The Greek Justice (?)
Posted by Abravanel, the Blog στο 10/11/2007
Books questioning the Shoah or downright racist are free to circulate and enjoy a high popularity even in mainstream bookshops. This includes books that are proven literary forgeries like the infamous «The Protocols of the Elders of Zion» that do not only circulate freely but are fiercely defended by the totality of the greek publishers and society.
So when well known nazi-admirer and TV figure Mr.Plevris published a book called «Jews, the whole truth» where he openly expressed his admiration for Hitler there was no shock. But what really distinguished him was not only his questioning of the Shoah but his open support for the extermination of the jews which, as far as he was concerned, it should have been more effective. Or else to put it in his own words:
«unfortunately the Nazis chose to move the Jews away from Europe, when in my opinion, they should have killed them, because this is the behavior towards those who desire world domination.»
P. 742: ‘That’s what Jews want. It’s the only thing they understand: an execution squad within 24 hours’
P. 269: ‘Every Greek, every person who is aware of the subversion carried out by Jewish Zionism, should act on his own as an individual and mobilize himself against Jews. Initially he needs to do the following:…
…Wherever intervention by Jews is noted he should foil it by denouncing it and then take whatever action is necessary.
P. 778: ‘The only way Jews can find salvation is for them to stop dreaming of ruling the world… Otherwise their annihilation will be complete and for all. At most a few thousand will remain and they will snip their little willies and wait for their Jehovah’.
P. 852: ‘Hitler was blamed for something that did not actually take place. Later the history of humanity will blame him for not ridding Europe of the Jews, though he could have… My dear Jews, I do not ask you to suffer all the things that your holy books tell you that we should suffer from you… You are criminals because that is what your religion has taught you to be. You are murderers because crime is instilled in you from an early age. Therefore we others have the right to deal with you. And that is what we will do’.
Phrases like this forced a group of greek christians and greek jews to file a complaint against him for advocating racist violence. A law suit which was accepted as legitimate by an Athens Appeals Judicial Council because “The appellant’s argument that his writings are an expression of opinion is unfounded because in fact he is inciting the readership, especially the Greek one, to mobilize against Jews (that is to hate, discriminate against, or use violence against them), whom the appellant characterizes indiscriminately as subhuman, deserving extinction, enemies of the Greek people and of Europe in general, praising at the same time the Nazis and SS’s criminal actions against the Jews.”
One thing that Greek Jewry and the Human Rights Organizations did not certainly expect was how the trial turned into a true farce. A court openly anti-jewish which was not only sympathetic to the defendant but downright hostile towards the witnesses for the prosecution. A court which rejected all greek jewish witnesses as not having legal interest in the case, as if it concerned some uncertain entity and not people in blood and flesh! A court who’s Prosecutor was so favorable to Plevris that he arrived to declare as «scientific work» his book! Even when this scandal came to light through a newspaper article, a complete silence roared deafeningly since no political party, public figure or academic rose to protest agaist the state of the Greek Justice.
What follows is the english translation of the bulletin by the Greek Helsinki Monitor, a greek NGO for human rights, which was actively involved in the law suit. Among else it includes selected excerpts from the trial which document the prejudice of the judges who arrived to defend themselves the defendant instead of letting his lawyers!
