us by the fact that we are concerned with a plethora of issues, folkish autonomy is but one of the many issues we are taking heed to. Those that only concentrate one the one issue, we believe, are doomed to failure. The so-called "movement" that is referred to throughout the article has only that one cause. It is for that reason that their "movement" is stagnant and hasn't moved anywhere for decades. The very thought of giving space on one of their websites to causes like National Bolshevism, National Anarchism, and Third Position movements would send most of these pathetic right-wing reactionaries into anaphylactic shock! Instead, we must move forward, not left or right, and continue in the fight for National Freedom, as well as Social Justice!

To discuss this article and other issues please visit the Folk And Faith Forum.

Terror versus Truth in Canada:An Interview With Ernst Zündel

Free Speech Directory || National Alliance Main Page

Free Speech - June 1995 - Volume I, Number 6

Terror versus Truth in Canada:
An Interview With Ernst Zündel

Conducted by Kevin Alfred Strom

On the front lines in the war to save our people is where you will find German-Canadian free speech advocate and revisionist author and publisher Mr. Ernst Zündel of Toronto. Mr. Zündel in recent weeks has very nearly become a martyr for his beliefs, being the victim of an arson attack which severely damaged his home and which surely would have killed him had he been at home as usual, and then the victim of a mail bomb cleverly disguised as a book and which he had the good sense to turn over to police when he became suspicious because of its weight. The controlled media, which are ever so vigilant to protect the rights of minorities and leftists and raise a hue and cry from coast to coast when one of their pets gets a scratch or a bruise or has his feelings hurt, have uttered hardly a peep at these and many other vicious attacks against Mr. Zündel.

My questions will be in bold style formatting, Mr. Zündel's answers will be in normal style formatting.

Welcome to American Dissident Voices. It is an honor to have such a brave champion of free speech as a guest. There are few people in this world who would be willing to struggle and fight for what they believe to be true as you have. In recent weeks you have been the victim of an arson attack and a mail bomb. There must be those who passionately hate you and what you are doing.

Well, the hate campaign has actually been of a much longer duration than just recent weeks. It has never taken as violent a form, except we had one bomb go off in 1984, but then things died down because the people that were my opposite numbers, usually the "holocaust" promotion lobby, were able to drag me into a Canadian court and keep me in there, tied up in litigation, for nine years after that. While I was in court the violence was by JDL ["Jewish Defense League"] demonstrators that knocked me to the ground, and who tried to attack my legal team as they went into court, and beat some of my witnesses on the way to court, and so on. But generally we had very good police protection, and when I found that the police protection wasn't swift enough or adequate, I organized my own.

So there has been an ongoing campaign of violence against you for over a decade.

Oh, yes. To me this is just an escalation. The reason why I have survived as long as I have survived is what my friends, comrades and supporters thought was an extraordinarily cautious approach. I wore bulletproof vests, and my bodyguards had the option of having bulletproof vests -- I bought five sets. I had former policemen and active policemen who were on holiday as my security advisors. I had searchlights on my building that came on with sensors. We have spent a lot of money on time-lapse recorders, and that paid off in this particular arson attack because we actually filmed the arsonist in the process of pouring 20 liters of gasoline, which is about five gallons, on the wall on the front of my building. Unfortunately, there was only one person in the building at the time, and they were in a back room and didn't see that monitor at the moment. Our cameras have also paid off in that we have trapped numerous people that heaved objects or who tried to pull signs down from our building. You have to understand that we are located on one of the most busy thoroughfares in Toronto. We have bylaws, like all large cities, which only allow you to erect fences up to a certain point. The city forced us a few months ago to take a security fence down by two feet. We cannot put barbed wire around, naturally, because this is a residential and business zoned area. There is, of course, a certain amount of protection from being within the center of the city, because there are always people about. This is how it came about that a person saw the arsonist actually walking along the street, carrying his can of gasoline, and the police got an excellent description. So, between our security video and the man's description I have every confidence that, with the help of my $5,000 cash reward, we will apprehend that man and that man will be brought to trial. Through him, we will find out who paid him to do the job.

When did this arson attack occur and how much damage was there?

It was 5 a.m. on the seventh of May, and some people have said that it was deliberately designed with the VE-Day celebrations in mind. As a matter of fact, I was in Western Canada, in British Columbia, at the time to meet with my long-standing attorney Douglas Christie to talk about legal moves against public officials and some of these Marxists and Jewish agitators that were saying they were going to drive me out of the neighborhood. They had established a committee to drive me out of the neighborhood where I live and carry on a lawful business where I think and write and speak -- which is constitutionally protected even in Canada. We were going to make moves under the criminal code of Canada, but it never came to that because the morning news was that my house had been torched. Unfortunately, my own private, really priceless library suffered almost total loss. Some of these books were three or four hundred years old. Many of them were bequeathed to me by older Europeans for my work. The unfortunate thing is, for the contents of the building I could not get any insurance anywhere in Canada. Once you are a victim of a bombing, you enter a risk group to which they will not sell insurance.

That is a tragedy. It could have been worse, though: people might have been killed.

Oh, yes. Had I been in Toronto, I would certainly have been killed in this attack. In the room where I normally sleep, the flames and the smoke and the soot is such that the gases would have killed me.

Now you have also been the victim of attempted murder via mail bomb.

