irvtriallogo.jpg (12499 bytes)

Justice Gray betrays Jewry

Has Jewish genius been outsmarted by English double dealing?

David Irving has, with his personal sacrifice, secured this verdict.

Irvingtrial3.jpg (23833 bytes)

ukflag.gif (2292 bytes)
The
Thin Red Line:

British Bulldog Courage against overwhelming odds!

"Irving, who is representing himself" against "some 20 members of Lipstadt's defense team!"
(JTA, Jan 11, 2000)


Jewish pyrrhic victory

The verdict on David Irving represents one of the most significant revisionist publications of modern times. It is signed and sealed by Justice Charles Gray, one of the most respected English Judges (photo)!

gray.jpg (9326 bytes)

The putative defeat of David Irving by Deborah Lipstadt, the front-figure for the Jewish organisations and Israel, is likely to evolve into the greatest triumph for revisionism ever. It is seldom that Jewish genius makes mistakes with its unparalleled fighting tactics, its calculations, its methods, its acting skills and foresight. However, the legal battle against David Irving was one of the very few cardinal errors in their long Hebrew history. Jewish leaders believed that they had successfully trapped Irving, when they lured him into a libel suit against Deborah Lipstadt. They calculated that he would be professionally and financially destroyed.

Jewry seized power in the USA through a most professional performance of holocaust suffering in the Media and in Hollywood films. Jewish Professor Norman Finkelstein puts it this way: "Our present interpretation of the Holocaust has been deliberately devised by American Jewish groups for purposes of ethnic supremacy, political advantage and financial gain." (BBC-News - Jan. 26. 2000)

It was obvious that no British Judge would have dared to side with David Irving. From the beginning, Irving was fighting a losing battle. The German weekly DIE ZEIT annotated on April 6, 2000 in regard of the impartiality of the Judge: "One may usually expect of a Judge of her Majesty that he would not lose sight of the social   and political implications regarding a verdict. The reaction on a judgement in favour of Irving can easily be imagined."

David Irving, who is regarded as the best Hitler biographer in the world, was a threat to the holocaust industry and the victorious allies by doggedly refusing to accept the story of genocidal gas chambers at Auschwitz. Denying the existence of homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz was tantamount to denying the financial and political superior existence of world Jewry - hence, he had to be destroyed.

The trial before the High Court was not planned simply to make Irving lose his law suit and drive him into bankruptcy by bearing the costs at £ 2.5 million, but more importantly he had to be severely branded an "anti-Semite", a "liar", a "racist" and a "falsifier of history". Justice Charles Gray correctly judged the mood of the Lipstadt team and mighty Jewish organisations, when he delivered his shameful verdict and called Irving a "anti-Semite", a "racist" and a "falsifier". However, he refused to call him a "liar". The judge was also aware of the British establishment's resistance to any change of established historical dogmas which could prove dangerous for the present political correct elite and embarrassing for the British war time government, because millions of young lives would have not needed to have been squandered.

Jewish hate centres around the world exulted in the judgement: "David Irving's career is over, a press statement from the Simon Wiesenthal-Center read." (Süddeutsche Zeitung online, 12.4.2000)

Why did Judge Gray praise a "falsifier of history"?

However, sadly for the beneficiaries, Judge Gray's verdict does not deliver what it promises. Justice Gray, who was supposed to destroy Irving's reputation and livelihood by branding him a "falsifier", granted him a biography, which, if printed on a book-cover, will make Irving immortal. How is it possible for a judge of the London High Court, who is convinced that he has decided against a forger, describes this "forger" in his verdict as the following?:

13.7 My assessment is that, as a military historian, Irving has much to commend him. For his works of military history Irving has undertaken thorough and painstaking research into the archives. He has discovered and disclosed to historians and others many documents which, but for his efforts, might have remained unnoticed for years. It was plain from the way in which he conducted his case and dealt with a sustained and penetrating cross-examination that his knowledge of World War 2 is unparalleled. His mastery of the detail of the historical documents is remarkable. He is beyond question able and intelligent. He was invariably quick to spot the significance of documents which he had not previously seen. Moreover he writes his military history in a clear and vivid style. I accept the favourable assessment by Professor Watt and Sir John Keegan of the calibre of Irving's military history (mentioned in paragraph 3.4 above) and reject as too sweeping the negative assessment of Evans (quoted in paragraph 3.5).