Link to the AntiNazi Initiative which covers broadly the trial: http://www.antinazi.gr/ (english and greek)
Link to Greek Helsinki Monitor: http://cm.greekhelsinki.gr/
In particular: Greece: Trial of Kostas Plevris and “Eleftheros Kosmos” for anti-Semitism on 5 September
Greece: On an anti-Jewish trial in Athens (commemoration of Kristallnacht) (english)
Also in greek one can read more extensive reports by GHM:
Δίκη Πλεύρη – Ελεύθερου Κόσμου για αντισημιτισμό στις 5-9 – Εκπρόσωπος ΛΑΟΣ στηρίζει Πλεύρη
Ενημέρωση και ανασκευή ανακριβειών για δίκη Πλεύρη – «Ελεύθερου Κόσμου» για αντισημιτισμό στις 5-9
Τρεις δίκες ακροδεξιού «Ελεύθερου Κόσμου» για αντισημιτικά και αντι-τσιγγάνικα κείμενα
Ψέματα Άδωνι Γεωργιάδη για βιβλίο Κώστα Πλεύρη και αντισημιτισμό
69η Ημέρα Μνήμης της «Νύχτας Κρυστάλλων» και αντιεβραϊκή δίκη στην Αθήνα
Link to DeviousDiva who hosted an article on the International Day Against Fascism and Anti-Semitism and also hosts the bulletin by the GHM: http://deviousdiva.com/2007/11/09/remember
Link to touki8eblom‘s blog’s who at the bottom of the page has a cartoon which depicts my view perfectly: http://tuki8eblom.blogspot.com
It is noteworthy, though it hardly appears surprising, the fact that the populist, antisemitic party of LAOS appeared closely linked to this book. LAOS deputy Adonis Georgiadis openly praised the book in various TV shows while the son of Plevris was also elected as a deputy for the LAOS party, though later LAOS tried to disassociate itself from the «dangerous» Plevris. For the record the team of liberal journalists of IOS Press have dealt extensively with both Plevris book and it’s links to LAOS; for more info try clicking (in greek):
Ο Αδωνις Γεωργιάδης και το βιβλίο του Πλεύρη
Το κρυφτούλι του κ. Καρατζαφέρη
Ο ΛΑΟΣ και ο ναζισμός του κ. Πλεύρη
UPDATE: Link to Jungle-Report, a greek-language blog posting about this: http://jungle-report.blogspot.com/2007/11/blog-post_09.html
More…
The Greek Helsinki Monitor (GHM), on the occasion of tomorrow’s International Day Against Fascism and Anti-Semitism in commemoration of Kristallnacht (9 November 1938), notes “the unprecedented for Greek justice anti-Jewish climate that prevailed in the [11 September 2007] trial of the self-proclaimed anti-Semite Kostas Plevris, author of the racist book ‘The Jews: The whole Truth’ (1,400 pages), mainly because of the attitude of the prosecutor, who did not think twice before calling the neo-Nazi book ‘scholarly work.’ In the anti-Jewish climate prevailing at the trial, there was an indirect contribution of the presiding judge of the court, who was apologetic towards the defendant for the delay in the trial procedure and in consequence in the issuing of the verdict! The prosecutor was also disdainful towards the first prosecution witness [Anna Stai, President of the Anti-Nazi Initiative], whose arguments he tried to refute himself rather than letting the defendant’s lawyers do that!”
These are comments of the President of the Central Board of Jewish Communities in Greece (KIS) Moses Konstantinis, in the September 2007 issue of the KIS newsletter “Ta Nea mas” (“Our news”), translated in English by GHM. GHM appends characteristic excerpts from that trial, which document the comments of the KIS President. It is reminded that defendants Kostas Plevris and “Eleftheros Kosmos” (a neo-Nazi weekly) were referred to trial on the basis of the indictment by Deputy Athens Appeals Prosecutor Spyridon Mouzakitis (available at the webpage http://cm.greekhelsinki.gr/index.php?sec=194&cid=3176), confirmed by an Athens Appeals Judicial Council, when it rejected (decision 1817/2007) K. Plevris’ appeal against the indictment: “The appellant’s argument that his writings are an expression of opinion is unfounded because in fact he is inciting the readership, especially the Greek one, to mobilize against Jews (that is to hate, discriminate against, or use violence against them), whom the appellant characterizes indiscriminately as subhuman, deserving extinction, enemies of the Greek people and of Europe in general, praising at the same time the Nazis and SS’s criminal actions against the Jews.”