Yes. That's another kind of an odd situation, in that the bomb that was mailed came in the guise of a parcel, and the parcel looked like any other book. When we felt it, it was unduly heavy. There was a cover on it; there was a curved spine on it; and it certainly was a book. But I compared other books with it on our scale and realized that even with the heaviest paper it would require a much larger volume than this parcel had to be the same weight. Either somebody was sending me gold bricks or something worse.

I had a fortunate phone call from Vancouver from a long-time acquaintance and political collaborator of mine. When we told him the P.O. box number on the parcel he said, "Well, heck, that's my P.O. box number!" I was shocked. I had seen the man two weeks ago. He had never said he was going to send me a parcel. It was a two year old P.O. box number.

So I went to the police. I took the bomb in my car, drove down to the police station, and got promptly chewed out by the police people. They said one shouldn't drive around the city carrying bombs in the trunk of a car.

Yes [laughter].

I didn't know it was a bomb at that time, I just suspected it to be one. And besides, I'm so in Dutch with my neighbors here that I thought that was better than getting them all upset with what might be a fake bomb scare where they'd have to clear out the whole neighborhood. If it was a fake I'd look ridiculous, so I didn't call anybody from the media. I figured since we'd had it in my office for almost a week, and had handled it, that if it was a bomb it was of a kind that would not explode unless one opened it. The bomb squad in Toronto deduced exactly the same thing after they handled it and x-rayed it. So I wasn't so stupid after all. I had deposited it in an empty area of the parking lot of the police station. Then the bomb squad did its thing with the robot. They put it in an explosion-proof container, and drove it off into an uninhabited area and exploded it.

Are you ever worried that your nine lives are going to run out some day?

[Laughter] Well, I think I have six or seven left!

The really interesting thing is that after the police and bomb experts were through examining it, they stated that it was a very powerful pipe bomb that would have killed anybody within 90 meters of the blast. In American measurement, that's about 300 feet. And I live in a very densely populated area, as I said in the downtown Toronto area on a main thoroughfare. If that thing had gone off in this building it might have leveled the block.

Are there any leads or suspects?

For the bombing, not really; it's too early in the investigation.

The interesting thing is that on the 13th of April, I had been sent, from a Vancouver address, an envelope containing a mousetrap to which were attached some very sharp blades. In it was a threatening letter that said it was from the "Anti-Fascist Militia." They said that this was a declaration of war and that this was only the first device and that the next one may well be "boom." That is how the letter ended.

Over the years, when you have a high profile, you get threatening letters and you get lots of threatening phone calls. I got a little more concerned since this organization was founded to drive me out of the neighborhood, and thousands of posters were distributed all around Toronto with instructions on them for how to build a Molotov cocktail, meaning a fire-bomb, an arson bomb, along with a picture of my face in the crosshairs of a rifle, and my address. The headline on the poster was "Bored?", then the Molotov cocktail, then my house and address and my face. I turned all these things over to the authorities, I mailed them in press releases to the Canadian media, I made them available to the intelligence agencies that look after security in this country. I did what every citizen ought to do, plus I really fortified my building to the point where some people referred to it as a "bunker," which it was not. It was just a very secure building. But even if you are on a main drag, you are not immune to arson.

Have the authorities vigorously pursued these cases?

You know, many people have called me, friends from the nationalist camp, revisionists and so on, from around the world, have called me over the years -- and now again because of what happened -- and they are all very cynical about the police and the authorities. I'd have to say that in my case -- and I don't say this because I expect favors from the Toronto police, I'm just saying it because it's a fact -- the Toronto police department has been the one organization in my tremendously difficult and protracted struggle against the Zionist "holocaust" promotion lobby that has shown professionalism and a detached method of dealing with me. They have accorded me my constitutional rights, and that is to their credit because the media hate campaign against me has been so intense and so vicious that it's a miracle that the police have taken such a professional approach. I am convinced that if there are fingerprints on any of these devices, if there are leads that my $5,000 reward poster will bring, the police will vigorously pursue these people.

Now the next question is: Will the courts, will the prosecutors vigorously prosecute this case? I don't think so.

What makes you feel that way?

Because the police did arrest eight people outside my building after a recent violent demonstration. You have to understand, we've had demonstrations in my neighborhood that were supposed to go outside my building of up to three and four thousand people. The last one was only about 250 people. It was quite violent. The people who were demonstrating were followed by the police, and eight of them were arrested for threatening policemen with two-by-fours, causing mischief, and throwing objects at the police. The police were quite prepared for firebugs, because I saw a special unit with four different policemen carrying fire extinguishers during the demonstration, which is highly unusual. So the police are not the problem.

The problem was that the lady prosecutor in Toronto did such a non- prosecution -- such a poorly prepared prosecution -- that she didn't submit the color video tapes we had showing the camouflaged faces of these terrorist demonstrators, where we had zoomed in on people who were throwing objects, showing others who were threatening police with two- by-four beams, and so on. None of this was introduced into evidence.

The judge turned his back towards me, sitting back on his judge's chair, while I was in the witness stand being questioned. The whole courtroom was full of these anarchists, leftists, communists and Jewish lobbyists. He treated me like a piece of dung, and let all of these eight people go.

The police did the right thing -- they protected private property, they protected my constitutional right to speak, they brought these people to justice, they arrested them, they charged them properly, and then everything fell apart. If I was a leftist Marxist demonstrator bent on making life difficult for a man like Ernst Zündel, I would take this as official encouragement.

Indeed. It seems to me that the media are culpable as well. In this country, we've heard virtually nothing of what's happened to you.

