Institute for Historical Review

Institute for Historical Review

IHR miscellaneous files

Arrest Warrant for Dr. Frederick Töben (5/3/99)

(English texts that were translated by the prosecutor into German to support his allegations are given from the Australian original text whenever possible. The marks "(...)" are given as in the German warrant, mostly relating to pictures in the English text. -- The Translator)

Amtsgericht Mannheim

Warrant-No. 42 Gs 1002/99

Office of the Publics Prosecutor Mannheim
Aktenzeichen: 503 Js 9551/99

Mannheim, May 3, 1999

Arrest Warrant

For the accused Dr. Gerald Frederick Töben
born 02.06.1944 at Jadeberg
residing 23 Caloroga Street,
Australian citizen,
Marital Status: divorced,
Occupation: Director of the Adelaide Institute

Pretrial incarceration had been ordered.

He is charged with several independent activities, which should be conceived as one project all together, on the basis of numerous free will decisions:

  • being one of the leading so-called revisionists;
  • having mailed since 1996 from Adelaide/Australia the monthly Adelaide Institute newsletter to recipients within the borders of the German Federal Republic, and issuing the same text on the Internet at his address;
  • in his circulars the defendant claims and maintains frequently, using questionable quotations and references as well as additional Internet links, fully aware that such stands in contradiction of the historical truth, and -- at least in part -- identifying with Nazi measures of prosecution, in a pseudo-scientific fashion motivated by the tendency of relieving Nazism from the disgrace of the mass murder inflicted upon the Jews, seeking to heighten and intensify the perceptions and passions of the readers, denying the Nazi leaderships' responsibility; and
  • declaring extermination is a legend invented by the Jew which now serves the purpose of subjugating the German people, such as presented, for example, on the Internet at his address,

1. In April of that year drawn from his above mentioned address inter alia (p. 19 ff., p. 25 ff.)

About the Adelaide Institute

We are a group of individuals who are looking at the Jewish-Nazi Holocaust, in particular we are investigating the allegation that Germans systematically killed six million Jews, four million alone at the Auschwitz concentration camp. In our investigations we refuse to be intimidated by anyone because we believe that the first step in any murder investigation is to forensically test the alleged murder weapon. In the Auschwitz murder case, certain individuals wish to prevent us from focusing upon such an investigation.

The latest version of how the Germans gassed millions of Jews at Auschwitz is propagated by Professor Deborah Lipstadt of Emory University in the U.S.A. who claims that mortuaries were converted into homicidal gas chambers. Proof of this is apparently found in so-called "conversion plans." We have requested of Professor Lipstadt and of the Holocaust Museum, Washington, to provide us with copies of such conversion plans. We are still waiting for them to provide us with these plans.

In the meantime we have noted the original four million Auschwitz death figure has been reduced by Jean-Claude Pressac to a maximum of 800,000. This in itself is good news because it means that around 3.2 million people never died at Auschwitz -- a cause for celebration.

We are worried about the fact that to date it has been impossible to reconstruct a homicidal gas chamber. Even the Holocaust Museum in Washington informed us that it could not bring one across from Europe because there are none available. This is like a space museum without a rocket or the Vatican without a Crucifix. We are justifiably skeptical about the homicidal gas chamber claims.

We reject outright that a questioning of the alleged homicidal gas chamber story constitutes "hate talk," is "anti-Semitic," "racist" or even "neo-Nazi" activity.

(The warrant does not include the image of Frederick Töben shown in the original at this point -- the translator.)


The director of the Adelaide Institute, Dr Frederick Töben, puts it thus:

"If I offend anybody because I show poor taste in my sometime blunt and honest questioning, then I apologize. However, if I offend because I am politically incorrect by asking uncomfortable questions, then I claim it as my right, under the free speech principle, to say these things."

We at the Adelaide Institute also focus on the Jewish-Bolshevik Holocaust, a matter which Australian author Helen Demidenko-Darville has raised in her book The Hand That Signed The Paper. The controversy generated by this novel still continues.

