If foreigners don't like living in Britain, they can bugger off back to Psynigragua anytime!


Not News: Kikess Anetta Kahane wants to destroy Europe via Immigration

Category: Category: None   Tags: ---
Not News: Kikess Anetta Kahane wants to destroy Europe via Immigration

  • Kikess Anetta Kahane.

  • Commie Kike Max Kahane's daughter.

  • In Kike tradition of Marx, Trotsky , Freud, Luxemburg, Marcuse, Horkheimer, Adorno, etc.

David Reimer, Rest In Peace

Category: Category: None   Tags: ---
David Reimer, Rest In Peace

David Reimer: The boy who lived as a girl

CBC News Online | May 10, 2004

Summer 1965. In a Winnipeg hospital, Janet Reimer's lifelong dream comes true as she gives birth to twin sons, Bruce and Brian.

But within six months, both boys develop difficulty urinating. The doctors suggest they be circumcised.

On April 27, 1966, Janet drops her boys off for the routine procedure and her dream turns into a nightmare.

The doctors had chosen an unconventional method of circumcision, one in which the skin would be burned. The procedure goes horribly wrong and Bruce's penis is burned so badly it can't be repaired surgically.

Over the next few months, the Reimers consult with countless doctors. None can offer any hope. Bruce Reimer would have to live with his non-existent penis.

One night, the Reimers see a television profile of an American doctor and his theories on sex and gender. Dr. John Money of Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore argues that boys – caught early enough – could be raised to be girls. Nurture and not nature determines a child's gender, the doctor argued.

Janet Reimer thought it was worth exploring. The family went to Baltimore to see Dr. Money, who decided that Bruce Reimer was a perfect candidate.

At the age of 21 months, Bruce's testicles were removed. What remained of his penis was left, not to interfere with his urinary tract. When Bruce was released from hospital, his parents were told to raise him as a girl. The family was told not to divulge anything to anyone. They went home with a girl they called Brenda.

"We relatively quickly came to accept that," Janet Reimer told CBC News in 1997. "He was a beautiful little girl."

Janet Reimer did her best to raise Bruce as a girl. She dressed him in skirts and dresses and showed him how to apply make-up. But the transformation was anything but smooth. Bruce Reimer didn't like playing with the other girls – and he didn't move like one either. He got into schoolyard fistfights. The other kids called him names like "caveman," "freak" and "it."

In an interview with the CBC's The Fifth Estate, Reimer said it got so bad he didn't want to go to school anymore. He felt picked upon and increasingly lonely.

By the time Bruce turned nine, the Reimer family was having serious doubts. Not John Money. He published an article in the Archives of Sexual Behaviour pronouncing the experiment a resounding success. It became widely known in medical circles as the Joan/John case.

Money wrote: "The child's behaviour is so clearly that of an active little girl and so different from the boyish ways of her twin brother."

The twin brother, Brian, remembered it differently: "The only difference between him and I was he had longer hair." "I tried really, really hard to rear her as a gentle lady," Janet Reimer said. "But it didn't happen."

By the time Bruce was reaching puberty, it became increasingly clear the experiment was not working. He started developing thick shoulders and a thick neck.

At the same time, the Reimers were under pressure from Money to take the final step: allow surgeons to create a vagina.

But Bruce rebelled. He protested that he didn't need surgery and threatened to commit suicide if he was forced to make another trip to Baltimore to see Money.

That's when his father broke down and told him everything.

Bruce Reimer said he had one thought at the time: to go to the hospital and track down and shoot the doctor who had botched his circumcision. In the end, he was unable to exact his revenge, but turned his anger on himself.

He attempted suicide three times. The third – an overdose of pills – left him in a coma. He recovered and began the long climb towards living a normal life – as a man.

Bruce Reimer left his Brenda identity behind. He cut his hair and started wearing male clothing again. He changed his name to David.

Earlier, the Reimer family had sued the hospital where the botched circumcision was performed. They settled for about $60,000, which was held in trust for David until his 18th birthday. By then, the settlement was worth about $100,000.

Initially, David Reimer only told his story from the shadows – he refused to talk about it if his identity were revealed. That changed in 2000, when American author John Colapinto wrote As Nature Made Him: The Boy Who Was Raised as a Girl.

A whirlwind of media exposure followed, across Canada and the United States.

Around the same time, research was sounding the death knell for the nurture vs. nature theory. Two studies – released by the Johns Hopkins Children's Center – concluded that it's prenatal exposure to male hormones that turns normal male babies into boys. The studies "seriously question the current practice of sex-reassigning some of these infants as females…"

Janet Reimer said it was a difficult thing for her son to go public with his story, but he wanted to help other children facing a similar fate.

David Reimer underwent four rounds of reconstructive surgery to physically make him a man again. The surgery enabled him to enjoy a normal sex life, but he was unable to father children.

"I'm not going to cry a river of tears over that, because I've got three great kids. I've got a wonderful wife. I've got a good home," he told CBC News in the wake of the release of the book.

Recently, David Reimer's life had taken another turn. He lost his job and was separated from his wife. His mother said he was still grieving the death two years ago of his twin brother.

David Reimer committed suicide on May 4, 2004. He was 38.

[Video conclusion: David Reimer: "I'm living proof and if your not gonna take my word as gospel, because I have lived through it who else you gonna listen too? Who else is there ? Is it gonna take somebody winding up killing themself -- shooting themself in the head for people to listen?"]

David Reimer: the boy who was raised as a girl

What does the case of the "boy who was raised as a girl" tell us about innate sex differences?

Except where otherwise noted, all direct quotations in this essay come from John Colapinto's book, As Nature Made Him: the boy who was raised as a girl, published in 2000 by HarperCollins.

On August 22 1965, Janet Reimer, a young housewife living in Winnipeg, Manitoba, gave birth to identical twins. She named her two healthy baby boys Brian and Bruce. When the boys were seven months old, they both developed phimosis: painful urination due to obstruction of the outlet of the penis. The doctor recommended both boys be circumcised.

Bruce was scheduled to go first. The operation went horribly wrong. Somehow -- it's still not clear exactly how such a thing could happen -- somehow, the cautery instrument used to cut away the foreskin was turned up to maximum power, and baby Bruce's penis was literally fried. The dead tissue smoked, turned black, and fell off like an old scab.

World-famous Johns Hopkins psychologist Dr. John Money urged Janet and Ron Reimer to raise Bruce as a girl. Dr. Money assured the parents that Bruce could become a happy and fulfilled woman, while warning them that Bruce would be miserable as a grown man without a penis. The Reimers were impressed by the confidence of the world-famous Johns Hopkins professor. They gave their consent. On July 3 1967, their son Bruce underwent surgical castration (removal of the testicles). Bruce became Brenda.

In 1972, Dr. Money published the first accounts of the amazing experiment. And it was amazing. Bruce and Brian were, after all, identical twins: they shared precisely the same genes, and they were being raised in the same home by the same parents. Would it be possible to rear one of them successfully as a girl, just by dressing Bruce/Brenda in dresses and giving her dolls to play with? Here are excerpts from Dr. Money's report in his 1972 book, Man & Woman, Boy & Girl:

The effects of emphasizing feminine clothing became clearly noticeable in the girl's attitude towards clothes and hairdo a year later, when she was observed to have a clear preference for dresses over slacks and to take pride in her long hair. . . . By four and a half years of age [she] was much neater than her brother, and in contrast with him, disliked to be dirty. The mother reported that her daughter copies her in trying to help her tidying and cleaning up the kitchen, while the boy could not care less about it. The girl wanted and received for Christmas dolls, a doll house, and a doll carriage. The boy wanted and obtained a garage with cars and gas pumps and tools.

Dr. Money's report was hugely influential, and quite understandably so. If a boy could be transformed into a girl just by having his penis removed, wearing a dress, and letting his hair grow, then sexual identity -- and the differences between the sexes -- must be primarily cultural in origin. This finding was reaffirmed by Dr. Money in his 1977 book, Sexual Signatures:

Although the girl had been the dominant twin in infancy, by the time the children were four years old there was no mistaking which twin was the girl and which the boy. At five, the little girl already preferred dresses to pants, enjoyed wearing her hair ribbons, bracelets and frilly blouses, and loved being her daddy's little sweetheart.

Money concluded that Brian's sex reassignment as a girl was "convincing evidence that the gender identity gate is open at birth for a normal child. . . and that it stays open at least for something over a year after birth."

Dr. Milton Diamond had been interested in the case since Dr. Money had first reported it, in 1972. However, his requests for further information about the "girl's" adolescence had gone unanswered. In 1992, Dr. Diamond succeeded in tracking down one of the doctors involved in the case of Brenda/Bruce: Dr. Keith Sigmundson, a psychiatrist in Winnipeg who had been treating "Brenda." "I was wondering how long it would take for you to find me," were Dr. Sigmundson's first words, when Dr. Diamond identified himself and explained why he was calling. Dr. Sigmundson knew that Dr. Money had been distorting the facts of the case, but Dr. Sigmundson had not had the courage to challenge the famous Johns Hopkins psychologist. Dr. Diamond persuaded Dr. Sigmundson to let the truth be known. Finally, in an article published jointly by Diamond and Sigmundson in March 1997 in the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, the facts of the story came to light.

The truth turned out to be very nearly the opposite of what Dr. Money had reported. Far from an effortless transformation from male to female, Brenda/Bruce had fought the assignment to the female gender -- even though "she" had not been informed of the truth of "her" sexual identity. As a small child, "Brenda" tore off the frilly dresses her mother made. She insisted on rolling in the mud with the other boys. She stomped on the dolls that relatives gave as presents.

