The Hoffman Wire
All Saints Day, 2012
Interview with Zionist Agent Maximilian Krah of the
SSPX
(Krah is the
attorney for the Society of Saint Pius X as administered by Bishop Bernard
Fellay)
Editor's
Note: Bishop Fellay is the prelate who expelled Bishop Richard Williamson from the SSPX.
Maximilian Krah is the attorney who was assigned by Fellay to
"defend" Bishop Williamson against prosecution in Germany for
blaspheming the sacred relics of the religion of Holocaustianity, which is
illegal in the German state. In the course of "defending" Williamson
Krah actually attacked and insulted him in front of the German court.
Krah is an associate of the
murderous Israeli army and has attended an Israeli army training event as a
"tourist" as well as a fund-raiser for Tel Aviv University. He assures the interviewer
that this all very innocent on his part.
Krah claims that Williamson was
given Pressac's report on the alleged homicidal gas chambers to study "for
a year" but he "failed" to do so. What actually transpired
was that Bishop Williamson made contact with a revisionist researcher after a
worldwide explosion of media venom was directed at him after he granted, on
German soil, an interview with a Swedish television station. In the course of
the interview he did not "deny the 'Holocaust." He questioned the
existence of homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz-Birkenau.
As the media lynch mob grew in
intensity, Bishop Williamson wanted to have access to the latest revisionist
research on the subject of the gas chambers. The revisionist researcher he
contacted in turn organized an international team of researchers and
historians, led by an American editor (who I do not have permission to name),
other youtheful revisionist historians, as well as the eminent Dr. Arthur Butz
and Dr. Robert Faurisson.
Bishop Williamson carefully
studied the documents and texts these scholars kindly made available to him.
These included large portions of the Pressac material, because Pressac, toward
the end of his life, threw up his hands in frustration and disgust over trying
to scientifically prove the existence of homicidal gas chambers. Yet Mr. Krah
is either too ignorant or too duplicitous to acknowledge Pressac's failure and
instead invokes Pressac as a means of discrediting Williamson's skepticism
toward the gas chamber dogma.
Why didn't Krah and Fellay study
the books of Faurisson, Butz, Samuel Crowell, Carlo Mattogno, Germar Rudolf and Fred
Leuchter? Why was the burden of reading and study on Williamson alone?
Why does the Catholic Church sanctify and unquestioningly uphold secular
consensus history that has no bearing on the Faith of Jesus Christ? Indeed,
some would say that Auschwitz has replaced Calvary
as the central ontological event of western history. In Europe
there are no laws against blaspheming Jesus Christ or denying His resurrection.
Only the relics of Holocaustianity are protected from scrutiny in Europe by the threat of criminal prosecution.
Holocaustianity is the de facto civil religion of Europe;
the last truly believed religion in that otherwise largely agnostic
continent.
In the interview Krah claims that
the Israeli Zionists are the defenders of Christian shrines in the Holy Land. Krah makes no mention of the Israeli attacks on the Church of
the Nativity during the Israeli holocaust in Jenin, during which the Church of
the Nativity was shot up by Israeli soldiers and others churches bombed. He
makes no mention of the large number of Palestinian Christians who have been
driven out of Palestine
or murdered by the Israelis. He makes no mention of the constant vandalism and
assaults on Christian
Churches by Talmudic
terrorists. He makes no mention of the fact that Christian misionary activity
is banned in the Israeli state. Spreading the Gospel of Jesus Christ in the land of Christ is forbidden by the Israelis, but
Krah praises them. He writes, "And there is also a rising group of
so-called Hebrew Catholics, who are converted Israeli Citizens."
Really, Mr. Krah? Who converted
them and where were they converted? Where do they reside in the Israeli state
and where is there home church in the Israeli state?
Has Mr. Krah bothered to ask
native Palestinian Christians who they would rather be ruled by -- fellow
Palestinians or Israelis? The Palestinians have no voice in Krah's obsequiously
Zionist narrative.
In Maximillian Krah we have a
very serious and committed Zionist agent operating inside the highest levels of
the SSPX, by Bishop Fellay's mandate.
The following interview with Mr. Krah was published in The
Remnant newspaper. The Remnant's senior adviser is Mr.