GHM notes that, even after the publication of documented articles about what was said in that trial, on 12 September 2007, in the large circulation dailies “Ta Nea” (“Racism is ‘scholarly work!’ Uproar with the prosecutor’s attitude towards K. Plevris’ book on the Jews” at http://www.tanea.gr/article.aspx?d=20070912&nid=5962628) and “Eleftherotypia” (“Plevris on the carpet” at http://www.enet.gr/online/online_print?id=42961328), there was not a single institution –political, scholarly, legal, journalistic, human rights, or other- that even whispered a condemnation of the anti-Jewish attitude of these judicial officials.
It was thus proved once again that tolerance of anti-Semitism (and of other forms of racism) is widespread in Greece. It was also proved that the various “anti-racist activists” act only within “limits.” These limits almost always do not include fighting racism against the Jews (and against ethnic and national minorities). This is why, within the EU, Greece and Greek society enjoys indeed a unique position (of discord)…
Prosecutor Leonidas Lazarakos:
There is Plevris, there are also A, B, C, X, Y, Z, who have opposing opinions, sister! And they want to express them. So, will we reach the level of those ludicrous decisions taken in foreign courts to accuse and condemn historians, who have denied the Holocaust? They deny it! That’s their right! So, let the others, the historians come out and say “gentlemen you are wrong. You are frauds of science. What you say isn’t true. And that the Holocaust did happen for this, that or the other reason. Here is the evidence. Here are our sources. Mr. Plevris cites a bibliography. He has quoted from bibliography. By this I mean to conclude that his work is of a scholarly nature. The entire spirit of your testimony, which concerns me, is that you deny the scholarly nature of his work. (…)
Prosecutor: We have said many times that democracy is a very good political system but it has an inherent weakness. It permits everyone to express his opinions. Therefore, the fascist and the national socialist also have the right to express their opinions. Right? (…)
Prosecutor: Whether Hitler did good or evil, global humanity, global humanity has said he did evil. Mr. Plevris has the right to say that he did good. Why should we deprive him of that? (…)
Prosecutor: The Jews…the Jews, has anyone condemned them and persecuted them for their ideas? If Hitler did do that, everyone has condemned him. As global humanity. When Jews say “we are the chosen people on earth” has anyone filed a complaint against them? (…)Prosecutor: These two things emerge as conclusions. Because you are not evaluating his work in a scholarly manner. This is what concerns us here. Plevris is a scholar! Whether we like Plevris as a scholar… this is a question of criticism, it’s not a question of tossing him in the dungeon. (…)
Prosecutor: But [Plevris’ book] is a scholarly manual. (…)Prosecutor: Do you, as an anti-Nazi, have the right to write a book against the Nazis?
Witness Anna Stai (President of the “Anti-Nazi Initiative”): I have an obligation to write a book against the Nazis.Prosecutor: Fine. Fine. In your opinion, you have an obligation. And Plevris, in his opinion, has the obligation to write what he wants. Now, would you want a Nazi court to try you and convict you? Or a Nazi state? (…)
Prosecutor: Look here madam. Let me explain something to you: The court is tolerating you. I, myself, cannot tolerate you! If you continue in this fashion I will order your arrest and detention! (…)
Presiding Judge of the Three-Member Appeals Court Efrosyni Tselehovitou: Well, let me tell you something. In your effort here to support your positions, you or others, I don’t know who, try not to be picturesque. Is it an expression “Hitler is his boss”? “Which Hitler”? Is there a Hitler so you can call him “boss”? (…)Presiding Judge: No madam! The books are not on trial!
Stai: Those “ideas” are on trial…
Presiding Judge: Nor are ideas on trial! (…)
Presiding Judge: Madam, let me ask you something. This is irrelevant to these proceedings. Is the need such here that you have to have an anti-Nazi organization? (…)Kostas Plevris: Yes. And a question. Do you approve that [the Jews] gave an image to the Ministry of Culture, this one here [approaches Stai and shows her an illustration in his book] with Christ deformed (…) what page is it, what page is it?
Prosecutor: Which page is that on? Which page?
Kostas Plevris: page 194. Look here! The Jews gave it! The Jews gave a painting…
Presiding Judge: Don’t give me a speech. Ask a question.