School had been an unending nightmare. Teachers and students alike somehow knew at a glance that something was not right about "Brenda." Girls avoided her. Boys made fun of her. Teachers anxiously asked the parents for more information about what made "Brenda" so strange, so combative, so un-ladylike. One of "Brenda's" few friends at school later recalled:

As far as I knew, Brenda was a girl -- physically. But from everything that she did and said, she indicated that she didn't want to be a girl. The other girls in our group were competitive against the boys; we wanted to prove we could do whatever they could do. We might get in arguments with the guys, but we wouldn't have gone as far as to fight with them physically. I wouldn't want a bruise on my face, for example. But Brenda fought with the boys. Brenda would take the bruises. I myself was a tomboy, but I never wanted to be a boy. Brenda did.

Injections of female hormones did nothing to change "Brenda's" boyish ways. "When I say there was nothing feminine about Brenda," brother Brian Reimer later recalled, "I mean there was nothing feminine:

She walked like a guy. Sat with her legs apart. She talked about guy things, didn't give a crap about cleaning house, getting married, wearing makeup. We both wanted to play with guys, build forts and have snowball fights and play army. She'd get a skipping rope for a gift, and the only thing we'd use that for was to tie people up, whip people with it. She played with my toys: Tinkertoys, dump trucks. This toy sewing machine she got just sat.

Remember, neither "Brenda," nor her brother, nor any of her classmates knew the true story about her sexual identity. They all thought she was a girl, albeit a girl who behaved pretty strangely. The other kids at school called her "gorilla," or "Cavewoman." One girl who made fun of Brenda must have been surprised when Brenda "grabbed her by the front of her shirt, smashed her against the lockers, and threw her onto the ground. Boys who teased her got similar treatment. "That's what always impressed me about Brenda," said a classmate. "She'd actually fight with the boys who teased her. She'd haul off and punch them. I always wished I could do that."

On March 14, 1980 -- when "Brenda" was 15 years old -- Ron and Janet Reimer finally told their child the truth: "She" had been a normal boy until a terrible act of medical malpractice had destroyed his penis. "Brenda" was relieved. He wasn't crazy, after all; his growing sexual interest in girls suddenly made sense; everything made sense. "Brenda" insisted on immediately reassuming a male identity, and he did so with remarkable ease, despite having neither a penis nor testicles. He chose the name David, because he felt that his life so far had been a David-and-Goliath struggle. "Brenda" is now David Reimer, happily married and the adoptive father of three children. He is proficient at automobile mechanics and enjoys watching televised sports.

Reflecting on the case, Dr. Milton Diamond commented that "if all these combined medical, surgical, and social efforts could not succeed in making that child accept a female gender identity, then maybe we really have to think that there is something important in the individual's biological makeup; that we don't come to this world neutral; that we come to this world with some degree of maleness and femaleness which will transcend whatever the society wants to put into it."

David Reimer committed suicide in May, 2004. He was 38 years old.

David Reimer: Unethical Sex Change that Destroyed a Family
October 13, 2010 by hlinn, Worldplay Research Initiative (WRI)

Ethics in social science research have often been questioned in numerous cases throughout history. However, one of the most significant and remembered cases involved giving a sex change to an unfortunate baby boy who experienced an accidental penis removal during circumcision. David Reimer, a Canadian born in 1965, was brought to a physician’s office at eight months old for this standard and very common procedure. However, instead of using the usual scalpel, physicians decided to use an electrocautery needle, which in turn accidentally burned off David’s penis. Dr. John Money, the psychologist who visited with David’s parents after this horrifying incident, suggested to provide David with a sex change. After deliberation, David’s parents agreed to this idea, while Dr. Money took advantage of this opportunity as a case for research. Without informing the parents, Dr. Money secretly wanted this case to prove his idea that nurturing a child as a male or a female can determine their sexuality, not nature itself.

Dr. Money referred the parents to another doctor in order to surgically construct a vagina on baby David. After the surgery was complete, David’s name was changed to Brenda, and began to receive hormonal supplements for years to come. However, even though Dr. Money labeled this experiment as successful, he chose to ignore and misinform Brenda’s parents of the negative effects, which in turn destroyed the family in the long run. Brenda’s parents never told her about what happened when she was a baby boy, and Brenda remained confused growing up with her desires to act and play like a boy. She was finally told what truly happened to her when she turned fourteen, but her suicidal mother, alcoholic father, and depressed brother led to Brenda remaining in a constant state of pain and confusion. Even after Brenda changed her name back to David, stopped taking hormonal supplements, and went back for another sex change to reconstruct a penis, the pain of life itself never stopped haunting David. At 38 years old, David Reimer committed suicide. Despite all of the complications in this disastrous study, Dr. Money never recorded anything in his research describing the conflicts and downfalls, but remained that the experiment was a complete success. Obviously, in the end, it did not turn out to be successful, but disastrous.

Ethically, who is Dr. Money to decide that the sex of a child should be his choice? He manipulated David’s parents into believing that this would be the best possible decision they could make as a family for their poor baby, and he selfishly used this as an opportunity to put his name in the record books for a possible successful case. His name is definitely in the record books, but not in a favorable way. He is notoriously remembered as the man who destroyed an entire family because of the mere fact that he wanted to create something that would give him intellectual and admirable credit. However, if Dr. Money were still to have suggested this idea to David’s parents, all the while including the possible negative effects that could inflict upon David and their family, it might have given David’s parents the opportunity to find another solution to their son’s problem. Also, if Dr. Money would have recorded the obvious struggles that his case subject David had with his sexuality, it would have at least proven that Dr. Money had at least a little bit of integrity to admit that his experiment was not successful, and should be advised not to perform under these types of circumstances.

If there are any lessons to take away for future researchers, it would be to think about the effects that experiments might have on families if there is any ethical breach that might be present in the study, and to always acknowledge both the positive and negative aspects that occurred or could occur. The research that we are conducting in our Interactive Multimedia Communication class, the Worldplay Research Initiative (WRI), is completely different from this particular case; however, we must remember from this case where we stand as researchers, and to know our ethical limitations when we conduct studies in the gaming industry.

Indonesian Woman

Category: Category: None   Tags: ---

One Hot Chocolate Momma!

Category: Category: None   Tags: ---
41-year-old Dominique Lanoise’s daughters Witelane (24), Fabienne (23), Sheila (21), Tesilia (20), Gelowe (16) and Jeanna (14) have spent the last few years cooking and cleaning for her in Miami. In November, 2009, she somehow took a trip to Haiti, to visit her family, and got stuck there after the earthquake, in which she claimed all her Haitian family died. Then she was stranded in the Dominican Republic for six months, until the Dominican Air Force flew her back to Florida, after her 5-year-old daughter died.


Arbeit Macht Frei

Category: Category: None   Tags: ---
Arbeit Macht Frei


Category: Category: None   Tags: ---

Doctor Who: "The Idiot's Lantern"

BBC Wales & CBC, 2006.05.27

  • Episode 7 of Season 2 of the New Doctor series (The Doctor having been resurrected by the mincing queer Russell R. Davies in 2005), on the Jew-run, massively taxpayer-funded BBC.

  • Setting: London 1953, in "Churchill's England"

  • The Villains: (1) An old-fashioned domineering war-hero, who bosses around his wife and his suggestively queer son. He lives on a street in which every house has a swastika on the truth. He (and others like him -- "the generation that defeated Hitler and liberated the Jews") must be expelled from his family, his home, and his neighborhood, before the people can be free to juke on the streets with grinning Negroes, and "make love" with whoever they like. (2) An alien who sucks off TV-viewers' faces and souls. After the alien is defeated, Queen Elizabeth II is able to bring equality, multiculturalism, democracy and sexual freedom to her United Kongdom.

  • Stars: David Tennant as The Doctor & Billie Piper as Chavess Rose Tyler

  • With: Jamie Foreman plays Eddie Connolly, the evil, arrogant, stupid, abusive patriarch. Rory Jennings plays his son, Tommy Connolly, who stands up to him in true feminist fashion, and gives him a lecture about how the brave Britons defeated Hitler so women could lord it over men and queerboys could be free as the wind. It is suggested that the Tommy-boy is queer. He helps The Doctor save the human race. Debra Gillett plays Rita Connolly, the beleaguered wife and mother, who is empowered by Rose and The Doctor to hand her pathetic pig of a husband a suitcase, and kicks him out on the street.

  • Writer: Mark Gatiss, who was making up for his offence the year before, when he had written an episode about an alien race of fake asylum seekers, whom The Doctor had assisted to enter Wales, via the use of the carcasses of dead Britons (The Doctor arguing that otherwise they would just go to waste), only to be shocked when they (the aliens) turned on The Doctor and set about trying to conquer Earth and kill all Earthlings. The Doctor, Rose, Charles Dickens, and a member of the working class who had great fore-site defeated the fake asylum-seeking aliens and diverted disaster. This was interpreted by certain designated culture critics as a "fascist" and "racist" attack on the U.K.'s current immigration policies.

  • Director: Euros Lyn

  • Executive Producers: Russell T Davies & Julie Gardner

  • Viewers: 6,800,000

  • This London is populated entirely by White Britons, until the Queen is crowned, and there is a street festival, in which smiling Negroes celebrate the dawning of the New Age.

Review from Doctor Who Golden Moments

The Idiot's Lantern

Golden Moment: This is yet another story about stealing the things that make people unique. It is also a story about passing the torch, in a patriarchal age, to a woman. Eddie Connolly is the living embodiment of an oppressive patriarchy, and in a manner of speaking, his bullying steals the souls and individuality of his family. He tells them what to do, what to say, when to speak and how to feel. For a while, his way of doing things is simply the status-quo.

But when he finally comes unglued, it is a Golden Moment because it is a metaphorical turning point. As the Doctor stands by and watches him vomit words of bile (of the status-quo) upon his wife and son, we know that Connolly has finally crossed the line, and the Doctor will stop the destruction that he represents. "I've got a position to maintain! People around here respect me!" he screams at his wife and son. "How dare you! You think I fought a war just so a mouthy little scum like you could call me a coward? [Your mother] was filthy, a filthy disgusting thing!"