Adelaide Institute associate, Mr David Brockschmidt, sums up the essence of Demidenko-Darville's 'crime' in writing this book:

"The merit of Helen Demidenko-Darville's novel -- and hidden agenda of the anti-Demidenko affair -- is that she has revealed a basic historical fact, viz, that Lenin's henchman, Trotsky (Bronstein) and Stalin's henchman, Kaganovich, were Jewish mass murderers. This historical fact clearly shows that Jews are not always victims in history, but also murderers. Australia's mass media has failed to publicize this important fact. Why?"

(The warrant does not include the image of David Brockschmidt displaying his parents' medal -- the translator.)


David Brockschmidt displays his parents' medal received from the West German government for saving Jews during World War II. The Brockschmidt family was also honored by the Israeli Government and a tree in their memory has been planted in the Avenue of the Righteous Gentiles, Jerusalem, Israel.

David's father was also instrumental in providing Oskar Schindler with the trucks which transported the Schindler Jews from Poland to Czechoslovakia. Steven Spielberg, who knew the vital role Brockschmidt played in this operation failed to give credit to David's father. Why?

These two historical issues -- the Jewish-Bolshevik Holocaust and the Nazi-Jewish Holocaust -- are worthy subjects for an intellectual enquiry. We are aware of the fact that to venture forth in to such an enquiry can be dangerous. Professor Robert Faurisson (France), Mr David Irving (England), Dr Wilhelm Stäglich, Professor Udo Walendy, Messrs Günter Deckert, Germar Rudolf, Mr Thies Christopherson, Pastor Manfred Junger (Germany), Mr Ditlieb Felderer (Sweden), Mr Hans Schmidt (U.S.A.), and Mr Ernst Zündel (Canada) are people who have suffered physically, mentally and materially as a result of their search for truth in history. The enemies of freedom of speech will use physical and legal violence -- persecution through prosecution -- to stifle debate on these contentious historical issues. There is a tremendous pressure placed on people who dare touch these taboo subjects. All too often the first thing that snaps is the family unit, followed by professional and social ostracism.

So, be warned -- this final intellectual journey is not for the faint-hearted. If you dare to seek the truth, in particular about the alleged homicidal gassings, then you will be smeared, libeled and defamed by those who are intellectual midgets but materialistic giants.

If you are mentally strong enough to seek the truth of the matter, then force an open debate. Don't get side tracked by details and always refocus on the basics. Too many individuals drown in a sea of particulars.

People who claim that during World War II, the Germans gassed millions of Jews are leveling three allegations at the Germans:

1. The Germans planned the construction of huge chemical slaughter houses;

2. The Germans constructed these huge chemical slaughterhouses during the middle of World War II; and

3. The German used these huge slaughterhouses to exterminate millions of Jews.

Any normal person familiar with bureaucratic red tape will now ask: What proof is there to back up these claims? Firstly, where are the plans of this enterprise? Secondly, where is the budget needed to finance the massive enterprise? Finally, it is inconceivable that such a massive undertaking would get past first base without an executive order. To date, we have been led to believe that "a wink and a nudge" began the alleged extermination project.

We at Adelaide Institute believe that those who level the homicidal gassing allegations at the Germans owe it to the world to come up with irrefutable evidence that this happened.

Instead, these defamers and libelers of the Germans use legal means to stifle debate on the topic. They claim that anyone who asks questions is engaging in "hate-talk," is "anti-Semitic" is a "racist," even a "neo-Nazi."

If that doesn't work, then physical violence is used to silence those who want to know the truth.

So, come on board if you have the courage to look for truth. We naturally maintain that should -- after fifty years- proof of the homicidal gassings be forthcoming, we shall gladly publicize this as well. To date, there has been no proof offered to the world. Robert Faurisson sums it up well: "No holes, no Holocaust!"

We are not "Holocaust deniers." We proudly proclaim that to date there is no evidence that millions of people were killed in homicidal gas chambers. That is good news all round. Why would anyone find this offensive? We are celebrating the living who were thought dead. How can this be an offense -- unless it offends those who have their snout in the trough which Jewish academic, Dr Frank Knopfelmacher called, "the Holocaust racket."