In Toronto, the people that really "lit the fuse" were the mainstream media. They have engaged in a hate campaign, in a shameful and shameless way -- especially since the 50th anniversary celebrations of the end of the Second World War. Also guilty, I think, are the people who put up posters outside my house claiming that it was to celebrate VE-Day that they torched my house. You cannot stoke the fires of prejudice against German people and then not find that somewhere, sometime down the road it doesn't discharge. And that's what has happened. They agitated and agitated and agitated, until finally they found an unbalanced enough person and they put the torch to my house.

The organized Jewish and leftist groups want to shut you up and stifle debate on the subject of what really happened to the Jewish people during World War II. But by putting you on trial ten years ago, they created the biggest public debate on the subject that the world has ever seen.

Yes. They basically scored what we call in German an eigentor, they scored a goal against themselves. Their hatred finally turned against themselves. The trial of Ernst Zündel has gone down in Canadian history. We have struck down, through my trial, one of the most pernicious laws -- a law that could get writers and broadcasters into conflict with the law very easily. The Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional, and we defined in the process our new bill of rights, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, in a way that is almost American. In other words, they're leaning very heavily on the American model. I have only been able to do my own broadcasts and my own TV and public access shows because of this Supreme Court definition and victory. So it's true: they pursued me for nine years in the courts; and in the end, evil produced good.

You've recently published a huge, 564-page book detailing your trial and it is full of magnificent documentation of the evidence that was brought to bear there.

It was compiled by my attorney, Barbara Kulaszka, and is titled Did Six Million Really Die?: Report of the Evidence in the Canadian "False News" Trial of Ernst Zündel. It is a condensation of 12,700 pages of trial transcripts into a readable form. It really is, as one of the leading professors in Europe called it, an encyclopedia of the "holocaust," because both sides are presented. The prosecution witnesses, including Dr. Hilberg from the United States who is known as the "pope of the `holocaust'," Christopher Browning, his disciple, and others are cross-examined in a court. What we're looking at here is not just a book, it is testimony given under oath and verified by cross- examination. People don't have to go and buy trashy pro-"holocaust" or even smaller anti-"holocaust" books. It's all in one book: the "holocaust" as a historical event, or non-event has been solved. It has been explained in detail in a courtroom in Toronto.

What we have to do now is to make the public at large aware that what we're looking at is not a historical event but -- and I have to be brutal and I am going to say it -- a racket. It is a racket which defrauds nations. The German nation was its first and principal victim, to the tune of 100 billion Deutsche marks plus. There were times when the state of Israel got up to 40 or 41 per cent of its budget, directly or indirectly from these "reparations" -- money the German people paid for propaganda. For an event that was wholly created in the poisonous psychological warfare kitchens of the Second World War, run by the ministries of propaganda in many countries, not just by the British or the Americans, but also the Russians and undoubtedly the world Jewish organizations. The German people have been defrauded out of 100 billion Deutsche marks. It's a racket. It is not a historical event.

I am not against Jewish people, or any other person, who unlawfully, illegally, or immorally was deprived of his freedom in the Second World War getting restitution. Or if there were Jewish business people in Germany that had their businesses seized, they should be restituted properly. The German nation is magnanimous even in defeat, and they have a sense of justice and they certainly want to repair damage that was done unjustly. I am totally in favor of that. But not to let generations of German people to be defrauded, and then to be vilified by films like Spielberg's Schindler's List.

You call yourself a revisionist.

Yes I do.

Now that term has been sullied by the media. The media try to give the impression that revisionists are part of some sort of sinister movement to "revise" history à la George Orwell's 1984. But it is really quite the opposite. Can you explain why you call yourselves revisionists?

It is a very good point that you are touching on here. American people, French people, English people, even Jewish revisionists like David Cole and the man who was a witness for me, Joseph Burg, and the French [Jewish] Professor Dommergue: these are people that merely want to look at history, bring it into accord with the facts, meaning historical documents and events; strip it of rhetoric and propaganda; and then basically write a factual history.

But as a German -- and I am German-born -- we Germans are condemned once again to be radical revisionists. Because, you see, we lost our honor as a nation. We lost our self-esteem. We also lost the institutions of our country. We were not allowed to organically build on our long history and heritage. So a German revisionist has to not only revise historical facts but also bring borders into question, because we were stripped of vast territories in the Second World War. As a German revisionist, I cast a far wider net than an American revisionist or a French revisionist. They are engaged in what Dr. Faurisson, the world's most famous revisionist, calls the greatest intellectual adventure at the tail end of the twentieth century. To me as a German person, I want my nation's honor restored. I want lies to be exposed as lies, frauds as frauds. I want borders to be recognized where ethnic Germans were living long before America was discovered. In Germany, we must have an internal revision of our political system, that was grafted upon us by Allied conquerors. Conquerors never, never conquer a nation to bring freedom. They brought control. The government in power in West Germany, which is now expanded all the way to the Oder River, is nothing but an instrument of Allied control, not of freedom. We Germans need revision from the inside -- of our borders, of our institutions. Americans are lucky: they can only concern themselves with "were there gas chambers, or were there not gas chambers?" I am the most radical and the most sweeping of the revisionists, and this is why some of the more intellectual revisionists sometimes look upon me a little askance. They can afford to be scholars. I am a street activist revisionist because we, as Germans, want our country back, want our honor back. We want our father's generation to be exonerated and rehabilitated. By the year 2000, I hope that the job is done regardless of bombs or fires.