And indeed, this is when his wife finally shuts the door on him, his son finally defies him, the Doctor discovers Magpie's shop and begins to stop the Wire [the villain of the episode, which stole souls via the TV] from consuming souls, and it is the day when Queen Elizabeth II takes the throne of Great Britain. Down with the Eddie Connollys of the world, God Save the Queen!

Pompous Patriarchal Patriotic Pig Put In His Place
Eddie the Pompous Patriarchal Patriotic Pig: Don’t mind the wife, she rattles on a bit.

The Change-Agent Doctor: Well maybe she should rattle on a bit more. I’m not convinced you’re doing your patriotic duty. Those flags. Why are they not flying?

Eddie the Pompous Patriarchal Patriotic Pig: There we are Rita, I told you. Get them up, Queen and country!

Rita the Pitiful Housewife: I’m sorry.

Eddie the Pompous Patriarchal Patriotic Pig: Get it done. Do it now.

The Change-Agent Doctor: Hold on a minute.

Eddie the Pompous Patriarchal Patriotic Pig: Like the gentleman says.

The Change-Agent Doctor: Hold on a minute. You’ve got hands, Mr Connolly. Two big hands. So why’s that your wifes job?

Eddie the Pompous Patriarchal Patriotic Pig: Well it’s housework, isn’t it?

The Change-Agent Doctor: And that’s a womans job?

Eddie the Pompous Patriarchal Patriotic Pig: Course it is!

The Change-Agent Doctor: Mr Connolly, what gender is the Queen?

Eddie the Pompous Patriarchal Patriotic Pig: She’s a female.

The Change-Agent Doctor: And are you suggesting the Queen does the housework?

Eddie the Pompous Patriarchal Patriotic Pig: No! No, not at all.

The Change-Agent Doctor: Then get busy!

Eddie the Pompous Patriarchal Patriotic Pig: Right, yes sir. You’ll be proud of us sir. We’ll have Union Jacks left, right, and centre.

Rose the Enlightened Chavess: ‘Scuse me Mr Connolly, hang on a minute. Union Jacks?

Eddie the Pompous Patriarchal Patriotic Pig: Yes, that’s right, isn’t it?

Rose the Enightened Chavess: That’s the Union Flag. It’s the Union Jack only when it’s flown at sea.

Eddie the Pompous Patriarchal Patriotic Pig: Oh. Oh, I’m sorry. I … I do apologise.

Rose the Enlightened Chavess: Well, don’t get it wrong again. There’s a good man, now get to it!

The Change-Agent Doctor: Right then! Nice and comfy, at Her Majesty’s Leisure.


  • Putting up little flags in the house, to celebrate a coronation, is not "housework".

  • The wife does the housework because the husband goes off to work outside the home every day.

Review from Atomic Anxiety



Rose is the star of the first half of this episode.


She’s full of cheekiness at first [...]. When she and the Doctor bluff their way into an ordinary household on a street where lots of people have disappeared [...] she’s all full of vinegar towards the father, who’s a control-freaky dick.

The dad, Eddie Connolly is an excellent character in his dickishness, representing the changing times. He’s clearly a member of the patriarchal, old order while his wife and son (who learn to stand up to him) symbolize the hope of a new day. And in case you missed that, there’s a big neighborhood festival after the coronation [...] but he’s not invited because his wife kicked him out.

As the Doctor tries to interview Connolly’s wife and son, Rose is all over Eddie, ordering him about and using his own ignorance against him as a bullying tactic. When Mrs. Connolly starts to break down, though, it’s Rose who comforts her.


The Doctor has to solve the case without Rose, so he employs Connolly’s son Tommy to … um … do something sciencey.


Review from "Millennium Dome: Soft Toy and Liberal Democrat Blogger of the Year 2010"


"[...] this was very much the "small scale" Doctor Who story. Domestic, even. The Doctor emphasises this at the end when he prefers the "real history" of the Florizel Street street party to the "pomp and circumstance" of the coronation itself.

"Maureen Lipman was a really good villain this week. Icily posh and making the vilest threats out of the catchphrases of the era. "Are you sitting comfortably?"


"Incredibly, though, she actually wasn't icily posh enough! Alex showed us a real 1950s BBC continuity announcer. In her tiara and ball gown. Never mind cut glass accent, this lady could cut diamonds.


There was, obviously, a bit of a sub-text. Or text as it became with a slightly heavy handed polemical scene mid way through where young Tommy confronts his father. If you are keen on spotting this week's "gay agenda" look no further than remarks like "bit of a mummy’s boys, that one" and "you want to beat it out of him" and finally "freedom to love who you want". "I fought a war for you!" threatens dad; "You fought a war to stop fascists!" retorts Tommy. And there was me thinking it was a coincidence that all those 1950s TV aerials looked like swastikas!

"There's a slight sense that this was writer Mark Gatiss abandoning his usual light-touch as a response to criticism. Last year he gave us the early hit "The Unquiet Dead" a story of ghosts and Charles Dickens. But he received some small stick, and a somewhat over the top reaction, from Laurence (Mad Larry) Miles who pointed out that "The Unquiet Dead" could be read as a story of bogus asylum seekers.


"Larry may have had a slight point in that we live in a time when all to many reactionaries want us to believe that the Doctor's liberal welcome of a people in need is naïve bordering on culpably stupid. So possibly, possibly, Mr Gatiss took this year's opportunity to punch those little Englanders in the head: we fought against the fascists not to become them. You morons.

Review from Elementary, My Dear Reader: The Musings of a Ravenous Reader in Life, Literature, and Film

The Idiot's Lantern


While in the Connolly house, the Doctor and Rose order the loud-mouthed, emotional bully Mr. Connolly about, using Queen and country as an excuse. It’s a really good, funny commentary on and subversion of the stereotypical gender roles of the 1950s.


Review from jigglymuffin @ Out of the Blue Box

The Idiot’s Lantern

It was 1953 and the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II, so everyone was in front of their televisions to witness the occasion.

For the past episodes, we’ve already met a lot of monsters but the Idiot’s Lantern gave us a monster that may be nearest to us—our televisions. The media, especially through television, is part of the family’s everyday living. Headlines for the day, sports, movies, shows, soap operas, and advertisements—everything made easily accessible through the media.


Fortunately, we have the Doctor to save the day. With the help of [queerboy] Tommy, he was able to tap into the transmission thereby diverting the signal of The Wire to be trapped into a Betamax video tape.


Tommy, the boy who helped the Doctor, is an image of bravery and fighting for what you believe is just and true. I guess it’s normal that there will come a point when children will question the rules of their parents and stand up for what they believe in life.



Despite the patriarchal orientation of many societies in the world, this episode highlighted the power of the second gender—the females. It was the coronation of a very famous and powerful woman—Queen Elizabeth. The wife of Edward Connolly, who spent her married life just following what her husband would tell her, finally learned to fight for what was right.


Review from whotopia, the canadian doctor who magazine

The Idiot's Lantern

The Idiot’s Lantern, Mark Gatiss’ second script for this revived series, leaves you desperately wanting more.


When you think about, not much really happened of any consequence during the 1950s. America went to sleep under Eisenhower, while a long decade of prosperity in Australia was briefly punctuated by a failed attempt to ban the Communist Party. Britain’s slow slide from Empire to mere island nation accelerated quickly in the 1950s, punctuated by the failure at Suez. Into this milieu ride the Doctor and Rose, kitted out for a night watching Elvis gyrate those hips on the Ed Sullivan Show, only to discover they have landed in the drabness of 1953 Britain, on the eve of the Coronation of Elizabeth II.


The new series of Doctor Who doesn’t feel dense enough. Watch an average episode of The West Wing, Spooks, New Tricks or The Sopranos and you walk away feeling that the writers have packed in as much incident, drama, humor and action as they could. With the new series, one is sometimes left feeling that there is something missing from an episode, as if the writer/producers aren’t confident with the material they have to fully engage the viewer.


The Idiot’s Lantern certainly comes close to achieving that goal. [...] The depiction of 1950s Britain, with its slide into genteel poverty from imperial greatness, is deftly shown. Despite the ravages of the Second World War, despite the loss of empire, despite the drabness of ordinary life with effects of rationing, the people of Floriel Street look forward with happiness to the crowning of their new monarch.

Of course, something is watching and waiting, peering out at them from the corner of their living rooms.


A darker storytelling tone would be appreciated. You can tell where Gatiss would love to take this story by the pre-credits
scene. It’s all darkness and shadows, gloomy weather and flashes of light.


There are several plus points for this episode.


Billie Piper is allowed to shin, her performance not hamstrung as in earlier episodes by the sulkier, jealous, tiresome thing she had become. Here she is more at ease, taking on the patriarchal bully in the Connolly household one moment, before venturing off blithely into danger a la the Doctor.


Earlier in this review I commented that underneath the surface of the average episode this season, there was more surface. Cruel, but aptly presented here. While an entertaining episode, it’s all surface charm and glibness. Better writing and characterization would handsomely fill out the forty five minutes, eliminating the feeling of slightness that predominates. Instead, the Connolly family is painted in broad strokes – timorous wife, buffoonish husband, suppressed teenage son, dotty grandmother.


The rest of the cast do their best with superficial roles. Jamie Foreman as Eddie Connolly plays the character too broadly for my taste. Special praise should go to Rory Jennings, as the idealistic son prepared to stand up to his bullying father.


Reviewed by Rob Mammone [PDF]

Reviews from Pagefillers

"Are you sitting comfortably. Then we'll begin..."