No judge would say this about a convicted "forger" and no other historian in the world can claim to possess such an accolade - signed and sealed by Justice Gray and the High Court of London. Why did Judge Gray praise an "anti-Semite" and a "falsifier of history"? The only conclusion one can draw, is, that Justice Gray would, if the case had not been of such a high political profile, have sided with Irving. Therefor Gray's assessment can only be dismissed as a political ploy to please his masters and advance his career in law. By being politically forced to destroy Irving, he retaliated by praising the "pariah" and releasing the most devastating revisionists facts to the public with the High Court's seal.

lipstadt.jpg (5772 bytes)

Deborah Lipstadt's pretty countenance reflects the triumph of her pyrrhic-victory over David Irving. Intoxicated by David Irving's defeat and by Judge Gray's co-operative verdict, she and the Jewish power centres have not yet recognised that they have been double crossed by this verdict.

Justice Gray went even further than only weaving a wreath of honour for David Irving. What Israel and the Jewish organisations around the world have successfully suppressed for decades, namely the revisionist arguments, has now not only been made public, but even signed and sealed by a respectable judge of the London High Court. Gray's verdict is so filled with first class revisionist arguments and facts, which, if published in Germany, would result in many years of imprisonment. But a British High Court verdict cannot not be banned.

The German daily 'Süddeutsche Zeitung' has grasped this fact immediately. In a report about the Irving-Trial, Petra Steinberger exposed the German persecution system (April 12, 2000, page 17) in the most blatant way: "Such a law suit would have never been accepted in Germany because the denial of the holocaust constitutes a crime per se." This means that independent research on the history of concentration camps are illegal, because only the political prescribed holocaust version is allowed!

What figure makes you a holocaust denier?

Justice Gray branded Irving a "falsifier of history" and a "holocaust denier" because he doubted the official death-toll figure of the holocaust and especially for Auschwitz: "The 62 year old historian expressed doubts about the number of Jews killed by the Nazis. Lipstadt accused him of having distorted history." (Süddeutsche Zeitung, April 12, 2000, page. 1)

However, Justice Gray reduced his verdict to absurdity, when he highlighted the official death figures of Auschwitz, which reminds us more of the numbers in a game of lottery rather than historical facts. Here are some passages from Gray's verdict regarding the Auschwitz death figures (chose your favourite figure):

7.39 Schlomo Dragon, another Sonderkommando, gave evidence on 10 May 1945 to the Polish Central Commission. Dragon had worked at bunker 2 and crematoria 4 and 5. Van Pelt commented that, while Dragon was precise when he talked about what he has witnessed in person, he was less accurate when it came to estimating the number of people killed in Auschwitz, which he put at four million ...

7.40 . Van Pelt considered that Tauber's testimony is almost wholly corroborated by the German blueprints of the buildings and that it corroborates the accounts given by Jankowski and Dragon. Tauber estimated that the number of people who were gassed during his time at Auschwitz, between February 1943 and October 1944, was two million people from which figure he extrapolated that the total number gassed at Auschwitz amounted to four million.

8.22 The difficulty of arriving at an accurate estimate is compounded by the undoubted fact that many inmates died from disease and above all in the typhus epidemics which from time to time ravaged the camp ... Initial estimates, largely based on the capacity of the crematoria, ran as high as 4 million. As has been see the camp commandant, Hoess, gave varying estimates, ranging from 3 million to 1.1 million. However, analysis of the numbers of Jews transported to Auschwitz produced a lower estimate of around 1 million. Research carried out more recently, notably by Raul Hilberg and by Dr Piper of the Auschwitz Museum, has concluded that the true figure for the number of deaths at Auschwitz is in the region of 1.1 million of which the vast majority perished in the gas chambers. This figure has, according to the evidence of van Pelt and Longerich, been endorsed by the majority of serious, professional historians concerned in this field. The only significant exception is Jean-Claude Pressac, a French chemist and amateur historian, whose study concluded that the overall number of deaths was 630-710,000, of which 470-550,000 were gassed on arrival at the camp.

Irving is branded by Justice Gray  as a "holocaust falsifier" for he "expressed doubts about the number of Jews killed by the Nazis". But the same Justice Gray wasn't able to tell Irving which figure he must refer to in order not be branded a "forger" and a "holocaust denier".