Christopher Ferrara who has excoriated Bishop Williamson. It seems that Mr.
Ferrara knows for a fact that large numbers of people were gassed to death in Auschwitz. He also knows for a fact that it was Arab
terrorists from the caves of Afghanistan
who brought down the World
Trade Center,
and Building Seven of the WTC. Using the publishing facilities of the Remnant,
Mr. Ferrara has heaped abuse and contempt on Bishop Williamson for doubting
execution gas chambers and believing that 9/11 was an inside job.
The Church of Jesus Christ is
called to be counter-cultural; a pilgrim church in the midst of worldly people
and their lies and hoaxes. Yet we observe in both the Vatican and the
SSPX an imprimatur extended to establishment propaganda which is made holy and
incumbent upon Catholics to believe, on pain of expulsion. This is truly a
perversion of everything for which Jesus Christ stood. The fact that Bishop
Bernard Fellay has Zionist agent Krah installed in the inner circle of the SSPX
tells us all we need to know about Fellay and the current direction of his
"traditional Catholic" SSPX. --Michael Hoffman www.
[The following is an excerpt from Krah's
interview]
Maximilian Krah: First,
regarding the Williamson case. It is obvious to me that the statement he made
concerning the Holocaust is historically wrong, and he is not open to arguments
of historical facts. But, as a lawyer, it was clear to me that he did not
violate the German law because, in the moment he made his statement, his wrong
statement, he had no idea that the interview would be broadcasted in Germany. This
is the whole reason why I believe he is not guilty of having violated the
German law. I am not a criminal lawyer, so I had to find one for him. And in
such a case I would always highly recommend to take a criminal lawyer, who was
under no circumstances linked with, in any way, pro-Nazi movements. To explain,
the neo-Nazi movement in Germany
is extremely small. It is maybe 1% of the population. It is absolutely small,
and you usually don't want to be linked with those persons, because they are
exactly the persons you don't want your kids to play with.
And so, to make his defense as
successful as possible, I highly recommended him to choose an attorney which
was more to the left side so that he can focus on the legal aspects, and was
completely free of any political implications in his case. I explained it to
him and I introduced Lossmann to him. Lossmann is a widely accepted criminal
lawyer, who publishes in research journals on criminal law. He is not as left
as the rumors have presented him, because even the Greens [the Green Party],
has two wings. And he is definitely not from the left wing of the party. He is,
I would say, comparable to an East Coast Liberal. That means he is definitely
not a Communist or anything like that. He is just a liberal citizen, interested
in the fine arts, and maybe in the fine wine. I introduced both to each other.
I explained the reason why I think we needed a more liberal person, than I am
myself, and most of my colleagues, with whom I usually cooperate. The Bishop
absolutely was fine. Lossmann was doing a great job, and then Bishop Williamson
decided, without any explanation, to choose a different attorney…
Robert J. Siscoe:…So when
you initially presented Bishop Williamson with your recommendation, and the
reasoning for your recommendation, he agreed?
Krah: I explained
everything and made it transparent. And he understood and agreed.
Siscoe: And then he at
some point changed attorneys?
Krah: Yes, and he changed
to a completely unacceptable person, and he got a warning from the General
House [of the SSPX] and changed lawyers once again. Now he has chosen, once
again, a completely un-political lawyer, who by the way is the president of the
Association for Pop Music. He is doing a brilliant job, just as Lossmann did.
They argue exactly the same way. They don't argue in any way politically or
historically. They say "look this is the law. This is what he has done. He
had no idea at the time he gave the interview that it could be broadcasted in Germany, so the
case will not have a successful prosecution". And it is the same
argumentation, and the same style of defending. It is a deduction to the legal
problems, and does not involve bringing the historical and political matters
into the court room. And this is the only chance he has. This is what Lossmann
did, and this is what Edgar Weiler is now doing. And in the middle, he had, for
I guess one week, another approach, and I'm sure this other approach would have
led to a catastrophe.
Siscoe: Can you explain
your involvement with the Society when "the Williamson affair" first
broke? What was the Society facing in Germany, and what did you do to
assist the SSPX in this matter?