I am sorry to say that most Americans-and I talk to ordinary Americans every day-even Americans of German descent, who get their news from the newspapers and the major TV networks, think that "holocaust" revisionists are either kooks or hate-filled bigots. "Everyone knows," so they say, "that the Germans killed six million innocent Jewish people by gassing. To say that they didn't is the equivalent of saying that the Civil War never happened." What do you say to such people? What is the strongest evidence for your doubt of the "six million" story?

That's a very good, broad, and sweeping question. As you know, I commissioned an American gas chamber expert, an execution expert named Fred Leuchter, to go to Auschwitz, Birkenau, and Majdanek, which were allegedly the "industrial killing centers" where the Germans supposedly dispatched all kinds of people to their deaths in gas chambers. That man came back with 33 samples -- soil samples, rock samples, samples from the drains, the walls, the ceilings. He took a draftsman along and a video photographer who recorded all the activities while they were taking the samples. All of these samples were bagged. They were only handled with rubber gloves. They were numbered and dated. Special technical drawings were made of all the installations, and it was marked where in each installation these samples were taken. They were taken to the United States, and were tested in a blind test; the lab was not told what they were testing. They thought it was an industrial accident. They came back with absolutely no traces of any of the killing compound in some of the major "gas chambers." For instance, in Auschwitz-1, where they have taken all the tourists through for the last 40 years, not a single trace of the compound Zyklon-B was found. This is, to me, scientific forensic proof. Science doesn't suspend its rules or its laws for Zionists, for Communists, for Nazis, or for anybody else.

Are you saying that these were the rooms where it is claimed that mass executions by gas took place?


These very rooms show no traces of the killing compounds?

No traces, or very minute ones, and the very minute ones are explainable: as morgues, and that's what these rooms were, they had to be fumigated. When dead bodies are put into a morgue, they get cold, and then lice leave that dead body. The louse was the chief carrier of the typhus disease. These rooms had to be fumigated once in a while. And we have taken a test sample of a chamber, an actual delousing chamber, which the Poles, the Germans, the Jews and everybody else agrees had been a delousing chamber for mattresses, uniforms, and so on. We took a sample from that as a kind of guiding sample, and compared to what it was in the "gas chambers," where millions were supposed to have been exterminated by gas, it is incredible how high the residue was there. And how nonexistent or very small it was in the alleged "gas chambers."

This report, called The Leuchter Report, is included in your encyclopedic book.

That's right. The full examination, with all the drawings and so in, is in there, as well as the booklet for which I was charged and which was the basis for the nine-year litigation.

If any of your listeners are interested, I don't know if you'll permit me to make a little commercial, but for $50 plus $5 postage, we will send them this thick book. It will save them months or years of going down the false track, as Dr. Faurisson said. Dr. Faurisson researched for years in the wrong direction. With this one book, we can save you years out of your life. (Information for ordering this book is at the end of this article)

You have admitted a patriotic motivation for wanting to clear Germans of these accusations in the hate propaganda against them. Is there a political motivation on the part of all "holocaust" revisionists? Are they all on the political right?

Actually, that is a complete misunderstanding and it was created by the "holocaust" promotion lobby; organizations such as the Simon Wiesenthal Center. It's simply not true.

My Romanian Jewish friend Joseph Burg, who was a "holocaust" revisionist and has written five books, was certainly not pro-nationalist or pro- Nazi. He was himself put into pales of settlement during the Second World War. Many of these people are unabashed champions of truth. They are championing truth above all. It goes way back to the French socialist and member of the French national assembly, Paul Rassinier, and down to Dr. Faurisson. Dr. Faurisson came to revisionism as a man of the left, not of the right. I remember when I first met him in California in 1979, he was certainly anything but nationalist. Bradley Smith in the United States, who was married at one time to a Jewish woman, certainly is anything but National Socialist or nationalist. The same can be said for so many other revisionists.

That I, Ernst Zündel, as a German, am passionately pro-German I think people can understand or ought to understand. If America was ever befallen by a tragedy, like the German people were, I hope and I pray that American sons would rise up and defend America the way I try to defend my own ethnic group. I am not saying that during the Second World War Germany did not, under the leadership of the National Socialist government, commit crimes. In hindsight, with 20/20 vision today, that means deprive people of their liberty, put them in concentration camps, deny their human rights. I was horrified when during my trial I found out how easily people could be put in concentration camps in England, in Canada, in America, in Germany. There seems to have been a whole concentration camp syndrome going on in the whole Western world. So we should not judge countries like Germany, or even the incarceration of Japanese-Canadians in Canada or Japanese-Americans in America, with our 20/20 hindsight, and being as sensitized to human rights as we are today. It was not fashionable in 1935, 1940, 1941, or 1942 to be a human rights activist. It certainly wasn't fashionable in Canada. I know of none that protested the incarceration of the Japanese. I don't know of many in the United States. I certainly haven't heard of any Russian human rights activists during the time of Stalin's Gulag. And in England it was the same.

I think we should put the war behind us. There is world of ignorance and apathy to be conquered. Historical revisionism is a tool to make the historical record conform to documents, not to propaganda.

Usually history is written by the victors. You are trying to correct that 50 years later.

This is so often said to me, and I am so sick and tired of people saying "it's justified." Everything is justified, because after all "we won" the Second World War.