By Joe Ford


The Idiot's Latern fails to capture the toastiness of the era because it is far interested in some obscure and (frankly) boring alien threat. Why can't we have a pure historical story? One which allows us to soak in the richness of history. [...] I wanted to see more of the jazziness of the era, more of the domesticity... but instead we end up on a transmitter with a monster screaming out "HUNGRRRRRRRYY!" Yaaaaaaawn.


Euros Lyn's direction of this story was extremely jarring. The first scene out of the TARDIS is pure Grease, with jazzy music and sickly costumes and sharp cuts. Then there is the soap opera scenes inside the Connelly household, filmed at the most bizarre angles, so distracting I kept trying to angle my head so I could see the shots straight. Then we are into horror territory with the old woman silhouetted by the window and the Doctor trapped admist the shadowy domain of faceless beings. Finally it's action set pieces, with rapid scenes cutting between Magpie and the Doctor on the tower as the story reaches its hectic conclusion. [...] I was never quite sure which genre I was watching. [...] Lyn interprets the schizophrenic script with as much flair as we have come to expect but I felt as if I was being pulled in a ten different directions at once.


Mr Connelly was a bit OTT for my liking; okay so this is a guy who holds his household together with strong discipline but his constant cries of "I AM TALKING!" were more hilarious than they were dramatic. He keeps upping the eye-boggling shouting throughout, although despite this I did feel for him when he was kicked out of his own home.


By far the most impressive thing about this entire episode was the performance from Rory Jennings as Tommy [...]. I loved it when he turned on his father and reminded him why he fought the war and frankly the only reason I was so wrapped up in the finale was because he was still involved. I would have loved to have seen him leap into the TARDIS at the end [...]. It would have been a smart (and interesting) move to see Tommy join the crew. Alas it was not to be [...].

In fact it was the domestic scenes that I enjoyed most about this episode, a story that Mark Gatiss clearly relished writing but did not put enough into. He's all for atmospheric settings and crafted characters (both present here) but the alien threat is really poor here and the explanation and exploration behind it is handled in a insultingly cack-handed manner.

The Idiot's Lantern [...] is something of a misfire for the series, some tasty ingredients but overall leaves a bitter taste in your mouth.

We Are Not Amused

By Thomas Cookson

Throughout the New Series so far, I'd perhaps come to accept that the Doctor isn't the man he used to be anymore. The Doctor was once a character for connoisseurs, a character who lived and breathed large and literate words and the finest in art and literature. Now he is pretty much down with the kids, using slang jargon and substituting scientific terms for words like 'thingy' and 'jiggery-pokery', and he's down with modern tastes: whether they be Muppets, Reality TV, Buddy Holly or Ian Dury [...].

They want the Doctor to be 'cool' and to pander to the simple folk, and try to win over those who would rubbish the old Doctor for his old-fashioned and 'dated' mannerisms.


I've been able to put the blinders on this process of chavving up the Doctor, but something about tonight's episode broke the suspension of disbelief completely. To see the Doctor gelling his hair in that 50's quiff, donning sunglasses and doing that 'you goin' my way doll?' impersonations and then putting the final foot in the boot when he towed out that moped, things just got too silly; and more than that, things stopped being alien completely.


The old series [stuck] fairly close to the rules of the Doctor's image and attire and by doing so they made him seem alien and distinctive without even trying. Even Eccleston's leather jacket seemed like a nice extension of the character being hardened by cosmic war. This episode seems to uproot that element quite violently and the Doctor's character was left there to dribble and soak in too much ADD and popcorn.

The whole tone of the episode is far too cartoonish, and it's loud and bloated for a story that should be quiet, mysterious and eerie. What's more, beneath the style it is ultimately empty in a way that the nineties telemovie was, except much more so. The typical 1950's family at the centre of this house are far too caricaturish, and the comedy that comes out of that scene is pretty bad actually, with even Billie Piper gurning it up idiotically. It also doesn't quite ring true to me that the Doctor would come in and lay down the law of how the patriarchal husband is out of order bossing around his wife and child, let alone be so snide about it (but again this is the 'cool' Doctor and he couldn't be cool if he didn't get involved in the gender war now would he?). I'm not saying the Doctor would be happy to see domestic ugliness or patriarchal tyranny and women being kept in their place but then again he doesn't do domestics and in any case, if it was the 1950's he was in, he'd be wise to the fact that he can't really go around women's libbing in people's homes because there's a time and a place for that and he's 20 years too early; Britain isn't yet ready for it. (It also seems a tad hypocritical for a man who himself treated his female companions as coffee-makers and harboured nothing but respect for the Draconians despite their cultural misogyny. Though even hypocritical can be plausible, and if they keep up the cool-Doctor thing they could quite likely make him hypocritical again by next week making him an Eminem fan.)


[This episode has] flat characters, cartoonish events, bad comedy without any gravity, some of the worst moments of female emancipation ever televised (even managing to top Adam's fainting), a vaguely-described alien menace whose origins might be followed up properly at a later date, a message about the power of the media, a wash-out rush-through of an episode that's doing too much at once and ends without any impact at all, the Doctor and Rose acting at their most trendy, arrogant and obnoxious, the Doctor particularly behaving like a common thug and Rose being a bunny boiler. The most depressing aspect of this is that instead of making the Doctor and companion the light in a selfish and uncooperative world, it actually makes them the centre of that selfishness and standoffishness with their belligerence that guarantees that they get no help from anyone.


I'm going to gobble you up pretty boy! by Steve Cassidy 16/9/06

[The] story is almost smothered in a social commentary with all the subtley of a television van falling on you. I thoroughly enjoy a little social pastiche in Who. [...] I found myself grinding my teeth at the caricatures there on the screen. I felt a modern PC mindset was projecting its own ideas into the past. It felt like an episode of the 1900 house where modern people try to be like those in at the turn of the century. I felt it was trying too hard to make a point.


Rose, in particular, seems to be on a downward spiral [...]. One of the reasons was when she was showing up Mr Connelly about the Union Flag. It doesn't matter if he did or didn't deserve it. It's not about the person being embarassed. It's about the person taking enjoyment in embarassing someone. It's nasty, and I don't like it. [...]

[The Doctor's] shouting down of Mr Connelly "AND I'M NOT LISTENING!!" didn't work.


And can we let up on the contemporary references? Previous Doctors quoted Shakespeare or 'The Ballard of Flannen Isle'. This Doctor seems to spend his time watching crap earth TV.

Yes, yes - I know, that's the producer. I can spot an RTD edit a mile off. I also think he was responsible for the Connelly family dramas. Gattiss has let slip that RTD has sent his work back for previous rewrites and one wonders if this was the part he wanted expanded. There is nothing wrong with having an "emotional edge" in Who but this one had the subtley of a TV mast crashing down. I enjoy a bit of drama but I don't want my arm twisted into agreeing with what the writers want us to think. I just think the whole thing was too heavy-handed.


Eddie Connelly['s] weakness is his pride; this is shown in the first scene (the medals, the way he holds his head when he walks etc). What is telling is his reaction at the end of the episode, he meekly accepts when his wife throws him out and is also silent after Tommy's fascist accusation speech. He doesn't stop Tommy going with the Doctor and when his wife subsequently slams the door in his face, he doesn't try to get back into the house. Deep down he knows he is in the wrong, but is too proud to admit it. It seemed to me that he tried to take contol of things in the manner that he knew best; that of a soldier. He tried to take command of the family unit. I think in panic and ignorance he made a hash of it. I think Eddie genuinely believed that he outranked everyone else in the house. I also found that he represented the last throes of colonialisim in that he had became the ruler in another person's house/country and was eventually made to pack up move out of there as the family/country finally found the strength to find their independence.

A Review

By Ron Mallett

A very silly story.


Does anyone get the feeling that somebody out there really hated the last war generation? I think someone involved has some serious father/son issues. This story presented a very generalised, unsympathetic view of post-war patriarchal society and the mainstream conservatism that ensued.


A Review

By Finn Clark

There's nothing wrong with The Idiot's Lantern. It's not a bad story. It has some nice jokes and the dramatic climax actually feels like a dramatic climax instead of just button-pressing.

My only real objection is what the story doesn't do. As in The Unquiet Dead, I can't hear Mark Gatiss's voice. There are most certainly bits where the story's trying to say things about the 1950s, but, as with everything else, Gatiss has inserted those bits because he thinks he should and because he's dutifully assembling all the approved parts. They don't feel organic. It's hollow. Thus the Gay Pride speech comes across as the scriptwriter putting words in his characters' mouths instead of letting them speak for themselves.


Personally I don't even think it's even as good as The Unquiet Dead. That story [set in Cardiff, with Simon Callow as Charles Dickens] respected its characters. It revered Dickens and even gave Gwyneth [a maid that Rose talked down to] that wonderful "you think I'm stupid" line. However The Idiot's Lantern patronises its 1950s setting [...]. It's the same problem I have with many Doctor Who novels in Victorian England: that sense of smugness. "Look, weren't they stupid and aren't I morally superior?" [...] These people aren't real. They're a species of freak called "Fifties People", with all that flag-waving parochialism and awe at the simplest things.


I like the fact that [Gatiss] chose to write about the Connolly family in the first place, but the execution is leaden. Shouty Dad is just Shouty Dad. Tommy's big speech is unconvincing (even if a better actor could have probably made it work), although in fairness I like its mirror image at the end. "Tolerance even for the intolerant." That's a worthwhile message.


A Review

By Terrence Keenan


I wasn't very impressed. The TARDIS duo seemed bullying and obnoxious, and the Wire wasn't much of a villain.

So, does it improve on a second viewing?

No, and the fault is shoehorned mix of the main plot (the bits with the Wire) and the agenda plot (the whole Connolly plot). It's obvious that the agenda plot was rewritten extensively to give it more emphasis. It's as subtle as a kick in the head with an iron boot, and throws the whole story out of whack.