Kostas Plevris: Did you know that the Jews gave a painting to the Ministry of Culture, which depicts a Jewish penis with a circumcision ejaculating on the Cross? I have it in here. Do you want to see it? Do you approve of that?Prosecutor: Which page did you say that was on?
Kostas Plevris: The Jews gave it [to them] and got 175 million. Here you are, Mr. Prosecutor! Here it is!
Prosecutor: 194? Tell me what page! I’ll find it, I’ll find it.
Kostas Plevris: And did [Archbishop] Christodoulos protest? And didn’t they insult him?
Prosecutor: Well!…What would they have done? Wouldn’t they have insulted him?
GHM note: The painting in question “Asperges Me”, by Belgian (non-Jewish) artist Thierry de Cordier, was exhibited in the International Art Exhibition OUTLOOK, an event of the Cultural Olympiad (an initiative of the Ministry of Culture) for the Olympic Games of Athens 2004, curated by Christos Joachimides (also non-Jewish). Six weeks into the exhibition, a supporter of the extreme right LAOS party happened to see the painting and informed George Karatzaferis, the party leader, who in turn demanded the painting be removed from the exhibition. Former conservative party New Democracy leader Miltiadis Evert also asked for the removal. Minister of Culture Evangelos Venizelos and the board of the Cultural Olympiad asked that the painting be taken down. Exhibition curator Christos M. Joachimides complied with the request and removed the work on 10 December 2003. The story is actually mentioned in page 157 of the first edition of the book
Presiding Judge: Can you tell me, can this book…
Irene Koutelou (Member of the Anti-Nazi Initiative): About violence. Let me tell you something about violence. You can also “rid” your life of the Jew by burning him, say. You can bust up his shop, like what happened on Kristallnacht under Hitler.
Presiding Judge: Look here. You’re drawing parallels that are to the say the least… silly.
Koutelou: We aren’t drawing the parallels. It’s not us who are doing that.
Presiding Judge: You’re saying Kristallnacht with Plevris.
Koutelou: Yes, Kristallnacht, which he approves of. Mr. Plevris approves of it. (…)
Prosecutor: Because he’s a little heated in his writing?
Koutelou: You can’t be “a little heated” in your writing when you say that “unfortunately the Nazis chose to move the Jews away from Europe, when in my opinion, they should have killed them, because this is the behavior towards those who desire world domination.” This, in my opinion, is not being “heated”. Just as you are not being “heated” when you say that supposedly they went to the ovens and supposedly then went to the gas chambers…
Prosecutor: Why not? He is questioning these events! Isn’t that his right?Koutelou: It is not his right to question these events…
Prosecutor: Why not?? Why not???
Koutelou: Because the Holocaust is recognized by all of humanity and of the basis of this recognition of the Holocaust…
Prosecutor: Madam, one moment! One moment! Here we have a misunderstanding.
Koutelou: … by the Greek state, this law was enacted on the basis of which [Plevris] is being tried.Prosecutor: The law against racial discrimination was enacted for the Jews and their Holocaust??? Are you speaking seriously????
Koutelou: Certainly. Yes, yes. It was enacted on the basis of the Convention…
Prosecutor: Are you speaking seriously???
Koutelou: Certainly.
Prosecutor: Are you speaking seriously????
Koutelou: It was one of the reasons why it was enacted.
Prosecutor: What are you talking about madam??? What are you talking about???
Koutelou: Certainly! Certainly! (…)
Prosecutor: Why? Was there any danger? What I want to make you understand is that there was no danger to Jews in Greece, and for this reason it was not possible for this law to have been enacted for the Jews and the Holocaust.Koutelou: But there was…
Prosecutor: In 1979 everyone was unsuspecting about the Holocaust. Now, in the past 2 years, there have been some…things in Europe and, in France and Germany, there have been some court convictions, on the basis of some laws of questionable constitutionality. And there have been…
Koutelou: So it doesn’t happen again [meaning the Holocaust]. So it doesn’t happen
again.Prosecutor: …appeals to the European Court and we’ll see what the European Court will say.
Koutelou: So it doesn’t happen again. When it does happen again, the law will be meaningless.