If there is to be a mission statement from Adelaide Institute, then it is best summed up in a letter which appeared in The Australian on February 22, 1996. Written by John Buchner of Camden of NSW, nine days before the March 2nd federal election:

Open Season on Germans

Phillip Adams referred in a recent column of Review, January 13-14, 1996, to a number of foreign situations, which are dealt with in a jocular fashion, but he refers to the German people in a contemporary sense as "Nazi swine." Many people from a German background have settled in Australia and made a significant contribution to it, including serving in its armed forces against the Nazi regime. Their memory is vilified by Mr Adams' reference. During my school years here, I endured continual vilification because of my German origins and countless "Hitler Salutes." However, my complaint to you is not motivated by a chip on the shoulder because of these events. Like most Australians, I can take it and abhor the treatment other national groups have received. My concern is that there seems to be a perpetual open season on all Germans, as though all Germans must forever bear the guilt and shame of the Nazi regime. I can bear references to "Nazi Swine," albeit without amusement. But what of my children? Are my children to be forever classed "Nazi Swine" in this country? John Buchner Camden, NSW

Interestingly, a climate of political correctness pervaded the run-up period to the 2nd of March federal elections, with Liberal and National candidates coming in for some sharp rebukes from their Labor colleagues over publicly-made alleged racist statements. For example, there was Bob Katter who lashed out at "enviro-Nazis," "femi-Nazis" and "slant-eyed ideologues." Only the latter statement created an uproar. The "Nazi" word has been used by a number of politicians from all parties because it still has a sting to it. After all, everything done by the Germans prior to and after World War II is eclipsed by what is alleged to have happened at Auschwitz concentration camp. The argument is always "from Mozart, Beethoven and Wagner to the homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz." That's the card pulled out by anyone who is faced with competition from a German-born Australian or Australian of German descent.

It is from this basis that we take it as our right to challenge the taboo topic's veracity -- did the Germans operate homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz? It is too cheap for us to decry our work as that of "hate-mongers," "anti-Semites,""racists" or "neo-Nazis." Let us repeat: we are not deniers of the Jewish-Nazi Holocaust. We affirm that to date there is no proof that millions of people were gassed by Germans in homicidal gas chambers. Dare you join us in this final intellectual adventure of the 20th Century?

2. In April of that year was drawn from his address inter alia the internet-message "Images of Auschwitz" (p. 32 ff., 37a ff.)


Swimming Pool -- for inmates' use. Auschwitz also had a brothel, theater, post office -- even an orchestra. A stupid story is told by some "survivors" how the orchestra would play as the people were whipped into the gas chambers!

Then there was the camp hospital where a Dr Rosensaft saved many Jewish women. Why save lives when this was a death camp? It just doesn't make sense.

(Not included: Töben at the railway track at Auschwitz-Birkenau -- the editor)


Railway track at Auschwitz-Birkenau, laid mid-year 1994. Before that the people had to walk 3 km from the Oswiecim township railway station to Birkenau.

Here at the siding the so-called "selection" was made: to the left into the gas chamber and to the right to slave labor.

None of these assertions have been substantiated by any kind of facts or documentation other than questionable witness statements which often were "the creation of a feverish mind set on getting a pension from the German government."

(Not included: Töben at the entrance of Auschwitz-Birkenau KL -- the editor)


Gates to Auschwitz-Birkenau


Danish Year 10 students visiting Auschwitz I: some were interested but most were not. This particular talkative guide could not answer the question asked of him by the accompanying teacher: "What kinds of experiments did Dr Mengele conduct on the twins?"

Answer: "We don't know because the Germans destroyed all the records."

Like many of the atrocity stories about Auschwitz, a deeper probing finds that there is no factual evidence to support them, and any further questioning is regarded as an anti-Semitic, anti-Jewish, racist, neo-Nazi attack.

(Not included: Images of Krema I)


Door inside the alleged gas chamber -- made of wood. Such construction simply would not work in real life -- only in the minds of those who created the story of the gas chamber.