If Eddie Connolly was less of an ass, then the agenda storyline might have blended in better with the main plot and might have elevated the whole episode.


Hungry For More Than What We Were Given

By Scott Williams

I find it incredibly hard to pin-point why The Idiot's Lantern was such a massive disappointment and letdown for me, especially after the writer's previous triumph, The Unquiet Dead (one of my personal favourite Doctor Who episodes of all time and surely the best pre-credits sequence of the revived series).


I think the main problem for me was the family at the centre of the story, the Connelly family. All four of them failed to grab my imagination. [...] Despite the conviction in his performance, Eddie Connelly was purely a stereotypical, overly patriotic, misguided, dominant alpha male figure from the period. Likewise, the mother was simply a typical wife-under-the-thumb sort who was scared and submissive to her overbearing spouse. Not that that is necessarily a bad setup if done correctly, but sadly this was not the case here. I, for one, had no sympathy or empathy with either of them. There was just not enough characterisation there for me to care.



[caption id="attachment_198" align="aligncenter" width="323" caption="Doctor Who / David Tennant, by Springfield Punk"][/caption]

[caption id="attachment_198" align="aligncenter" width="323" caption="Doctor Who: Rose Tyler / Billie Piper, by Springfield Punk"][/caption]

"Shall such a one live?"

Category: Category: None   Tags: ---

"He that gives upon usury, and that takes an increase: shall such a one live? He shall not live. Seeing he has done all these detestable things, he shall surely die, his blood shall be upon him."

(Ezekiel 18:13)


Category: Category: None   Tags: ---

Kike Man United vs Muz Man City


Owner: Malcolm Glazer (Jew; USA; also owns First Allied Corporation, the G.H.W. Bush-founded Zapata Corporation, The Tampa Bay Buccaneers)

Co-Chairmen: Avram & Joel Glazer (Jews; USA)

Stadium: Old Trafford



Owner: HH Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan (Muz; half-brother of HH Sheik Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan, the President of UAE & Emir of Abu Dhabi) ~ Bought from Thaksin Shinawatra, then Prime Minister of Thailand

Chairman: H.E. Khaldoon Khalifa Al Mubarak (Muz; Abu Dhabi; on boards of First Gulf Bank, Aldar Properties, Ferrari, AMD, The Carlyle Group, General Electric, Oasis International Leasing, &c.)

Stadium: ʼal-ʻItiħād (الإتحاد)

The nations, not so blest as thee
Must in their turns to tyrants fall
While thou shalt flourish great and free
The dread and envy of them all

Rule, Britannia! rule the waves
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves

To thee belongs the rural reign
Thy cities shall with commerce shine
All thine shall be the subject main
And every shore it circles thine

Rule, Britannia! rule the waves:
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves.




Category: Category: None   Tags: ---

Soka-Gakkai, Ikeda Daisaku & Kike-Demons

Category: Category: None   Tags: ---

Soka-Gakkai, Ikeda Daisaku & Kike-Demons


Ikeda Daisaku's Jew-Speeches:

Makiguchi's Lifelong Pursuit of Justice and Humane Values

By Daisaku Ikeda

Delivered at Simon Wiesenthal Center June 4, 1996

In January 1993, just prior to its official opening, I had the opportunity to visit the Museum of Tolerance. The history of the Holocaust must be termed the ultimate tragedy wrought by human hatred and intolerance. Viewing the exhibits, I was powerfully moved. More than that, however, I was profoundly outraged. Exceeding either of these emotions was the intensity of the determination that welled up within me: the determination that we must never allow this tragedy to be repeated--in any age, in any country.

Taking to heart the words of Simon Wiesenthal, that "Hope lives when people remember," and with the unstinting support and cooperation of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, Soka University was proud to organize the exhibit "The Courage to Remember" (Japanese title: "Anne Frank and the Holocaust") at venues throughout Japan beginning in May 1994.

At the initial opening of the exhibit at the Tokyo Metropolitan Government Office, Rabbi Cooper led a distinguished delegation from the Center, and we were honored by the attendance of U.S. Ambassador Walter Mondale as well as diplomatic representatives from twenty countries.

On August 15 of last year, the fiftieth anniversary of the end of World War II, the exhibition opened in Hiroshima. At that time Rabbi Hier represented the Center at an opening ceremony attended by many prominent figures. "The Courage to Remember" later traveled to Okinawa and to date has been shown in a total of nineteen Japanese cities.

The exhibit has had an average of five thousand visitors per day, and thus far has been seen by approximately one million Japanese citizens. Many of the visitors are children and teenagers, and we frequently see them moved to tears by the courageous example of their fellow teen Anne Frank, whose life is portrayed in the exhibit. There has also been an endless succession of parents visiting the exhibition with their children. I am gratified to report that "The Courage to Remember" is serving as a site of learning where people are being awakened to an invaluable sense of justice.

At the initial opening, I could not help but recall the words of my mentor, Josei Toda: "One must learn from the indomitable spirit of the Jewish people." Indeed, I feel that there is much to learn from the strength and courage that has enabled the Jewish people to overcome endless persecutions and tragedies over the centuries.

As they have risen above each of the trials that has beset them, the Jewish people have learned, have remembered, and have passed on their wisdom and spiritual strength to succeeding generations. The courage to remember is at the same time the compassion to teach. Hatred is learned; tolerance must therefore be taught.

Buddhism asserts that anger can function both for good and for evil.

Needless to say, anger that serves self-absorbed emotionalism or greed is of an evil nature. Anger driven by hatred brings only conflict and confrontation to human society.

Anger, however, that is directed at great evil, against the desecration of humanity and the abusive disregard for human life, is anger of great good. This kind of anger reforms and rejuvenates society, opening the way to a world of humanism and peace.

Indeed, the emotion which "The Courage to Remember" inspires in viewers is none other than this feeling of "righteous anger."

One of the most important issues facing humankind in the wake of the Cold War is that of how to bridge the chasms of mistrust and hatred between different peoples, cultures and religions. I was deeply struck by the following words spoken by Dr. Wiesenthal, when he addressed the 50th Session of the United Nations General Assembly last November, in a culminating event of the United Nations Year for Tolerance. He stated:

"Tolerance is the prerequisite for the peaceful coexistence of all people on this earth and the only alternative to the hatred that led to the horrible crimes against humanity. Hatred is the evil opposite of tolerance." [1]

It should be noted here that, like anger, tolerance also has its passive and its active modes, its helpful and its harmful forms.

The indifference and apathy that is so prevalent in modern societies could be cited as an example of passive tolerance. Earlier in this century, the Japanese tendency to confuse unprincipled compromise for tolerance created the spiritual conditions that led to the growth of militarism--and to the bitter historical experience that followed.

In contrast, active tolerance is inseparable from the courage to resolutely oppose and resist all forms of violence and injustice that threaten human dignity. It is a way of life based on empathy, seeing the world through other people's eyes, feeling their sufferings and joys as one's own.

The Simon Wiesenthal Center provides a model of positive tolerance, actively seeking to create opportunities for dialogue between cultures, promoting shared learning and mutual understanding. A person of true tolerance is at the same time a courageous person of action who works to encourage the bonds of empathy and appreciation among people.

It is an unparalleled honor to have this opportunity to speak about the life of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi, the teacher of my teacher and first president of the Soka Gakkai, here at the Simon Wiesenthal Center--a fortress dedicated to the noble mission of protecting peace and human rights. I would like to share with you the convictions for which Makiguchi gave his life, focusing on the two themes of "righteous anger" and "active tolerance."

The following quotes [2] from Makiguchi's writings will suffice to indicate the degree to which his thinking ran counter to that of Japanese militarism--the prevailing mood of his times.

  • "Rebuking and removing evil is part and parcel of embracing and protecting good."

  • "If you cannot be a courageous enemy of evil, you cannot be a friend to the good."

  • "One must not be satisfied with passive goodness; one must be a person of courage and mettle who can actively strive for good."

Makiguchi opposed Japan's role in World War II and the restrictions the military government imposed on freedom of religion. As a consequence, he was jailed, abused and died in prison at the age of seventy-three.

Tsunesaburo Makiguchi was born in 1871 in a small village on the Sea of Japan in Niigata Prefecture. The name of the village was Arahama, which might be translated as "beach of rough seas." June 6, the day after tomorrow, will mark the 125th anniversary of his birth.

Makiguchi proudly referred to his humble origins, his birth in an impoverished fishing village. The poverty of his family, and the need to support them, forced him to give up further study after elementary school. Nevertheless, he utilized every opportunity for reading and learning and showed great talent for teaching. Because of his scholarly disposition, a small sum of money was contributed by those with whom he worked so that he could go to a teachers' college, from which he graduated at age twenty-two.

Makiguchi poured his youthful energy and passion into the task of expanding educational opportunity for his underprivileged students. Many of those who were taught by Makiguchi have left grateful descriptions of his efforts as a teacher.

It was during Makiguchi's days as a young teacher that Japan began pursuing a national policy expressed by the slogan "national wealth and military strength" (Jpn. fukoku kyohei)--the path of imperial expansion. In the field of education, highest priority was likewise accorded to national aims, and all efforts were made to instill a blind, unquestioning patriotism.

Makiguchi, by contrast, expressed this view: "What then is the purpose of national education? Rather than devise complex theoretical interpretations, it is better to start by looking to the lovely child who sits on your knee and ask yourself. What can I do to assure that this child will be able to lead the happiest life possible?" [3]

Makiguchi's focus of interest was never the state, but always people, individual human beings. This reflects his strong sense of human rights, which inspired him to declare, in an era when the priorities of state sovereignty were being forcefully emphasized, that "the freedom and rights of the individual are sacred and inviolable." [4]

In 1903, at the age of thirty-two, Makiguchi published his thousand-page work The Geography of Human Life. This publication came on the eve of the Russo-Japanese war. The tenor of the times is symbolized by the fact that seven of Japan's most famous scholars from Tokyo Imperial University petitioned the Government to take a hard-line stance against Russia, heightening public enthusiasm for war. In contrast, Makiguchi, an unknown school teacher, was promoting an awareness as global citizens who, while rooted in the local community, avoid the pitfalls of "narrow-minded nationalism."

