CODOH Leaflets Must Work Quickly and be Simple

[JLAD Prove Me Wrong]

So I saw this video yesterday.



Mark Collett explains in this video how a leaflet should be simple, give the message before it gets thrown away, and enrage one's foes, in relation to the message, "It's Okay to be White". Although this video isn't related to revisionism, it can be applied to revisionism.

I believe that CODOH should create leaflets with a simple phrase that quickly gets the message through.

Something like, "Go with CODOH" or "CODOH is in the know"

These messages, like Collett's message, would be easily remembered by a non-revisionist, and would even be legal in countries which ban denying the holocaust. It is only illegal to deny alleged Nazi war crimes, so stating these messages above only means that one supports OPEN DEBATE on the holocaust. So these would be legal in Germany, Poland, etc.

They should then be posted on walls with postings, and if the media erupts, the media has done our work for us by furthering our message.

[Moderator]

Very good, JLAD. but how much are you contributing to CODOH to make these leaflets / flyers?

https://codoh.com/donate/
M1

[Hektor]

Very good, JLAD. but how much are you contributing to CODOH to make these leaflets / flyers?

https://codoh.com/donate/
M1

How many leaflets would be required for a campaign and what would the cost be?

[JLAD Prove Me Wrong]

how much are you contributing to CODOH to make these leaflets / flyers?

The cost would be cheap. 30 centsfor the entire papers. The document is here.

file:///home/chronos/u-f4eed926f1ee1f7a9aecb5eaefb279f1917a657a/Downloads/Untitled%20document%20(1).pdf

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HFl ... hY128/edit

My thoughts were that indivduals could print these, and than leave them on tables, bathrooms, etc.

If CODOH is interested in having these on their site, that would also be good.

[Moderator]

Very good, JLAD. but how much are you contributing to CODOH to make these leaflets / flyers?

https://codoh.com/donate/
M1

How many leaflets would be required for a campaign and what would the cost be?

I suggest talking to a professional printer about costs.
Or someone could prepare & print them at home at minimal cost.
Or an already prepared flyer could simply be downloaded & printed by those wishing to distribute them.
How many is dependent upon the energy level of those distributing them.

M1

[Moderator]

If someone designs a good flyer, I'll see to it that CODOH makes it available to download & print.
M1

[JLAD Prove Me Wrong]

I was think that the flyers would be three pages in total.

The first page would read

DISCLAIMER:

The words “Go with CODOH” and “CODOH is in the know” do not deny, promote, attempt to justify, or downplay any action committed by the NSDAP. The words simply support a free speech system which allows Holocaust Denial, like the U.K and USA has. If one idea can be censored, every idea can be censored. Free speech must include all speech, so long as no one is threatened, libeled, etc. Those two phrases are legal to say in every country on Earth.

This would be to protect people who live in police states like Germany or Austria.

The second page would say, "Go with CODOH”, be size 18, and have the same words parallel to it on the same line. This would repeat on another line, 5 spaces apart, single spaced.

The third page would read, "CODOH is in the know" and be the same as the second page, only the words are different.

I have these on my drive as of right now.

[Moderator]

I received this response from CODOH's Germar Rudolf:

1. Linking to or advertising for website with "illegal" contents is a crime in Germany.

2. We have discontinued material such as this exactly because no one ever orders it. It is unrealistic to assume that anyone will taker the time and muster the courage to expose themselves to the threats to their civilian existence by possibly outing themselves publicly this way.

3. Still, I'd be willing to try again. Is there any volunteer with skills in creating such a leaflet that could help?

4. The slogan should be universal, such as, in large print "It's okay to support free, peaceful speech" and maybe small somewhere: "especially where it is most besieged: http://www.CODOH.com"

Germar Rudolf

M1

[JLAD Prove Me Wrong]

1. Linking to or advertising for website with "illegal" contents is a crime in Germany.

2. We have discontinued material such as this exactly because no one ever orders it. It is unrealistic to assume that anyone will taker the time and muster the courage to expose themselves to the threats to their civilian existence by possibly outing themselves publicly this way.