Hole in the roof of Krema I. It is now admitted that this is all fraudulent work.

From: Auschwitz 1270 To The Present, by Deborah Dwork & Robert Jan van Pelt. W. W. Norton, New York, 1996, pp. 363-4:

There have been additions to the camp the Russians found in 1945 as well as deletions, and the suppression of the prisoner reception site is matched by the reconstruction of crematorium I just outside the northeast perimeter of the present museum camp. With its chimney and its gas chamber, the crematorium functions as the solemn conclusion for tours through the camp. Visitors are not told that the crematorium they see is largely a post-war reconstruction.

When Auschwitz was transformed into a museum after the war, the decision was taken to concentrate the history of the whole complex into one of its component parts. The infamous crematoria where the mass murders had taken place lay in ruins in Birkenau, two miles away. The committee felt that a crematorium was required at the end of the memorial journey, and crematorium I was reconstructed to speak for the history of the incinerators at Birkenau. This program of usurpation was rather detailed. A chimney, the ultimate symbol of Birkenau, was re-created; four hatched openings in the roof, as if for pouring Zyklon B into the gas chamber below, were installed, and two of the three furnaces were rebuilt using original parts. There are no signs to explain these restitutions, they were not marked at the time, and the guides remain silent about it when they take visitors through this building that is presumed by the tourist to be the place where it happened.

Images of Krema II


Hole in roof of Krema II. According to the model of the gas chamber displayed at Auschwitz and at the US Holocaust Memorial Museum, there are supposed to be four square holes in the roof through which SS guards inserted the Zyklon-B gas.

Professor Robert Faurisson's words are so appropriate here: "No Holes, No "Holocaust."


What we found at Krema II is two crudely cut holes which would have had the German responsible for making the holes, shot for shoddy work.

Images of Krema III


Solid pillar of Krema III -- that is all which remains of this crematorium site.

3. In April of that year was drawn from his address inter alia the internet-message "More images of Auschwitz" (p. 64 ff., 73 ff.)

Auschwitz I -- Stammlager


The entrance to Auschwitz-Stammlager (base camp) with its famous inscription: Arbeit macht frei -- work liberates.


The gallows where 50 years to the day (April 16, 1947 of this photograph being taken in 1997), Commandant Rudolf Höss was hanged for a crime he did not commit.


To the left of the gallows, the alleged entrance to the homicidal gas chamber. This was the entrance to the air raid shelter. When the building was fraudulently turned into a 'gas chamber', this entrance should have been removed.


The door to the alleged gas chamber with the obligatory 'peep-hole' in the door through which you can see just another wall.


Inside the alleged gas chamber -- shown to millions of tourists and sold to them as an orginal gas chamber. Now authors Robert Jan van Pelt and Deborah Dwork in the book Auschwitz: From 1270 To The Present (published in 1996) claim that it is a mere 'symbolic' representation of the gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau (quoted below).

(some passages of Töben's essay are not part of the warrant; the omissions are marked ...)

(Not included: Auschwitz II -- Birkenau)


The caved in roof of Krematorium II at Auschwitz-Birkenau, destroyed by the Soviet Army. The story has it that the Germans blew up the building to hide their 'crime' but failed to destroy the architectural plans of the building. Professor Gerald Fleming falsely claims that the plans prove the gas chamber story to be a fact.


Dr. Töben enters the 'gas chamber' through one of the two holes which have been crudely cut into the concrete roof.


The pillars are not 'porous' and the ceiling does not show any of the four holes through which allegedly the Zyklon B gas was thrown.


This plaque replaced the 19 plaques whereon until 1990 it was stated that 4 million persons had been killed at Auschwitz. No one has yet explained how it is possible simply to reduce a death figure from four million to one and half million.


These words were inscribed on the 19 plaques until 1990. Even the Pope blessed this plaque in 1979. The words were removed after Soviet Union President Gorbachev released in 1989 the Auschwitz Death Books which until then, it was thought the Germans had destroyed while evacuating Auschwitz.