At age forty-two, Makiguchi was appointed principal of an elementary school in Tokyo. For the next twenty years, he served in this capacity, developing some of Tokyo's most outstanding public schools.

One of the important influences on Makiguchi's thinking was the American philosopher, John Dewey, whose philosophy he sought to use to create change in the Japanese educational system. An outspoken advocate of educational reform, Makiguchi found himself under the constant scrutiny and pressure of the authorities. Among his controversial proposals was a call for the abolition of the system of official inspection through which representatives of the central bureaucracy could directly interfere in the running of local schools.

He also refused to give in to the prevailing custom of granting special treatment to the children of influential families. This eventually resulted in the involvement of a leading national politician, who lobbied for Makiguchi's ouster. Students, teachers and parents all rallied to Makiguchi's defense and sought to have the transfer order stayed, even staging a boycott of classes. At the school to which Makiguchi was transferred he met with similar harassment. This time, he was able to make the educational authorities renovate a playground as a condition for accepting the transfer.

Makiguchi's endeavors bring to mind the great love of humanity demonstrated by his contemporary, the extraordinary Jewish-Polish educator Janusz Korczak, who fought to the very end to protect the lives of his students, dying together with them in the Holocaust.

In 1928 Makiguchi encountered Buddhism. Buddhism, in that it recognizes and seeks to develop the wisdom inherent in all human beings, can be considered a philosophy of popular education. Makiguchi felt that in Buddhism he had found the means by which to realize the ideals he had pursued throughout his life--a movement for social reform through education. Makiguchi was already fifty-seven when he embraced Buddhism--an event that commences the dramatic final development of his life.

Two years later, on November 18, 1930, together with his disciple and fellow teacher, Josei Toda, Makiguchi published the first volume of The System of Value-Creating Pedagogy, and it is from this day that we date the establishment of our organization.

"Soka" is Japanese for "value creation." From Makiguchi's viewpoint, the most fundamental and central value is that of life itself. Taking into account Dewey's pragmatism, he stated that "The only value in the true sense is that of life itself. All other values arise solely within the context of interaction with life." [5] The fundamental criterion for value, in Makiguchi's view, is whether something adds to or detracts from, advances or hinders, the human condition.

The ultimate goal of Soka, or value-creating, education is to foster people of character who continuously strive for the "greatest good" of peace, who are committed to protecting the sanctity of life, and who are capable of creating value under even the most difficult circumstances.

In 1939, what was in effect the first general meeting of the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai (Value-creating Education Society) was held. Needless to say, this was the year in which World War II began with the Nazi invasion of Poland. Japan's armies were also on the move, committing horrible barbarities in China and Korea.

Deeply disturbed by these developments, Makiguchi launched a frontal critique of militarist fascism. At the time, most religions and religious organizations in Japan lent their support to State Shinto, which provided the philosophical and spiritual underpinnings for the prosecution of the war. Makiguchi, however, opposed this trampling underfoot of the freedoms of conscience and belief, refusing to permit his religious convictions to deviate from their orientation toward peace.

He was also outraged by the attempt to impose on the peoples of Asia belief in Japanese Shinto, writing, "The arrogance of the Japanese people knows no bounds." [6] His stern and uncompromising attitude in this regard stemmed from a profound spirit of tolerance toward the cultural and religious heritage of other peoples.

In December of 1941, Japan's forces made a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, thus initiating the war in the Pacific. Five months later, the periodical of the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai, Kachi Sozo (Value Creation), was forced to cease publication at the order of the domestic security authorities.

Having deprived the Japanese people of their freedoms of conscience and religion, it was a simple task for the fascist military powers to suppress freedom of speech. By depriving people of their fundamental freedoms, the military authorities sought to create an obedient, sheeplike mass. Makiguchi expressed his firm conviction that "a single lion will triumph over a thousand sheep. A single person of courage can achieve greater things than a thousand cowards." [7] Makiguchi's stance of squarely confronting all forms of evil and injustice made his thoughts a potent threat to the powers-that-be. He was considered a "thought criminal" and his activities were subject to constant surveillance by the "secret police."

Nevertheless, Makiguchi continued to organize small discussion meetings where he openly expressed his religious and moral convictions. According to his written indictment, he attended over the course of two wartime years more than two hundred forty such meetings. In the presence of the police during these meetings, Makiguchi continued to criticize military fascism. Often his speech would be cut short by the police.

Where even the priests who professed to share Makiguchi's Buddhist faith capitulated to government pressure to pray to the Shinto talisman, Makiguchi refused to the very last.

In July, 1943, Makiguchi and Toda were arrested by militarist Japan's equivalent of the Gestapo. They were charged with violations of the notorious "Peace Preservation Act" [8] and with lese-majesty, disrespect for the emperor. Makiguchi was already seventy-two and spent the next year and four months, a total of five hundred days, in solitary confinement.

Makiguchi, however, never retreated a step. It is said that he used to call out from his solitary cell, asking the other prisoners if they were bored, offering to engage them in debate about such questions as whether there is any difference between not doing good and actually committing wrong. [9] He was an unrestrained master of humanistic education who always sought equal and unqualified dialogue with others.

He even explained, patiently and clearly, the principles of Buddhism to his guards and interrogators. The official deposition records his view that a way of life in which one is "so sensitive to the praise or censure of society that one, while not doing evil, fails to do good" runs, in the final analysis, counter to the teachings of Buddhism. [10]

There is a famous Buddhist aphorism that if you light a lamp for another, your own path will be brightened. [11] Indeed, Makiguchi was to the very end an example of a life of positive contribution, bringing forth the brilliant light of hope for himself and for others.

Elsewhere in the record of his interrogations we find him declaring Japan's invasion of China and the "Great East Asian War" a "national catastrophe" brought on by the fundamental spiritual misorientation of the Japanese nation. At a time when Japan's invasions were described as a "sacred war" and the press and opinion-makers were vying to glorify this undertaking, Makiguchi's words reflect a singular courage and determination.

His prison letters to his family have survived and in them we find such passages [12] as these:

  • "For the present, aged as I am, this is where I will cultivate my mind."

  • "I am able to read books, which is a pleasure. I want for nothing. Please watch over the home in my absence and don't concern yourselves about me."

  • "Being in solitary confinement, I am able to ponder things in peace, which I prefer."

His letters are filled with concern and consideration for his family; in them one senses composure, even optimism.

"Even hell has its enjoyments, depending on one's outlook," he wrote in a passage scratched out by the prison censors.

The hell of the four walls of his stifling solitary cell, its heats and colds, took a steady toll on Makiguchi's aged frame. But he was never despondent; in his heart, the brilliant sun of his beliefs rose and remained high. Burning with righteous anger, Makiguchi continued his struggle against the forces of a state authority that refused to respect human fights. His anger, however, was never tainted with hatred.

Eventually, age and malnutrition brought the inevitable physical decline, and Makiguchi finally agreed to be transferred to the infirmary. Donning his formal clothes, he straightened his hair and walked there unaided, with frail yet determined step. The following day, on November 18, 1944, the anniversary of the founding of the Soka Gakkai, Tsunesaburo Makiguchi passed away peacefully.

Even the terror of death was unable to force Makiguchi into submission.

For human beings, nothing is perhaps more universally dreaded than the prospect of one's own demise. It could even be said that fear of death forms the basis for instinctual aggression. Yet Buddhism speaks of the indivisible unity of life and death, asserting that these are both integral aspects of an eternal continuum. For one who fives with just and unwavering conviction, and has a penetrating understanding of the essential nature of life and death, both life and death can be experienced as joys.

In the frigid confines of prison, Makiguchi proved the truth that by living with utter dedication to humane and noble ideals, it is possible to greet death without a trace of fear, regret or loathing. Unknown to anyone, he brought to completion the life he had made great by his actions and his spirit.

His quiet passing was at the same time a new start, a new departure.

Josei Toda spoke of the unbearable grief and outrage that seized him when, two months later, one of the judges bluntly informed him, "Makiguchi's dead." He spoke of moaning in solitude, of crying until his tears ran dry.

But from the depths of this despair a new hope was born.

Toda the disciple emerged alive from the prison where his mentor had died. Anger at the authoritarian forces that had robbed his mentor of life was transformed into a pledge and determination to create a new popular movement for peace.

In The System of Value-Creating Pedagogy, Makiguchi wrote that, "Driven by their instinct for self preservation, evil-minded people band together, increasing the force with which they persecute the good. In contrast, people of goodwill always seem to be isolated and weak . . . There is no alternative but for people of goodwill to unite." [13] This was his penetrating insight based on personal experience.

As a disciple sharing profound unity of purpose with his mentor, Josei Toda began, amidst the postwar devastation, to construct a movement based on the solidarity of ordinary citizens of goodwill. Again, his methodology was grassroots--one-on-one dialogue and small-scale discussion meetings.

Grounded on the principle of the sanctity of life as expounded in Buddhism, this is a movement that seeks to empower people, to awaken their inner wisdom, thus creating a world in which justice and humane values are accorded universal respect.

In his theory of value, Makiguchi states that the existence of religion is justified by the degree to which it relieves suffering and brings happiness to individuals (the value of gain) and to societies (the value of goodness). In his unalloyed humanism he asserted that people do not exist to serve religion; religion exists to serve people.