3. Still, I'd be willing to try again. Is there any volunteer with skills in creating such a leaflet that could help?

4. The slogan should be universal, such as, in large print "It's okay to support free, peaceful speech" and maybe small somewhere: "especially where it is most besieged: http://www.CODOH.com"

1. As long as a phrase isn't followed by dotcom, it isn't a website link.

2. That really is too bad.

3. I'll see what I can do, and hopefully I can make something good.

4. That's good. Quick words that will stick with people are the ways to go.

[borjastick]

Here's a few treatments of a meme idea. The colour version would suggest a less harsh environment. In my opinion any leaflet or digital image to be used on the interweb should have a simple and easily digestible message. Those who have a couple of brain cells might just have their interest piqued. Hitting someone over the head with loud and objectionable messages probably wouldn't work.

ausmeme1.jpg (18.75 KiB) Viewed 3373 times

ausmeme3.jpg (127.43 KiB) Viewed 3373 times

ausmeme4.jpg (20.39 KiB) Viewed 3373 times

[Lamprecht]

I could make something, I'm decent at graphics design. I think a good Idea is something like this, and then a list of people who were imprisoned for researching the holocaust, with a few sentences about how orwelian censorship is.

Any ideas?



(Note: don't Canada and Australia also have denial laws??)


There's also a VHO flyer if anyone wants to use:

http://vho.org/Intro/GB/Flyer.pdf

[JLAD Prove Me Wrong]

don't Canada and Australia also have denial laws??)

No; they have laws against 'hate speech', but neither country explicitly bans denying the holocaust.

Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Australia)

Part IIA—Prohibition of offensive behaviour based on racial
hatred
18C
(1) It is unlawful for a person to do an act, otherwise than in private, if:
(a) the act is reasonably likely, in all the circumstances, to
offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a
group of people; and
(b) the act is done because of the race, colour or national or
ethnic origin of the other person or of some or all of the
people in the group

Criminal Code 1985 (Canada)

Hate Propaganda
Advocating genocide
318 (1) Every one who advocates or promotes genocide
is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment
for a term not exceeding five years.

Definition of genocide

(2) In this section, genocide means any of the following
acts committed with intent to destroy in whole or in part
any identifiable group, namely,
(a) killing members of the group; or
(b) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction.

and also Criminal Code 1985 (Canada)

Public incitement of hatred Incitation
319 (1) Every one who, by communicating statements
in any public place, incites hatred against any identifiable
group where such incitement is likely to lead to a breach
of the peace is guilty of
(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment
for a term not exceeding two years; or
(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.
(2) Every one who, by communicating statements, other
than in private conversation, wilfully promotes hatred
against any identifiable group is guilty of
(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment
for a term not exceeding two years; or
(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

So basically, as long as we don't 'incite hatred' or advocate genocide, these would be perfectly legal in Canada and Australia.

[Hektor]

I could make something, I'm decent at graphics design. I think a good Idea is something like this, and then a list of people who were imprisoned for researching the holocaust, with a few sentences about how Orwellian censorship is.
Any ideas?

(Note: don't Canada and Australia also have denial laws??)
There's also a VHO flyer if anyone wants to use:
http://vho.org/Intro/GB/Flyer.pdf

That flyer is a good start, but may require instruction on how to fold it correctly.

I see several approaches:
- Pointing out the onslaught on free speech by groups pushing the Holocaust agenda.
- Pointing out the present political agenda groups promoting the Holocaust do have (financial, ideological).
- Revealing the Psychological Warfare / Propaganda origins the Holocaust does have.
- Problems with the proof (or lack thereof) presented for the Holocaust.

A flyer is supposed to go along with some action as a means to provide people with more information and explanatory value. But you'd also need to know your target audience there and speak their language. Choosing the right target audience is already difficult. I'd say those targeted should be themselves multiplicators (like journalists and teachers), but they tend to repel it for career reasons and because they only accept info from their higher ups (e.g. academic historians, that hardly would state anything dangerous for their careers).

Another problem is that about 97% of people aren't really interested. They consider it a past thing and more or less "settled", since that's how it looks from the media or schoolbook perspective. "If it was wrong, wouldn't investigative journalists have revealed this already?" And of course "Only a Nazi would deny the Holocaust" - Actually, what is a "Nazi" and why would they? Those 97% are anyway those that swim with the groups and the trends. The remaining 3% are those that are potentially critical, and would turn to activism once they realize that they've been taken for a ride and that it's still more relevant than ever even for their personal lives. The persecution of Revisionists is also considered an outrage.