If that is true, then all the GIs, all the British Tommies, all the Canadian soldiers, and all the other soldiers that were part of this coalition of 51 countries that were at war with Germany, have to take responsibility for what has befallen the Western world today, and the world generally. The subjugation by Stalin of half of Europe: 250 million Europeans that lived for half a century under this horrific Soviet empire, and all of the millions of deaths that ensued as a result of that -- they are responsible for that. It's not all motherhood and apple pie. Also, those GIs who bombed Germany into the stone age are responsible for what has happened to our society in America, in Canada, in England. They are responsible for our current immigration policies.

It's not fashionable or Politically Correct to say it, but I have earned the right by incarceration, fines, bombs, and arson, and I tell you that the mess that we are in today, the cesspool that our societies collectively have become, the thievery, the whole litany of travails of the Western world, all began in 1945.

I've said it before on this program, and I'll say it again: 1945 was a victory for Communism and those who were behind Communism on both sides of the Atlantic.

That's right. I want to plead for my own father's generation. It was a magnificent generation. That generation of Germans, along with volunteers from Denmark, Holland, even England and the Free India division and so on, we Europeans were alert and awake to the danger of Bolshevism. Fifty years before President Reagan called it the evil empire, my father was fighting the evil empire at the gates of Moscow. I think that it's about time that the Western world forget its breast- beating and pay respect to those men who fought their way to Stalingrad trying to topple that evil empire. There is nothing redeeming about Stalin's Bolshevism, and it is a shame that Western man, that Europeans, that German-Americans, that Anglo-Saxons would ally themselves with the Soviet Union to battle to the ground a European power. I am not saying that Hitler was a choir boy. But I am saying, let him who was innocent in the Second World War cast the first stone.

When is there going to a monument or a major Hollywood movie depicting and memorializing the deaths of those who died under Communism? I'd like to see that happen.

I am very hopeful. I have lived in North America, and have watched the struggle for freedom, internally in Canada and America. Especially in America. I have every hope that salvation -- and this might sound strange to you as an American -- will come from America. The defeat of Europe came from America. Stalin was beaten by the Germans. America saved Bolshevism. I am quite sure that freedom will be saved, and that freedom will come from North America. Our concept that we have now in Canada and America of freedom of speech allows us to correct history. Just yesterday, I had a phone call from Germany, from a young German who had attended a lecture by Raul Hilberg, the "pope of the `holocaust'," who said in Heidelberg less than a week ago that we must not shut off the debate about the "holocaust." We must be allowed to ask questions about the "holocaust."

That is a heartening sign, but in many nations you can now be jailed for doubting the "six million" story.

You're looking at one who did. I just spent six days, for that very reason, in a German jail and just recently was convicted and fined 12,600 marks, which is about $10,000. This is now going to the European human rights court, because the German judicial system did not allow Fred Leuchter, Dr. Robert Faurisson, and the German chemical expert G. Rudolf to appear as witnesses, even though all three were in the witness room, ready to give their testimony. They refused to allow me to present exonerating evidence, or at least reasons for why I thought what I thought. That's totally illegal under the European human rights code, and I am quite sure that eventually we are going to reverse this judgment.

Well, I hope that these laws are also reversed. From an American perspective, where we still, just barely, have freedom of speech (though Zionist lobby groups are trying to take that right away from us), I find it almost inconceivable that people are being jailed for doubting someone's version of a particular event that happened 50 years ago. It's like Alice's Through the Looking Glass. It's insanity.

I am, as a European, absolutely shocked by European people. I am also shocked by European nationalist people. They have allowed themselves to be so emasculated so silently. I, of course, have become acculturated in North America. I am particularly proud of what Americans and German- Americans achieved 200 years ago with the American constitution, with the Bill of Rights and its various amendments. I claim that as part of our German-North American heritage. I'm sad that we were never able to export it to Europe. If Europe had -- if Germany had -- if France had -- if the peripheral countries in Europe had a semblance of your system we could at least begin to make a change because we would have the freedom to speak. This is why America is so very important. All the troubles that you and I know that exist in America are minute compared to the problems that we would have if we could not speak out and try to correct them.

You have been hounded for your beliefs. Your business was ruined. For nearly a decade of your life you were fighting jail or deportation in court, and now you have nearly been killed. Most men would have given up long ago, and gone and watched the birds or tended their gardens. What makes you keep going? Why do you do it?

Many people, my sons and my grandchildren have asked me this, and I can only say to you that once your conscious mind is expanded to the truth of what really happened, it is so horrific. The world is really in the grip of manipulated history that will take us all down. It's like in computerese: "Garbage in; garbage out." If we persist in thinking that what we have is history and use it as a precedent to build a better society we are going to inherit nothing but ruins. I want a better world, a cleaner world, a safer world, a saner world. The men who died on the German side, I can assure you, 99 per cent of those men died for a noble cause. There were almost 10 million German people who gave their lives in the Second World War, civilians and soldiers. They did not have to die in vain. I'm making sure that their deaths are ennobled by me sticking up for what they fought for.

I think you ennoble the deaths of the American soldiers too, quite frankly. They believed that they were fighting for freedom of speech among other things.

I sure have pity for American soldiers, for Canadian veterans, and for British veterans. When they see their subways, when they hear from their grandchildren that they are no longer safe in their school-yards, and when they watch their public television become a kind of cesspool that purveys drug addiction and so on, I wonder if those veterans are not suffering greater psychological trauma and pain than the Germans who at least know that they were militarily defeated and they couldn't change it.