This past April, a cherry tree was planted on the Tokyo campus of Soka University, an institution that takes as its founding spirit the philosophy of President Makiguchi.

Seeking to eternalize the memory of late Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, who consecrated his life to the realization of Middle East peace, this tree was planted in a ceremony attended by Vice President Moshe Arad of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, which has recently concluded agreements for academic and student exchanges with Soka University.

Prime Minister Rabin left us these unforgettable words. "There is no greater victory than peace. In war there are the victors and the vanquished. But in peace, everyone is a victor." [14]

I am profoundly confident that as each spring brings new and fuller bloom to the Rabin Cherry Tree, we will see new generations emerge committed to the same vision of peace which was his pursuit. Truly, education represents the light of hope and new life.

Makiguchi's life was an all-out struggle against fascistic authority, never retreating a single step. His message of courage and wisdom will continue to echo and resound, awakening people's conscience in the coming centuries. He realized that, no matter how noble the principle or belief, it can only be realized through a concerted, grass-roots effort. It is in this spirit that the SGI Charter [15] calls for dialogue and cooperation among people of different faiths toward the resolution of the fundamental issues facing humankind. This spirit of first president Makiguchi lives on within the Soka Gakkai and takes concrete form in the activities of the SGI. We will always remain firm and unbending before any form of authoritarianism, and in this way will carry on Makiguchi's beliefs and convictions far into the future. It is our determination to continue to develop and expand a people's movement of peace, education and culture into the coming millennia, in accordance with the vision of Nichiren, the founder of the school of Buddhism we practice.

For my own part I am determined, for as long as I live, to act with courage toward the realization of an era of peace in the twenty-first century, for the peace that will signal victory for all. And I trust that I will have the pleasure and privilege of sharing that journey with our distinguished friends and colleagues gathered here today.

In closing, I would like to dedicate today's talk to President Makiguchi and to all those who have given their lives for justice and humane values, and to the youth of our world who live each day with a profound determination toward the future.

It is my belief-
- that a person, a people,
who embrace a noble philosophy,
people upholding sublime faith--
that only a person, a people,
who, amidst raging storms,
live out the drama
of reality and grand ideals,
subjected to and enduring
limitless persecution--
that only such a person,
only such a people,
will be bathed in the sunlight
of perpetual joy, glory and victory.

  1. Statement by Simon Wiesenthal as an Austrian delegate to the United Nations General Assembly, Fiftieth Session, Nov. 20, 1995.

  2. Collected Works of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi (in Japanese) (Tokyo: Daisan Bunmeisha, 1988, 1983), 9:97, 6:71, 180.

  3. Collected Works of Makiguchi (1981), 4:27.

  4. Tsunesaburo Makiguchi, The Geography of Human Life (in Japanese) (Tokyo: Seikyo Shimbunsha, 1980), 5:16.

  5. Collected Works of Makiguchi (1982), 5:232.

  6. Collected Works of Makiguchi (1987), 10:84.

  7. An Anthology of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi's Works (in Japanese), ed. Takehisa Tsuji (Tokyo: Daisan Bunmeisha, 1994), 26-27.

  8. The Peace Preservation Act of 1925 was one of the prime legal tools used to suppress all forms of dissident expression. The Religious Organizations Act of 1940 consolidated all religious organizations in Japan under Shinto leadership.

  9. Collected Works of Josei Toda (in Japanese) (Tokyo: Seikyo Shimbunsha, 1988), 8:463.

  10. Collected Works of Makiguchi, 10:209- 10.

  11. "The Three Virtues of Food," Complete Works of Nichiren Daishonin (in Japanese), ed. Nichiko Hori (Tokyo: Soka Gakkai, 1952), 1598.

  12. Collected Works of Makiguchi, 10:276-78, 85.

  13. Collected Works of Makiguchi, 6:69.

  14. Yitzhak Rabin, preface to De Rabin Memoirs (in Japanese), ed. Tetsuo Sagara, trans. Junko Takeda (Tokyo: Mirutosu, 1996), 19.

  15. The SGI Charter has been reprinted in the SGI Quarterly magazine, January 1996.

Rabbi Marvin Hier--The Courage to Remember

By Daisuke Ikeda

Passing through the rotunda of the Simon Wiesenthal Center's Museum of Tolerance, Rabbi Hier, the Center’s Founder and Dean, pointed to a small notebook in a glass case. "This poem is in Anne Frank's own handwriting," he said. "She wrote it for a friend when she was only 10 years old."

Dearest Henny,
It is only a small thing
But I give it to you
The roses that bloom in the meadow
And a handful of forget-me-nots.

The open book shows pictures of flower baskets on each page. From the flower basket on the left, a dove takes flight with a letter in its bill.

The story of Anne Frank is well-known: how, with other members of her family, she was forced to live confined in the attic of a building in wartime Amsterdam for two years, until they were discovered and arrested by the Gestapo. She was sent to a concentration camp where she died in 1945, just days before the liberation of the camp by British forces. She was only 15.

Forget-me-not: The name of the flower that Anne wished to send her friend was a plea not to be forgotten. But who could forget her? Who can forget the millions who died in the Holocaust?

Rabbi Marvin Hier founded the Simon Wiesenthal Center, vowing that those slaughtered in the Holocaust would never be forgotten.

It has not been an easy task. People tend to want to forget. Not only those who perpetrated the evil but its victims as well. As Rabbi Hier points out, "Memory is fragile and pliable. And that is why, if we do not persist on our course, if we are not faithful to memory, then one day no one will believe that the eerie sounds of those trains once delivered millions of unsuspecting men, women and children to the death camps."

The Nazis murdered six million Jews. They ripped babies from their mothers' arms and flung them to their deaths; they used children as guinea pigs in appalling medical experiments; they herded people into gas chambers; and as life became increasingly callous, Nazi guards shot prisoners just to "let off steam." They spread false rumors about the Jews, the victims of their atrocities, denouncing them as brutal and inhumane, morally corrupt, the dregs of humanity. Everything that was most true of the Nazis themselves, they ascribed to the Jews. These repeated lies acted like poison that, drop by drop, penetrated the hearts and minds of the German people, paralyzing their senses. Eventually, people were so transformed that they accepted without question the most evil of deeds.

Rabbi Hier is committed to perpetuating the struggle of Simon Wiesenthal, after whom the center is named. Himself a survivor of the death camps, Wiesenthal has been dedicated to bringing to justice Nazi war criminals who went into hiding after the war. Wiesenthal has been motivated solely by his duty as a survivor. Justice is his motive, not hatred or revenge.

"Without Simon Wiesenthal," writes Rabbi Hier, "the subject of the Holocaust would not really receive serious attention anywhere in the world . . . There was a long time between 1945 and the early 60s: a crucial period when there was the greatest pressure to forget."

The denial was remarkable. Some members of the older generation in Germany and Austria intentionally spread lies about the past, claiming that Anne Frank's diary was a fake and that the "so-called" gas chambers were only for the purpose of disinfecting prisoners' clothing. Their influence was so potent that in 1958, youthful demonstrators interrupted a stage production of The Diary of Anne Frank in Linz, Austria, distributing leaflets with the message: "This play is a fraud. Anne Frank never existed. The Jews have invented the whole story because they want to extort more restitution money."

Later, Simon Wiesenthal wrote of this event: "These young rowdies were not guilty; their parents and teachers were. The older people were trying to poison the minds of the young generation because they wanted to justify their own dubious past. Many of them were trapped by their heritage of ignorance, hatred and bigotry. They hadn't learned anything from history."

Wiesenthal's life has been dedicated to the belief that "Hope lives when people remember." Rabbi Hier's work proclaims, "Hope lives as long as we do not remain silent."

Beneath an intelligent and urbane manner, a fierce anger against evil and injustice burns in Rabbi Hier's heart. Whenever he hears anti-Semitic propaganda, he springs onto the offensive immediately. He rebuts it, demands an apology and widely publicizes the truth, using every method at his command to cut off the poisonous weed of hate at the root.

To teach the importance of human rights, Rabbi Hier established the Wiesenthal Center's Museum of Tolerance. I visited the museum on January 31, 1993. Rabbi Hier graciously showed me around the facility, even though he was very busy preparing for its official opening early the following month. There were models of Auschwitz and a ghetto where countless Jews were massacred. The many photographs and audiovisual footage gave voice and identity to their now silent subjects. Who could ever forget these tragic events? Who could fail to be enraged by them?

Yet around the same time as I made my visit, books and weekly tabloids were still being published in Japan that talked of the "international conspiracy of the Jews"--the same ridiculous lies that were once spread by the Nazis. The victims of the persecution were being attacked and painted as its perpetrators. Such is the deplorable insensitivity to human rights that exists in Japan to this day.

The lies about the Holocaust are not unlike the lies still told in Japan, claiming that the Nanjing Massacre, where hundreds of thousands of Chinese were senselessly slaughtered, never took place. In the same way that the Nazis tried to establish the Aryan race as a chosen people, the Japanese militarists called Japan the "Land of the Gods." The belief that there is a divine people always entails the creation of the lie that there are inferior peoples. For the Nazis, these were the Jews and the Gypsies, and for the Japanese military, the Koreans and the Chinese. These lies resulted in the cruel slaughter by the Nazi and Japanese military forces.

Those who deny that Auschwitz or the Nanjing Massacre ever happened are murdering the victims all over again. And keeping Japan's young people in the dark by failing to teach them the truth about history is far more shameful than having to face and come to terms with our own shameful past.

Debate is currently heated in Japan over the publication of history textbooks which play down or deny the reality of wartime atrocities committed by Japanese forces.