Question: On what authority and on what facts is the current death number based? What happened to those who were thought dead (4 million) and are now alive? [4M -- 1.5M = 2.5M].

Deceptive Translation.... The Entlausungskammer (delousing chamber) is translated as gas chamber. Why?


The image on the left is a gas chamber door from an execution chamber in Baltimore in the United States. The image on the right is the alleged gas chamber door from Krema I in Auschwitz. One is a steel door, with secure locking mechanisms and hermitically sealed, while the alleged door from Krema I is similar to a door found in any house.

4. In October 1998 with an open letter Open Letter Mdme. Clapiér-Krespach, Judge at Amtsgericht Bruchsal, sended to many recipients (p. 49ff., 53ff., 56, 59ff.)

(Omissions below done by the editor of this document, as the orignal text is not complete available and the below given version has been truncated in order to avoid persecution by illegal practised censorhip -- editor.)

Dear Judge Clapiér-Krespach

Further to my telephone call to you today concerning your judgment in the Günter Anton Deckert case: la Ds 57 Js 24484/97-67/98, I would like to state the following:

You claim that you cannot say anything about your judgment -- "Ich darf nichts sagen" -- because the case is now going to appeal before the Landgericht Karlsruhe.

This is interesting for me because in another case in Germany, Mr Udo Walendy's case before the Landgericht Bielefeld, Justice Lützenkirchen advised me that he did not have to justify his judgment to anyone. He did, however, say to me that he had been to Auschwitz and had seen the "proof"!

I am now confused about German law and how German judges handle historical matters covered by the term "Holocaust," and I would like to know whether truth is a defense in any legal action before you. I would also like to have this legal issue clarified because next year I intend to visit Germany with the specific purpose of exploring further what Messrs. Deckert and Walendy have raised in their writings.

You say you are not allowed to say anything about your judgment -- and owing to the nature of your judgment, I asked you whether we could generalise about the matter without mentioning the case. You refused to continue the conversation and referred me to a Mr. Kleinheinz of the Landgericht Karlsruhe; Tel.: 721- 9266070. Unfortunately this person is on holiday and so I could not pursue my enquiry any further.

Let me therefore put my concerns to you in writing. It seems to me that your reasoning is faulty because the freedom to think, speak and research the specifics of the so-called Holocaust needs to be exercised in open forum. This is especially so if persons make statements in public about what happened at Auschwitz during 1943-45.

Hence it is only a natural reaction for someone interested in this topic -- Deckert is -- to put questions to those who claim to have been there during the war. In March 1997 a Mr Max Mannheimer, who alleges he survived Auschwitz, gave a talk to a group of students at Realschule der Ursulinen, Landshut. This was reported in the local paper.

Mr. Deckert obtained a copy of this report and from his prison cell in Bruchsal wrote Mr. Mannheimer a letter wherein he asked him quite specific questions about the claims Mannheimer made to the school students at Landshut.

This action of asking Mannheimer questions is supposed to have upset him so that he initiated legal action against Deckert. This in itself is an absurdity. Does Mr. Mannheimer not realize that anyone who makes public statements -- which he alleges are founded on historical facts, on truth -- is liable to be met with challenges, especially on a contentious historical matter such as the allegation that Germans systematically exterminated European Jewry in homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz?

You have now given Mr. Mannheimer comfort -- [to go on telling his lies (passage retranslated by the editor)] -- and Mr. Deckert another three months in prison for having insulted Mr. Mannheimer for asking questions.

This is an outrage because what you are doing is permitting Mr. Mannheimer to tell the most outrageous [lies] about Auschwitz to young impressionable minds, without penalty. And you are penalising Mr Deckert because in your view he should not be asking questions. Do you not realize that this is what makes us human: the power to ask questions, to think and speak freely? Your judgment is destroying Mr Deckert's human qualities. This is a grave inhuman act -- [...]!

Where is the great German intellectual spirit that celebrates: Die Gedanken sind frei?