I can tell you that I know several, Mr. Zündel. I know one man who literally cannot speak of his service in World War II. He was on a bomber that bombed Germany, and he cannot speak of it. He is reduced to tears.

I think that the time has come to stretch out our hand to all those who were deceived, as well as even the deceivers. In all my programs, and in all of my writings, I've always extended my hand to decent Jews and people who served the Allied cause.

I say to them: Fifty years have gone by. The war was a tragedy for all of us: all who were touched by it, not just Jews. Jews have no copyright on pain. Let's now get on with our lives and create a better world.

How can our listeners contact you if they'd like to know more about your efforts and your publications?

They can write to:

    206 Carlton Street
    Toronto, Ontario, M5A 2L1

Mr. Zündel, I admire your courage, and I want to thank you from the bottom of my heart for your uncompromising stand for the truth in an age of lies.

Did Six Million Really Die?: The Evidence in the "False News Trail of Ernst Zündel, contains the entire text of the Leuchter Report and a full reproduction of the book which triggered the Jewish-led prosecution of Mr. Zündel, along with the evidence presented by both sides at this history-making trail. It is available from National Vanguard Books.

A cassette recording of this broadcast is available for $12.95 including postage from:
National Vanguard Books
P.O. Box 330
Hillsboro, WV 24946

Free Speech Directory || National Alliance Main Page

Free Speech Directory || National Alliance Main Page


by Dr. William Pierce

Today let's talk again about an all-too-familiar subject: the murder of our people by the racial enemies we have taken into our midst. I don't really like to spend time talking about individual murders when matters so much more important and so much more tragic need our attention. But when I have talked about this subject in the past -- when I told you in August about the gang-initiation murder of two young White women by the Black and mestizo Crips gang in Fayetteville, North Carolina, for example -- the enormous response I received showed me that most Americans weren't aware of what is happening in this country.

They were shocked by what I told them. Or at least, they were shocked by the fact that they had to hear about these murders from me instead of from Tom Brokaw or Dan Rather or Peter Jennings. They were shocked that the news of these horrendous crimes against our people was suppressed by the national media. And I was shocked that my listeners were shocked. I had thought that everyone knew about this suppression of the news which doesn't fit. But apparently they didn't, and I suspect that many still don't.

So: two months ago, on October 2, Gary Trzaska, a 41-year-old apartment building owner, was jumped on by three Black teenagers as he walked along the sidewalk in front of one of his buildings in Buffalo, New York. Laughing and gesticulating like a troop of baboons, the three young Blacks knocked Trzaska down and then took turns kicking him as hard as they could. Several bystanders witnessed the attack but were afraid to come to Trzaska's aid. You know how the media would have dealt with that: "White adults assault Black children on Buffalo sidewalk. Janet Reno sends in FBI. Hate crime charges to be filed against White adults. Bill Clinton denounces White racism in special television appearance." Well, the bystanders didn't want to take a chance with that sort of thing. So they played it safe and just watched while the Black teenagers enjoyed themselves enormously as they kicked Gary Trzaska to death, and then ran off down the street, hooting and yelling.

A neighbor, George Boos, told the Buffalo News, "I've never seen someone so beat up in all my life. The doctor told me his insides were split open." Members of Trzaska's family told the Buffalo News that they couldn't understand why he was beaten so viciously, and they couldn't understand the motive for the killing, since $200 in cash in Trzaska's pockets was not taken by the young Blacks.

Well, the Buffalo News did report all of this. The story is in the paper's October 4 edition. Good for them! The problem is that papers outside Buffalo didn't report it. The national media didn't report it. People outside the Buffalo area weren't allowed to hear about it. It is news that just doesn't fit. You see, if a Black convict is dragged behind a truck in Texas by three White convicts, that is news that fits. It's big news. It's news that can be used to make Whites everywhere feel guilty about White racism.

Oh, incidentally, Trzaska was a homosexual. I imagine that because of that the media bosses really hated to have to pass up this story. It could have supplemented so nicely their story about the killing of the homosexual Matthew Shepard in Laramie, Wyoming, at just about the same time and could have been used to prove once again to everybody how beastly people are who don't like homosexuals. But it just didn't fit -- the murderers were Black teenagers -- so the story was killed.

On October 16 three different Black teenagers, in Burlington, North Carolina -- 13-year-old Joseph Jones, 16-year-old Harold Jones, and a 17-year-old Black girl, Dorthia Bynum -- grabbed a 10-year-old White girl, Tiffany Nicole Long, from the sidewalk just a few doors from her home, dragged her behind a garage, and beat her and sexually tortured her until she was dead. One of the young Blacks twisted a piece of television cable around Tiffany's neck to stifle her screams while the other Blacks were torturing her. Police used bloodhounds to find Tiffany's mutilated corpse in a pool of blood behind the garage at 4:30 the next morning. Burlington police who viewed the little girl's body said the murder was the most vicious crime they had ever seen.

When the three Black teenagers who killed Tiffany were brought into court, dozens of the teenagers' relatives and the local NAACP showed up to protest. It's a racist county, the NAACP chairman protested, and the young Blacks wouldn't get a fair trial. The three Black teenagers are retarded, the relatives protested, and shouldn't be held accountable. The police were brutal to them in questioning them about the murder. They're just children, the Black relatives said, and they should be allowed to go home to their parents. With all that fuss one would think that Mike Wallace or Time or Newsweek magazine would have taken notice. One would think that the whole country would have heard about it, like they did about that Black convict in Texas who was dragged behind a truck. Did you hear about Tiffany's murder? Even one word?