Krah: The interview was
broadcast at the same time that the Pope lifted the so-called excommunications
against the Bishops of the SSPX, including Bishop Williamson. So the headlines
in Germany
were "Pope rehabilitates holocaust-denier", and the SSPX became seen
as a neo-Nazi-group in the masquerade of religion. The Chancellor herself
expressed her misunderstanding about the Papal decision in favor of Bishop
Williamson. The German District made plenty of public declarations, expressing
that Bishop Williamson is in no way speaking for the SSPX and pointing out that
the SSPX has absolutely no acceptance for anti-Semitism and such wrong ideas on
history. But no one believed it, because no one trusted them. Many of the
Faithful, and even some priests, began to get nervous, and demanded clear
action against Bishop Williamson. Some even began attending the Fraternity of
Saint Peter or Motu Proprio masses.
In this serious situation, I was
asked if I could help quiet things down by using my network of associates, and
especially my connection into the media. Like in all countries, only a few
media outlets have national impact. The Church's correspondent scene is very
small, about 10 journalists for the whole of Germany. Most of them are aligned
with the Novus Ordo, which means they are incurably hostile against the SSPX.
One of the rare exceptions is Peter Wensierski of Der Spiegel –
("The Mirror") – who is really independent, which also means he is
equally distant, some say equally hostile, to everybody. But as he is equal
toward everyone, he was honest enough to state that the SSPX might be
ultra-conservative, old-fashioned, etc., but they are certainly not Nazis. He
is tough, but he is fair. Whatever one thinks of the SSPX, they are not even
close to fascism or the Nazis. And since Der Spiegel is the
"must-read" of the whole German elite, within two weeks the other
media accepted the distinction of: the position of the SSPX, and the opinion of
the one bishop. It could be seen in the wording of the headlines: Whilst before
there was written about "these holocaust-deniers", then it was
distinguished between the "conservative group SSPX" and "the
Holocaust-denying Bishop Williamson". We had just one shot, and it hit.
Clearly a sign of grace. I sometimes wonder myself how we succeeded.
Siscoe: But this wasn't
the end of it.
Krah: No, it was just a
step. But it brought us back on track. It gave us credibility. We then
communicated that the Superior General has given Bishop Williamson one year to
study the facts and ordered him to read a book on the issue, written by
Jean-Claude Pressac, who himself had doubts about the existence of gas chambers
in Auschwitz and later changed his mind after he started to look into the
facts. This gave us a one year respite, and the media stopped it´s attacks,
waiting for the year to pass by. Bishop Williamson did not read the book. So
when the year was over, we had to explain it. We just chose to be honest and
transparent. We showed the efforts taken by the SSPX, but we also conceded that
there was no influence on the Bishop, who has started to go his own way,
unfortunately. In the end, we were able to successfully communicate that the
SSPX in no way shared these views of Bishop Williamson.
Siscoe: How were you able
to influence the media?
Krah: By plenty of
behind-the-scene talks. I went to many distinguished journalists and explained
to them the SSPX, its mission, its history. Most of them were completely
unaware. Look, for us all of these issues are very present; we live them, and
are familiar with them. But for outsiders, the SSPX is something unknown; at
least it was so in 2009. For a liberal journalist, who is not practicing
religion at all, the idea of saying Mass in an ancient language like Latin is
somehow curious. You have to explain it to him in a way he can understand. You
have to convince, instead of judge. This is what I did and what I still do. And
as I am far away from every kind of political extremism, and always have been,
they considered me to be trustworthy, which allowed me to influence them in
favor of the SSPX. This is something I would like to point out in general; we
should always take in consideration the background and the thinking of our
counterparts. Most people are not hostile. They are just uninformed. Instead of
judging them, we should explain our views. In most cases we will see an
acceptance, and in some cases, even support.
Siscoe: If you don't mind
my asking, what impact did "the Williamson affair" have on the
current developments concerning Bishop Williamson?
Krah: I am not involved in
these current events. As far as I know, the 2009 affair is unrelated to the
current threat of expulsion. Look, the affair of 2009 was settled with the
final article in "Der Spiegel" early in 2010. Since that time, the
public has distinguished between the official position of the SSPX and the
private opinion of Bishop Williamson. What has happened since then is that
Bishop Williamson has openly undermined authority and hierarchy, which has
caused division within the SSPX. This is an internal affair, for which my
advice is neither required nor requested. This is the core business of the
superiors. I am used to mediate between the SSPX and different sorts of secular
players: judges, journalists, politicians, state officials, bankers. But I have
no share in internal affairs. Here I am an ordinary faithful like all others.