No holes, no holocaust

However, the main subject of the trial was about the gas chambers of Auschwitz. Irving claims that there were no mass gassings of Jews at Auschwitz. The defendants called Professor Robert Jan van Pelt into the witness box. Van Pelt called himself an architect (means, professionally qualified) until cross examined by Irving. He pledged prior to the trial that he could prove conclusively the operation of genocidal gas chambers at Auschwitz by forensic and architectural means. Professor Robert Jan Van Pelt, who was paid £109,244 for his testimony, had one flaw in his professional background. Under Irving's cross examination he was forced to admit that he had never qualified as an architect and therefor he wasn't entitled to testify as an architect. Surprisingly, however, he was allowed by Justice Gray to testify, despite the clear evidence in the court that he was a real liar. During cross examination, van Pelt had to admit that he could not prove the operation of gas chambers by forensic and architectural means. He eventually stated that his sole source of expertise relied only upon eyewitnesses accounts, as all the other official holocaust experts rely on as well.

Van Pelt's statement as an expert witness before the High Court read that Zyklon-B has been introduced into the wire-mesh columns and onto the chamber floor below. Here are the passages of the verdict:

7.10 Irving ... relied heavily on the argument that the roof of morgue 1 at crematorium 2 (which is where on the Defendants' case in excess of 500,000 Jews were gassed to death) shows no sign of the wire-mesh columns through which the Defendants maintain that the gas was introduced into the chamber below ...

7.91 If the chimney passed through the roof, argued Irving, the roof would to this day have five holes in it where the chimneys passed through the roof.

7.92, 7.94 "Van Pelt conceded in one of his supplementary reports that there is no sign of the holes. It would be impossible for chimneys of the size described by Tauber and Kula to have disappeared. ... In his evidence he [Irving] went so far as to say that, if anyone detected holes in the roof, he would abandon his libel action. As he graphically put it in his closing submission, Irving argued that [the Defendants'] entire case on Krema 2 - the untruth that it was used as a factory of death, with SS guards tipping canisters of cyanide-soaked pellets into the building through those four (non-existent) holes - had caved in, as surely as has that roof."

What a devastating blow to the holocaust industry by the above admission. But it becomes much worse. The defendants conceded that there is little forensic evidence that could be produced in order to prove mass gassings in the so-called gas chambers of Auschwitz. Please read the following passage of Gray's verdict:

7.118 The Defendants accept that the physical evidence remaining at the site of Auschwitz provides little evidence to support the claim that gas chambers were operated there for genocidal purposes.

All that van Pelt, the Jewish gas chamber expert, had to offer in the witness stand was eyewitness testimonies. Eyewitnesses who saw, how Zyklon-B had been introduced through the non-existent wire-mesh columns (see Tauber). One of van Pelts most important eyewitness was the ex-inmate Olere. Olere drew sketches of the "gas chambers" and the crematories. These sketches are accepted as hard evidence for the existence of genocidal gas chambers at Auschwitz. Olere drew sketches that show flames blazing three meters high above. Irving called Olere a liar because for technical reasons flames do not come out of crematory chimneys. Lipstadt's gas chamber expert had to admit before the High Court, that his main eyewitness Olere was not telling the truth and that Irving was right. Here is the relevant passage of the verdict:

7.11 Van Pelt agreed that no flame would have been visible since the chimney was 90 feet tall.

Irving squeezed the devastating admission out of the "gas chamber expert" van Pelt that there were no wire-mesh columns. However, this did not stop the Defendants maintaining that the gas was introduced through exactly these columns into the chamber below. Despite this exposure of the real liars, it is Irving, who is officially branded a "forger" and a "holocaust denier". Justice Gray gives the reason why Irving is a "falsifier" and a "holocaust denier". It is, because Irving has used these forensic facts only since 1998, that there were no holes on the roof of the buildings in question for introducing Zyklon-B into the Auschwitz gas chambers. Could any normal person imagine such reasoning? Here is the passage of the verdict:

7.120 As to Irving's claim that the pancaked roof shows no sign of the chimneys, the Defendants point out that this is a new argument which Irving appears first to have lighted on in November 1998.

Let us summarise Justice Gray's logic: Irving is a "forger" and a "holocaust denier" because he has used new facts to support his thesis, not incorrect facts!