Now, of course, many people around Burlington, North Carolina, did hear about it. Even people as far away as Greensboro and Raleigh read about it in their newspapers. Of course, they were told repeatedly by the local media that what happened to Tiffany was not a "hate crime." There was nothing racial about Tiffany's murder. I mean, how could there be? There were no White racists involved. The last thing the media wanted to do was get all of those North Carolina crackers stirred up. Anyway, news of Tiffany's murder, just like news of the murder of Gary Trzaska, just didn't fit. And of course, there are a lot of other things you haven't heard about in the last couple of months, because they don't fit. But as I said at the beginning of this broadcast, I really don't like to waste time talking about all of these crime details, because I'm afraid we'll end up studying the trees and failing to see the forest.

And I'm a lot more concerned about the forest than I am about the trees. That doesn't mean I'm not sickened when I read about the sort of thing which happened to little Tiffany Long, but the fact is that we are engaged in a war in which hundreds of millions of our people will die, and it's that war on which we need to focus our attention.

You know, the problem is not that Blacks do the sorts of things they did in Fayetteville or in Buffalo or in Burlington. That's the way Blacks are. Rape and murder are their thing. Most of the violent crimes in America are committed by non-Whites. We can't change their nature. We took them out of the African jungle and brought them into our midst, and we'll have to suffer the consequences of that terrible mistake until we remove them from our midst, one way or another.

Unfortunately, there is no peaceful way remaining for us to do that. All that remains to us now is violence and bloodshed and much, much suffering. There will be many more Crips gang-initiation murders, many more White people being kicked and stomped to death on the sidewalks of our cities, many more little White girls being dragged behind garages and sexually tortured to death by Black animals for whom such behavior is natural and normal. As I said, we're in a war, and there's no peaceful way out. It's simply win or lose.

One hundred thirty years ago, right after the Civil War, we could have ended this problem peacefully. We could have sent them all back to Africa. But we put it off, and now we've lost the opportunity for any peaceful resolution. In fact, we've lost the opportunity for a peaceful resolution to a lot of other problems. We let things slide to the point that we no longer can vote our way out. The two-thirds of the population which approves of Bill Clinton and thinks that he shouldn't be impeached just for lying about a few cigar tricks he did in the White House has got the decent, hardheaded people outnumbered now. The feminists and the queers and the welfare rabble and the non-Whites, together with the part of the White population which will vote for anybody who promises them more ball games on TV, can outvote the rest of us. And that's exactly what they'll do, shepherded by the Jewish media bosses. They'll destroy what's left of our civilization. They'll take us straight to hell, because all they care about is hanging onto the perks they're getting from the system. That's really all they care about.

I don't want to sound simple-minded about this. I understand that the next President of the United States may be a Republican instead of a Democrat. But he will be a man who will be elected only if he caters to the same coalition of system dependents, the same bread-and-circuses crowd -- feminists, homosexuals, recipients of monthly checks from the government, and non-Whites -- whose approval of Bill Clinton is currently scaring the Republicans in the Congress away from prosecuting him. And of course, whoever is elected must cater above all else to the Jews. This fundamental political situation becomes worse every year, as the country becomes less White through immigration and differential breeding rates and as the continued decay, the continued destruction, of traditional social institutions and structures yields more and more feminists, homosexuals, and confused, aimless people looking to the government for support.

Of course, if the media reported what's going on: if the White couch potatoes and fashion-conscious yuppies and trendy, liberal airheads had their noses rubbed in what's really happening in America, if the Jewish media began reporting things like the Black gang murders of White women in Fayetteville and the stomping of Gary Trzaska in Buffalo and the torture-murder of Tiffany Long -- if they began giving the same sort of coverage to all of these atrocities committed by non-Whites against Whites that they gave to the killing of a Black convict in Texas last summer and the killing of a homosexual in Laramie this fall, then enough White voters might get their act together to outvote the Clinton coalition. They might get some race-conscious politicians in office who could begin reversing some trends. They could begin by sealing the borders and launching a mass roundup and deportation of aliens. Then they could cut off the vote to everyone who's getting any kind of check from the government. That would be a good start.

But of course, the Jews who control the media understand all of that, which is why they will continue suppressing the news that doesn't fit. The last thing in the world they want is for the White couch potatoes and sports fans to wake up and pay attention to what's happening. The last thing they want is for the present demographic trends to be reversed. They have the White, heterosexual male on the run, and they intend to keep him running. They intend to run him right into the ground. Then there won't even be any potential opposition to their rule; there will be nobody at all to challenge them.

You know, whenever I say something like that I get a storm of protest from people who tell me that I am wrong to attribute such a scheme to the Jews. They will tell me, "Sure, there are some pretty nasty and destructive Jews running the Disney Company and the New York Times, but they are only a small minority of Jews. There are six million Jews in the United States, more than two per cent of the population, and most of them have no connection to the mass media. I know a nice Jewish dentist," these protesters will tell me. "He does good work on my teeth and doesn't charge too much. You can't condemn all Jews just because a few of them are bad."

Well, of course, my real aim is not to condemn all Jews. My real aim is to secure the future for my people, to overcome the dangers that threaten that future. And you know, I cannot do that unless I address the problem of the Jews as a whole. I'll give you an example. Imagine that you are living in a nice, peaceful, clean, safe, White neighborhood somewhere in America where the diversity mongers haven't had a chance to do their wrecking job yet. It's a neighborhood where your wife can walk down the street to visit a neighbor, even after dark, without having to worry about being grabbed by a carload of Crips who need a White victim for an initiation killing, a neighborhood where your children can play outside without your having to worry that they'll end up like Tiffany Long, in a pool of blood behind some garage.