Apropos persecution of Revisionists, it can get tricky:

Sellner states (~ 8:25ff) that "Holocaust Deniers" insist "they'd do it right once they were in power". Not sure where he picked that up, but possibly someone trying to make provocative statements. Of course that's a gross mischaracterisation of what Revisionists say. A straw man, if you want.

[Breker]

"If it was wrong, wouldn't investigative journalists have revealed this already?" And of course "Only a Nazi would deny the Holocaust" - Actually, what is a "Nazi" and why would they? Those 97% are anyway those that swim with the groups and the trends. The remaining 3% are those that are potentially critical, and would turn to activism once they realize that they've been taken for a ride and that it's still more relevant than ever even for their personal lives. The persecution of Revisionists is also considered an outrage.

One could have just as easily asked this question thousands of years ago:
'If witchcraft was wrong, why was it considered 'fact' for ages? Wouldn't the ruling, educated, literate classes have immediately rejected it?'

There are many once established 'facts' that are no longer accepted as truth. The incredibly ridiculous "Holocaust" is soon to join the list.
The fact that the claims are so easily refuted is the reason why people are jailed for free speech about it. It's unsupportable canon is why harassment and attacks are used against free speech activists.

We note that even Jews like Ron Unz are coming around to the obvious. He said of the "Holocaust" claims:
"Does anybody seriously believe something so totally ridiculous?"
American Pravda: Holocaust Denial, by Ron Unz: http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda ... st-denial/
B.

[Lamprecht]

don't Canada and Australia also have denial laws??)

No; they have laws against 'hate speech', but neither country explicitly bans denying the holocaust.

Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Australia)

Part IIA—Prohibition of offensive behaviour based on racial
hatred
18C
(1) It is unlawful for a person to do an act, otherwise than in private, if:
(a) the act is reasonably likely, in all the circumstances, to
offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a
group of people; and
(b) the act is done because of the race, colour or national or
ethnic origin of the other person or of some or all of the
people in the group

Criminal Code 1985 (Canada)

Hate Propaganda
Advocating genocide
318 (1) Every one who advocates or promotes genocide
is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment
for a term not exceeding five years.

Definition of genocide

(2) In this section, genocide means any of the following
acts committed with intent to destroy in whole or in part
any identifiable group, namely,
(a) killing members of the group; or
(b) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction.

and also Criminal Code 1985 (Canada)

Public incitement of hatred Incitation
319 (1) Every one who, by communicating statements
in any public place, incites hatred against any identifiable
group where such incitement is likely to lead to a breach
of the peace is guilty of
(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment
for a term not exceeding two years; or
(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.
(2) Every one who, by communicating statements, other
than in private conversation, wilfully promotes hatred
against any identifiable group is guilty of
(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment
for a term not exceeding two years; or
(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

So basically, as long as we don't 'incite hatred' or advocate genocide, these would be perfectly legal in Canada and Australia.

So, Zundel was imprisoned in Canada for publishing literature "likely to incite hatred against an identifiable group"

Was this holocaust revisionism, or something else? Often times, hoaxters claim we need to learn about the holocaust because somehow we could repeat it if we don't... In other words, ordinary people would want to kill millions of jews in gas chambers, except they don't because Hitler already did it. Does that make sense? To some people it does, and to others they claim that "denying the holocaust" is somehow justifying the murder of Jews. It's hard to get an actual explanation from people on why they believe this, probably because it's an emotional response based on feelings. They saw the piles of bodies and the photos and they just can't handle thinking about it.

Toben also had some legal issues in Australia, he was ordered by a federal court to remove "material from his Adelaide Institute website that vilifies Jewish people, and to refrain from publishing further similar material"

I guess, there is no specific law criminalizing "holocaust denial" but if saying "nazis didn't gas jews" is somehow construed as racist hate speech (and many people DO see it that way) then it is de facto illegal in these places.

I don't live in either of those countries, and I'm not pretending to be an expert. Does anyone have the exact article(s) these two individuals were attacked for, that allegedly "incite hatred against" and "racially vilifying" jews?