Gray's verdict is bulging with revisionist titbits like those above. Anyone who reads this verdict without prejudice would never have believed that Irving could have lost the case. Although Gray has ruined Irving with this revolutionary revisionist publication, camouflaged as a High Court judgement, he probably rendered the greatest service to revisionism with his verdict. All those who believed until now, the official holocaust version will gain a totally new understanding of the holocaust after having studied this judgement. It appears that Judge Gray betrayed Jewry as smoothly as did the German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder when financing revisionist TV-broadcasts in Palestine, whilst performing his sycophantic loyalty to Israel. It seems a new growing phenomena of deceiving Jews is blossoming around the globe as more political high-flyers in their drive for success are themselves now playing the age old Jewish game (as in a Spaghetti Western - "For A Few Dollars More").

David Irving has, with his personal sacrifice, secured this verdict. Students of the universities of the world will in the near future no longer accept the old holocaust proclamations any longer and Israel might find it difficult to commit further genocide on the Palestinian people under the pretext of "preventing another holocaust".

World power that has, according to Prof. Finkelstein, been won by Jewry through the holocaust story, will begin to erode after the publication of the Irving verdict. Branding Irving an "anti-Semite" will not stop people from reading Irving's books or from attending his lectures. This lable, however, is no longer seen as a stigma. The Jews are, according to the Great Mufti of Jerusalem, A'akramah Sabri, not liked anywhere in the world and therefor the lable "anti-Semite" could even be considered an accolade.

Adolf Hitler, a trauma for Jewry

Jewry suffers from the trauma that Adolf Hitler has not been totally defeated. Moreover, the Jews feel haunted by his spirit. Despite the success of the leading Hebrews, who have managed to force people almost anywhere in the world to speak negatively about Adolf Hitler, the "Führer's" popularity grows day by day. "Mein Kampf" has become a bestseller in many parts of the world. It is even published in Israel. The deep seated problem is the fact that the chief Rabbis couldn't ritually kill Hitler. They were denied the opportunity to physically witness the destruction of their Amalek opposition unlike the triumph they gained over Jesus Christ, Giordano Bruno, Fettmilch, J.F. Kennedy.

The Cabbalists see Hitler's spirit working through the medium of David Irving, because Adolf Hitler said to Dr. Gesing: "Nobody will ever judge me properly, not this generation, it'll have to be the next generation, it'll have to be an Englishman, it'll have to be an Englishman who knows the German archives and an Englishman who can speak the German language fluently." (CNN: aired Jan. 16,.2000)

However, the verdict of the High Court against Irving did not destroy anything spiritual in David Irving, whatever spirit lives in him. Quite the contrary, this verdict will strengthen him and it will motivate the masses to deal with Hitler in a much less prejudiced way.

With the holocaust story the Jewish organisations have seized world power (through USrael). It could be the same story now that is sounding the bell for the decline of their power. Great Jewish visionaries have already seen the catastrophe ahead of them:

»A Court battle which British Jewish historian Prof. David Cesarani this week described as "one of the most gripping of modern times. The consequences for both parties will be enormous," noted Cesarani, "and the consequences will reverberate far and wide."« (JERUSALEM POST - Tuesday, January 11 2000)

Since Adolf Hitler has never been totally defeated, since his spirit and memory was never eradicated, the power of the leading Jews was never completed in total neither. Now, as Adolf Hitler's spirit becomes more virulent day by day ("Mein Kampf" is a bestseller on the internet and in many countries), Jewish visionaries clearly see the decline of their power:

"Indeed, many Jewish leaders are warning of danger signs on the horizon this year, suggesting the organized clout of the community may be facing a long period of decline." (Jewish Chronicle, London, Nov. 1, 1996, page 5)

Justice Charles Gray, by his judgement, has contributed to the speeding up of the process of the downfall of Jewish power. It was not necessary, because Irving had accepted almost 80 percent of the Jewish version of holocaust events. If they had accepted this formally in court, they would have soundly wounded the revisionist movement as David Irving was incorrectly considered the leading figure. For the first time in a crucial moment of history, Jews failed to seize the opportunity and cut a deal visa a vi the disputed figures. The huge relief that Jewry expressed after the pronouncement against Irving was a clear sign to the world of Jewish insecurity on a subject, they seemed to have under control. By insisting on the Cabbalistic "6- million-figure" they have fallen on their own sword. The fight has just begun, as revisionists can now exploit the facts produced in court and David Irving might now really become the leading revisionist of the world. It can be expected that Irving will publish the trial transcripts and the verdict in book-form, which will fuel the revisionist engine with greater ferocity despite further Jewish threats to destroy them.

Gray's verdict
Auschwitz in figures

Trial-Index Index Page Home Page