Then the house next door to yours is sold to a Gypsy family, say, and they move in: all 27 of them. Of course, the local Christian minister organizes a welcome party for the Gypsies, just to show that there's no bigotry, no racism, in your neighborhood, and all the airheads and trendy do-gooders in the neighborhood go to the party. You go too, just to find out what you're in for, and you meet all the Gypsies at the party.

And you discover that on the whole they're not an unfriendly bunch. Of course, the men all carry knives, and about two-thirds of them have criminal records, but two of them actually have steady jobs selling used cars. Their kids are dirtier and noisier than yours, but they don't seem really dangerous. One of the older Gypsies is a quiet, dignified sort, and you strike up a conversation with him. He has a good sense of humor, seems to be intelligent and civilized, and you think that perhaps he won't be such a bad neighbor after all.

Within a few days, however, reality begins setting in. Your kids' bicycles disappear from your yard and are never seen again. Someone breaks into your garage, steals all of your tools, siphons the gas from your car, and takes the battery. Trash from the Gypsies' yard blows over into your yard. The noise, especially late at night, is a real problem. You spot the older Gypsy you had spoken with at the church party on his front porch and decide to mention some of these things to him. He sympathizes with you, asks you to describe the tools that were stolen from your garage, and tells you that he will see what he can do.

And sure enough, the next evening when you come home from work he knocks on your door and hands you your set of socket wrenches which had disappeared from your garage. He tells you that he found them in his basement and suspects one of his nephews stole them from you, although he isn't sure. Of your electric drill and your other tools he found no trace, however. And for the next three nights there are no loud parties next door, and you are able to get some sleep. Your children have even made friends with two of the Gypsy children, and one of their little girls seems really nice. Of course, your children have to be treated for head lice regularly as a result of playing with their new friends.

A few problems with your neighbors remain, however. A couple of the young Gypsy women are "in business," with customers coming and going at all hours, and one of the Gypsy men stands out on the sidewalk every night until quite late, selling drugs to people who pull up to the curb. These activities bring some pretty unsavory people cruising through your neighborhood, and one night your wife is knocked to the ground and her purse is snatched as she is walking back from a friend's home in the next block. And then the loud parties start again.

You speak again with the older Gypsy, and again he sympathizes with you, but not quite as much as before. You tell him that he should kick out of his house the two prostitutes and the drug dealer, so that the neighborhood can live in peace with the rest of his clan. Well, no, he can't do that, he tells you. The two prostitutes are the daughters of his favorite son, and the drug dealer is his favorite nephew. Besides, they all need the revenue the activities of these three bring in. Their government welfare checks aren't enough to cover all of their expenses. He is really sorry about the situation, and he wishes he could do something for you, but . . . .

And what you finally understand is that your Gypsy problem cannot be solved by thinking about your Gypsy neighbors as individuals. As individuals some of them are not really bad people. But as a whole they have ruined your neighborhood, taken away your happiness and peace of mind, put your family in jeopardy, and cut the value of your property in half. If you want to solve this problem, it has to be solved as a whole. You begin to wish that you had listened to one of your neighbors who had suggested to you as soon as the Gypsies bought the house next to you that you should burn it down before the Gypsies moved in.

Now, the analogy is not perfect, but it's good enough. Our problem is not just a few bad Jews who own the New York Times and make propaganda films, while most Jews are good citizens who must not be lumped together with the bad ones. Our problem is the Jews as a whole. In the first place, they have a lot tighter grip on the news and entertainment media than just the New York Times and the Disney Company. If you make a detailed study of the mass media, as I have, you'll find that the Jews effectively control or own most of them: Hollywood films, newspapers, news magazines, television, the music industry. That's how they're able to suppress news of the Fayetteville murders and what happened to little Tiffany Long and to publicize the few White-on-Black crimes so heavily that they've got most voters believing that these White-on-Black crimes are typical of the criminal activity in America.

And as for the majority of the Jews, the ones who're not actually involved in the ownership or management of the mass media, you'll find more of them than you ever imagined possible infesting all of the lower reaches of the media, so that if you get rid of the Jews at the top, more will simply pop up from below to take their places.

And you'll also find that on all questions pertaining to the welfare of Jews, they stick together as tightly as any Gypsy clan. If you want to, you go to that nice Jewish dentist you know and start talking with him about why the United States should cut off its huge annual subsidy to Israel and start supporting the Palestinians instead -- but after that you'd be well advised not to let him anywhere near your teeth.

One final thing to keep in mind: the media bosses who made the decision to keep the news of those Crips gang-initiation murders of the White girls in Fayetteville quiet and also the news of the torture-murder of little Tiffany Long did these things for a reason. It's not just a whimsical thing; it's systematic. They're doing it for the Jewish tribe, not just for themselves. They're doing it because they understand that we're in a war, their tribe against our tribe, and they don't want us to understand that.

© 1998 National Vanguard Books · Box 330 · Hillsboro ·WV 24946 · USA

A cassette recording of this broadcast is available for $12.95 including postage from:
National Vanguard Books
P.O. Box 330
Hillsboro, WV 24946

Free Speech Directory || National Alliance Main Page