September
5, 2002 (Thursday), Little
Rock (Arkansas) -- East of Dallas
(Texas) I SET out westwards at 12 midday and
pause in Texas, east of Dallas. Mark
Weber of the Institute for Historical
Review responds to my query about the
Fritzjof Meyer article
in Osteuropa: "Frey's
National-Zeitung dealt with it in a
pretty good front-page item." I reply that I would like to hear
Professor Robert
Van Pelt's take on it. If he now
admits that Krema II and III at Auschwitz
were not actually used for mass
gassings, then I shall start a worldwide
blitz on the media. That is precisely what
I said at the Lipstadt Trial, over and
over again: Probably no gassings at Kremas
II and III (and Krema I is anno
1948, built three years after the war);
perhaps some experimental gassings at the
"bunkers" offsite. Proved right, but at
what a cost! I ask Weber: "How long have you known
of the National-Zeitung article? I
only noticed it referred
to in Die Welt." Reminds me of the L'Express
triumph in 1995: It took me to wake
everybody up to the significance of what
the French journalist Conan
had
printed! I may do the same again now
-- 20,000 printed postcards. But first we
must learn more about Meyer: how astute is
he?
MICHELE Renouf has won her battle
against expulsion from the Reform Club in
Pall Mall -- London's clubland. They were
holding an extraordinary general meeting
to adjudicate on demands for her expulsion
from the club for "conduct unbecoming" for
having invited me to dinner there, and for
having written a Letter to the Editor the
BBC omitting reference to Lipstadt's own
racism in a radio programme on the trial.
She reports briefly: "The Evening Standard
Diary rang me, but I am obliged to say
nothing on my winning the skirmish
yesterday, over my expulsion from Occupied
Pall Mall. Prof. Bob Worcester
[CEO of Mori Opinion Polls] ably
defended on free speech, and my
submissions were 'forcefully expressed but
mercifully minimal.' Helped myself to a
Churchill's
War and gave it to Bob for
re-presenting" -- i.e. to the Club.
A RATHER less moderately worded message
comes from British right-winger Martin
Webster, announcing a different but
substantial legal victory, won this time
at the Leeds Crown Court, heartland of one
of Britain's most Jewish regions. I have toned down Webster's message
content to make it legible without
wincing: Printer
Tony Hancock has scored a
marvellous and complete victory over
the forces of [etc.,
etc.]Tony
was due to stand trial on Monday on two
counts of "aiding and abetting" (i.e.
printing) two items of literature for
veteran [etc., etc.] campaigner
Colin Jordan -- a leaflet,
Jack Straw's Jewish Justice, and
a booklet, Merrie England 2000,
which were held to be "intended or
likely in all the circumstances to
incite racial hatred". Mr.
Jordan was not required to attend Court
to answer to the substantive charges
due to his age and ill-health, on
condition that he ceased all political
activity -- an outrageous imposition
which he is contesting under European
Human Rights legislation. Yesterday
(Wednesday) the Judge directed that the
charge in respect of Jack Straw's
Jewish Justice be dropped since the
Crown Prosecution had not produced
significant evidence as to distribution
(i.e. "publication") of the
item. Today,
after the Judge's summing-up, the
(all-White) jury retired at lunchtime
to consider their verdict in respect of
Merrie England 2000. As soon as
the lunch break was over they filed
back into court to announce their
unanimous verdict of "not
guilty"! In
a few days time, when I have had an
opportunity to interview Tony and his
excellent barrister, I will issue a
more complete report on this
significant victory against an attempt,
mobilised by the Board
of Deputies of British
Jews,
to bring printers within the ambit of
the Race Relation Law even though
Parliament declined to amend the law to
that effect. This
fuller report will give details of how
Mike Whinge (left), defence
chief of the Board of Deputies of
British Jews, gripped the witness box
with arms shaking as he was put through
a rigorous cross-examination on the
vile, anti-Gentile, anti-Christian and
pornographic contents of the
Talmud. Webster believes that it was because
the press had anticipated this vigorous
defence strategy that not a single
reporter was in Court, even though an
adverse verdict could have led to a
serious curtailment of Free Speech and a
Free Press in Britain. -
-
Previous
Radical's Diary
-
Michael
Whinge wants to censor the
Internet
-
Michael
Whinge admits planting smear dossier on
Mr Irving with Canadian Jewish
organisation
|