From my meeting with Rabbi Hier emerged the project of bringing the exhibition "The Courage to Remember: Anne Frank and the Holocaust" on a tour of major Japanese cities. The exhibition touched the lives of more than a million people around Japan. In a speech at the exhibition's Hiroshima opening, Rabbi Hier called on people to speak out loudly and clearly for human rights, in every area of the globe where those rights are being violated or threatened.
The Museum of Tolerance

He also proposed a series of lectures to be held at the Simon Wiesenthal Center to make others aware of the unsung heroes of human rights around the world, to be entitled "The Makiguchi Memorial Human Rights Lecture Series." This choice of title is a tribute to the fact that Tsunesaburo Makiguchi, first president of the Soka Gakkai, fought to protect people's fundamental human rights from the oppressive forces of Japanese militarism and died in prison for those convictions.

When I was invited to give the first lecture in the series in June 1996, I closed my speech with the following poem:

It is my belief--
that only those individuals or peoples
who embrace a noble philosophy,
upholding sublime faith;
only those individuals or peoples
who, amidst raging storms,
live out the drama
of reality and grand ideals;
only those individuals or peoples
who have been subjected
to limitless persecution and have endured;
only these individuals or peoples
will be bathed in the sunlight
of perpetual joy, glory and victory.

In my heart, I called out to the millions in Europe and in Asia who had been trampled beneath lies and violence: We will never forget. We will fight for the truth to be known.

For, as Rabbi Hier has said, "A world without a past . . . is a world without a future."

Deutschland: „Nazi-Mädchen" muss Anne Frank lesen

Category: Category: None   Tags: ---
Deutschland: „Nazi-Mädchen” muss Anne Frank lesen
Richter entscheidet: Nazi-Mädchen muss Anne Frank lesen

Lisa (16, Name geändert) weiß eigentlich gar nichts über die Gräuel der Nazis. Weil sie so jung ist, hat BILD sie komplett unkenntlich gemacht. Jetzt muss sie „Das Tagebuch der Anne Frank“ lesen" | 08.09.2011


Kassel – Dieser Richterspruch ist mal wirklich gerecht! Damit sie endlich etwas lernt, wird ein kleines, dummes Nazi-Mädchen verdonnert, „Das Tagebuch der Anne Frank“ zu lesen.

Amtsgericht Kassel: Mit zwei Freunden (16/22) ist Lisa* (16) (*Name geändert) angeklagt, verfassungsfeindliche Symbole verwendet zu haben. Sie hatten 33 Plakate der Partei „Die Linke“ mit Hakenkreuzen und SS-Runen beschmiert. Lisa dazu: „Eigentlich weiß ich ja gar nicht, was die SS war...“

Was macht man mit so einem Mädchen? Richter Reinhardt Hering hatte eine weise Idee: Er stellte zwar das Verfahren gegen Lisa ein, erließ aber eine Auflage, die sie ganz sicher zum Nachdenken bringen wird.

Sie muss sich das erschütternde „Tagebuch der Anne Frank“ kaufen, es lesen und einen Aufsatz drüber schreiben. Alles in 10 Tagen. Ein Sprecher des Gerichts begründet die ungewöhnliche Maßnahme: „Ziel ist im Jugendrecht nicht die Strafe, sondern Erziehung. Hoffentlich lernt sie etwas draus.“

Der 16-Jährige Komplize muss 20 Stunden gemeinnützige Arbeit leisten, der andere bekam 10 Monate auf Bewährung. Weil er auch noch einen Polizisten verprügelte.

[Anne Frank wurde am 29. Juni 1929 in Frankfurt geboren. 1934 flüchtete die Familie des jüdischen Mädchens nach Amsterdam. Ab 1942 versteckten sie sich im Hinterhaus der Prinsengracht 263 vor ihren Verfolgern. Dort verfasste Anne auch ihr erschütterndes Tagebuch. Durch Verrat konnte die Gestapo das Versteck entdecken. Die Flüchtlinge wurden deportiert. Anne starb Anfang März 1945 im KZ Bergen-Belsen an Typhus. Von den Versteckten aus der Prinsengracht überlebte nur Vater Otto Frank, der nach dem Krieg das Tagebuch seiner Tochter herausbrachte.]

"Banned Book Week" 2011.09.24-10.01

Category: Category: None   Tags: ---
"Banned Book Week" 2011.09.24-10.01

Every year around this time a pack of pathetic pedophiles/sodomites/perverts/whores/Jews get together and compile lists of "banned books" that are available in virtually every bookstore and library. They also often get together at their local library and pat each other on the back, and perform painfully bad, publicly-sanctioned readings from these "banned books", and get a thrill out of being so outrageous. Many of these oh-so-outlaw events are funded by taxpayers.

From "Insatiable Book Sluts", in a post that has been promoted on WordPIss' Front Page:

Banned Books Week: What subversives are you reading?

"Sex? Drugs? Non-white people??? I am so scandalized!"

Firstly, I have to say that I am amazed that people are still fashed over The Color Purple and The Catcher in the Rye, but according to the ALA, both books made the top ten challenged books in 2009.  Also, can someone tell me why The Call of the Wild was banned/challenged?  Is there a human cannibalism scene that I don’t know about? (I never got around to reading Jack London, because I have a vagina.)

So, banned books week is nigh upon us; starting September 24 and ending October 1, it’s a supposedly naughty way to kick off the season of chills, thrills, and stuffing yourself to the gills.   My fellow bookslut is busily working on a piece about banned books [...]

A few suggestions for these sluts:

  • Shlomo Avineri, Moses Hess. Prophet of Communism and Zionism

  • A.R. Butz, Hoax of the Twentieth Century

  • Robert Faurisson, Is The Diary of Anne Frank Genuine?

  • Robert Faurisson (ed. Serge Thion), Vérité historique ou vérité politique: le dossier de l’affaire Faurisson : la question des chambres à gaz (1980)

  • Robert Faurisson, Réponse à Pierre Vidal-Naquet (1982)

  • Robert Faurisson, "Chronique sèche de l'Épuration – Exécutions sommaires dans quelques communes de Charente limousine", Revue d'Histoire révisionniste, no. 4, February-April 1991.

  • Robert Faurisson, Réponse à Jean-Claude Pressac (1993)

  • Robert Faurisson, Écrits révisionnistes (1974-1998), 4 volumes (1999)

  • Robert Faurisson & Siegfried Verbeke: Het «Dagboek» van Anne Frank: een kritische benadering

  • Jürgen Graf, Concentration Camp Majdanek: A Historical and Technical Study

  • Jürgen Graf, Concentration Camp Stutthof: And Its Function in National Socialist Jewish Policy

  • Jürgen Graf, The Giant With Feet of Clay: Raul Hilberg and his Standard Work on the Holocaust

  • Jürgen Graf, Holocaust or Hoax? The Arguments

  • J. Graf, T. Kues, C. Mattogno, Sobibor: Holocaust Propaganda and Reality

  • Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

  • David L. Hoggan, The Myth of the Six Million

  • David Irving, The Destruction of Dresden (1963)

  • David Irving, The Mare's Nest (1964)

  • David Irving, The Virus House (1967)

  • David Irving, The Destruction of Convoy PQ17 (1967)

  • David Irving, Accident: The Death of General Sikorski (1967)

  • David Irving, Breach of Security (1968)

  • David Irving, The Rise and Fall of the Luftwaffe: a biography of Erhard Milch (1973)

  • David Irving, Hitler's War (1977)

  • David Irving, The Trail of the Fox: a biography of Erwin Rommel (1977)

  • David Irving, The War Path (1978)

  • David Irving, The War Between the Generals (1981)

  • David Irving, Uprising! (1981)

  • David Irving, The Secret Diaries of Hitler's Doctor (1983)

  • David Irving, The German Atomic Bomb: The History of Nuclear Research in Nazi Germany (1983)

  • David Irving, Der Morgenthau Plan 1944-45 (1986)

  • David Irving, War between the Generals (1986)

  • David Irving, Hess, the Missing Years (1987)

  • David Irving, Churchill's War (1987)

  • David Irving, Göring (1989)

  • David Irving, Das Reich hört mit (1989)

  • David Irving, Hitler's War (revised edition, incorporating The War Path, 1991)

  • David Irving, Apocalypse 1945, The Destruction of Dresden, updated and revised edition (1995)

  • David Irving, Der unbekannte Dr. Goebbels (1995)

  • David Irving, Goebbels: Mastermind of the Third Reich (1996)

  • David Irving, Nuremberg: The Last Battle

  • David Irving, Churchill's War Volume II: Triumph in Adversity (1997)

  • David Irving, Rommel: The Trail of the Fox, Wordsworth Military Library; Limited edition (1999)

  • David Irving, Hitler's War and the War Path (2002)

  • Arthur Jeffrey, The Foreign Vocabulary of the Qur'an (1938)

  • Arthur Jeffrey, Islam: Muhammad and His Religion (1958)

  • R. Kammerer, A. Solms (eds.), A Scientific Sensation: The Rudolf Report

  • Fred A. Leuchter, Robert Faurisson, and Germar Rudolf, The Leuchter Reports: Critical Edition

  • Carlo Mattogno, Auschwitz: The Case for Sanity

  • Carlo Mattogno, Belzec

  • Paul Rassinier, The Real Eichmann Trial

  • Germar Rudolf (ed.), Dissecting the Holocaust

  • Germar Rudolf, Lectures on the Holocaust

  • Germar Rudolf, The Rudolf Report

  • Shlomo Sand, The Invention of the Jewish People

  • Shlomo Sand, The Words and the Land: Israeli Intellectuals and the Nationalist Myth

  • Georges M. Theil: Heresy in Twenty-First Century France

  • Udo Walendy, Forged War Crimes Malign the German Nation

  • Charles E. Weber, The 'Holocaust': 120 questions and answers


The Emma West Factor

Author:The Emma West Factor

Latest trackbacks
Search form

Archive   RSS   Login