And I´m happy with that.
Siscoe: There is another
rumor claiming that you were fundraising for Tel Aviv University. Can you fill us in on that?
Krah: Yes, of course. I
have a lot of friends, including many who are not Catholic. And I have Jewish
friends, which I appreciate very much. They are wonderful people, and there is
absolutely no reason for me to hide them, or to take their friendship into
question. So, with that said, I have no understanding for these accusations or
insinuations. They are my friends, and they can trust me as I trust them. I was
in New York
one evening when I received a phone call asking if I had plans for the night,
which I hadn't. But my friend had one, and we went to a reception in a gallery
in Chelsea, and there were plenty of people, both Jewish and non-Jewish, from
different countries, and it was hosted by the American Friends of Tel Aviv
University, and of course they took pictures [chuckle], and they posted them on
the internet, and this gave those people reason enough to attack me without
asking me what happened. It was just a nice evening, a gathering, in New York City. I´d attend
it again, even if I knew about the rumors it caused.
Siscoe: To clarify, you
are not a member of The American Friends of Tel Aviv University, and you did
not organize this event?
Krah: No, to both
questions.
Siscoe: There is another
picture online as well that has caused some controversy. It shows you attending
an IDF military camp recruitment event. Can you explain?
Krah: Yes, it was not a
recruitment event. One of my friends got married in the Negev Desert,
and he invited friends from all over the world, including my wife and me. He
generously arranged a tour, which included both the Via Dolorosa in Jerusalem and a visit
into a military camp, so we could have a personal impression of what the
Israeli army is doing. It was, you could say, a tourist tour, on the way from Jerusalem to the Negev Desert,
and included a luncheon. We were able to visit them and talk to them, in order
to get a personal impression of the military. And as far as I know, it is
widely common for groups that visit the State of Israel to arrange these kinds
of tours. I received an e-mail from a member of the city council in Dresden, who told me that
he himself had taken part in similar events. So, for me it was an interesting
invitation. And as I was a German soldier for one year after High School, I
enjoyed the opportunity to see how things are done in the IDF.
Maybe a word about… it is common
to read things on the internet about the State of Israel. Let's bring it back
to history. In the middle ages, Christianity made several Crusades to the Holy Land for one reason: to get the holy places open so
we would have access to them for Pilgrimages. We have, currently, more
Pilgrimages to the Holy Land than ever in the
past. We had more in 2012 than in 2011, and more in 2011 than in 2010, and in
2010 we had more than ever since. That means, the holy places are open; they
get protected. They are safe, and there is money invested. And the Catholic
Church gets tax benefits by the Israeli government in that country. I don't
know anybody who believes that, if this country was under Islamic rule, we
would have nearly as many Pilgrims there, and free access. And even the Pilgrim
groups from the SSPX Germany, that go from Jerusalem
and Nazareth to Bethlehem, always stay in a hotel on the
other side of the wall – the Israeli side.
If you just see facts and
reality, than we have to say it is hard to attack those authorities that
provide open access to those holy places. This is what I say: just calm down
and judge by facts. We have to see the facts as they are, and we have to see
that there are plenty of people living there. They have police, everything is
organized, and they do not harm the Christians there. And there is also a
rising group of so-called Hebrew Catholics, who are converted Israeli Citizens.
We have none of those in the Islamic countries. I only can warn all those
Christians who are so opposite, or hostile against the Israeli State,
what would happen if that State would disappear. We would have a lot of
problems with our holy places. And what would happen to the Christians in that
country if we had a change on the political landscape? And so I have absolutely
no problem to say that I have a positive attitude towards the state of Israel. The
world is not perfect. It never has been. There are wars always. There is a
state of imperfection. And if we see this, if we see the reality, we can say it
could be much worse. And this should lead us to a more distinguished position
towards the political situation in the Holy Land.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Say what is on your mind, but observe the rules of debate. No foul language is allowed, no matter how anger-evoking the posted article may be.
Thank you,
TruthSeeker