You are therefore encouraging the telling of lies to a younger generation of Germans. As truth-telling is a moral virtue, I conclude that your judgment is immoral and that you and your colleagues who continue to support those who tell lies about the Auschwitz concentration camp are immoral in your behavior. In view of what is currently happening in the United States of America where the President is a certain liar, do you not think it is time for the German judiciary to become moral again in matters that challenge the current Auschwitz orthodoxy?

I visited Auschwitz in April 1997 and I have from my own research now concluded that the camp never had any [...] [holy instrument of murder -- d. Sl.] operating there during the war years. I also conclude that anyone who claims that [...] [debateds instruments of murder, which witnesses described in a very different manner, so that a multitude of variants would have been working -- d. Sl.] operated there is either ignorant of the facts or is lying.

I would appreciate a response from you on this matter, in particular as regards my proposed trip to Germany next year -- and my discussing these matters with you and your colleagues. I would also appreciate you advising me, in writing, whether truth is a defense in this matter.

For your information I refer you to an article in Der Spiegel, 40/1998, at p.230-33, Die Erfundene Hölle, which details the most recent fraudulent Auschwitz claim made by an alleged Auschwitz survivor in Switzerland. Please consider any further Auschwitz matters before you in this light.


Dr Frederick Töben


5. In January of this year in "Newsletter" No. 86 (p- 63ff.)

Frederick Töben's 1999 New Year Reflections

In this the first month of the penultimate year before the Millennium, we can look back on five year's work and state with certainty: Germans never exterminated European Jewry in homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz concentration camp or elsewhere. Hence all Germans, and those of German descent, can dispense with that imposed guilt complex which has kept them enslaved to an evil mind-set for half a century.

Germans can, again, feel proud of their cultural achievements throughout the ages. A recent book: 1000 Years, 1000 People: Ranking the Men and Women Who Shaped the Millennium, by Barbara and Brent Bowers, Agnes Hooper Gottlieb and Henry Gottlieb, places German inventor of the printing press, Johannes Gutenberg (1394-1468) in first place. Number 20 is Adolf Hitler (1889-1945) who is characterized as the "villain of the millennium." We know, of course, that Stalin was a far greater villain than Hitler ever was! The authors' bias is therefore evident here, in favor of international socialism as opposed to national socialism.

So, although Germans can breathe easy now, they will have to brace themselves for some more German-bashing because the likes of Jeremy Jones from Australia's organised Jewry "cannot change their spots" overnight. They have been on a good wicket with this Auschwitz club, wielding it at anyone who does not agree with their politics so as "to stop them from functioning," to quote Jones.

The claims of the defendant, as well as the literature promoted and sold by him, are suited to promote a hostile attitude against Jews generally and foremost those residing in the German Federal Republic. Furthermore, they are inclined to undermine among the assailed Jewish portion of the Therefore he did in several independent activities, which should be conceived as one project all together:

a) In a fashion suitable to disturb the public peace;

1. incited hatred against a portion of the population;

2. assailed the dignity of others by insulting a portion of the population;

b) denied the truth of a factual occurrence perpetrated under the National Socialist regime, as designed in section 220 a Abs.1 code penal, in a manner to disturb the public peace;

c) insulted others; as well as

d) maligned the memory of the dead.

Such deeds are offensive and punishable according to sections 130 Abs. 1 and 3, 185, 199, 194, 52, 53, 9 Abs. 1 STGB.

The imminent circumstances surrounding the case are the result of extensive investigations, the secured proof material and Internet research.

There exists as reason for the imprisonment, the high risk of escape:

The defendant is facing a sentence of prolonged imprisonment. In this country he has neither a permanent residence nor family ties. There exists the acute danger that he will attempt to evade a trial by a court of justice by escaping to his homeland Australia.


Judge of the District Court

Zeitschrift fuer Kultur, Geschichte und Politik, Sleipnir im Verlag der Freunde, Andreas Roehler (V.i.S.d.P.), Postfach 350264, 10211 Berlin, Tel./Fax: (49/0/30) -- 42857835 und -- 6927863 e-mail:; Kto. Nr. 7439540 bei der Comdirect-Bank Quickborn, BLZ 200 411 11.

We ask for your assistance to continue our work.