Prosecutor: Listen, madam. So it doesn’t happen again… Oh! Meaning this is the mentality of Nasreddin Hoca. Right? So you don’t break the vase – Hoca says to his son – I’ll beat you in advance so you’ll be careful!
Koutelou: No, that’s not it at all! It’s nothing like that!Prosecutor: This is what you’re saying to me.
Koutelou: When you condone a crime, when you say that the Holocaust didn’t happen and you say that to….
Prosecutor: He is not condoning a crime here!!Koutelou: He is condoning it because he says, “it should have happened! It didn’t happen but it should have.”
Prosecutor: Listen. Let’s start from what you’re saying: He is denying the Holocaust. It’s his right to deny it. Some other historian will come along and take him on in a scholarly way. He’ll say, “Sir, you are wrong for this and that reason.”
Koutelou: Throughout Europe the right to deny the Holocaust is being denied because…Prosecutor: What did you say??? It’s being denied???? Are you speaking seriously madam???
Prosecutor: Madam, if you want to know, the objective of Law 927/79 was to protect the Gypsies, who had suffered from what you are talking about. They weren’t allowed into shops; they weren’t issued boat tickets; or allowed on ships; they weren’t allowed in cafés; shopkeepers refused to sell them jackets, trousers, shirts; for these reasons, if you want to look more deeply into the matter…
Prosecutor: Here, all sorts of perverts and junkies are running around, and all the muddleheaded intellectuals and progressives come out saying: “Oh! The right to diversity. Oh!! The right to [free] expression.” And everyone says: Fine and well!
Abravanel, the Blog 
Remember at THIS IS NOT MY COUNTRY said
[…] UPDATE: Please also check out the more detailed post from Abravanel […]
antinazi initiative said
ANNOUNCEMENT / CALL BY THE ANTI-NAZI INITIATIVE
SO THAT ATHENS 2007 WILL NOT BE MADE INTO ANOTHER BERLIN OF 1933
Everybody to the Athens Appeals Court on 3rd December
SO THAT THE PRO-NAZI JUDICIAL EXCESSES OF 11TH SEPTEMBER ARE NOT REPEATED
So that Plevris, the precursor of genocide, is not acquitted
Anti-Nazi Initiative calls upon all democratic people to raise the alarm, come to court and support the democratically-minded witnesses and counsel for the plaintiffs in the trial against the Nazi K Plevris and the newspaper “Eleftheros Kosmos”, which began on 11th September and was adjourned to be reconvened on 3rd December (for more information on the indictment against K. Plevris for his anti-Semitic book “Jews, the whole truth” refer to http://www.antinazi.gr/english/frameup.htm)
Anti-fascist friends, this is no ordinary trial. It is not a trial in which a small minority group of Nazi racists are denounced by democratically-minded people and punished by the authorities in some European country. It is not just a case of one extoller of the virtues of the Third Reich producing a repulsive 1,400-page-long book calling upon people to rid our country of Jews, and it is not just about the fact that the Jews of this country together with non-Jewish anti-fascists take this person to court for extraordinary and blatant violation of international laws against racial prejudice. It is not about pursuing advocates of racial violence from the fringes of society so distasteful to some theoretical defenders of “freedom of speech”.
No. This trial is a matter of life and death in respect of political democracy in our country. September 11th showed that the country we live in does not practise even rudimentary democracy. September 11th 2007 will go down in the judicial and political history of this country and the whole of Europe as the day when, 60 years after World War II, a court in a European country acted in defence of Nazis and racists, turning against their victims and those who defended them.
At the outset the court made sure it removed the counsel representing the Central Board of Jewish Communities in Greece (KIS) and the Jewish woman Gilbert who is a member of Greek Helsinki Monitor from the proceedings on the “grounds” that the book did not affect the plaintiffs (i.e. the Jews) directly and that it is up to the state to defend anyone who may have been wronged by the book. This having been done, the witnesses for the plaintiffs were left without any support in the face of the unbelievable procedure that followed, which seemed more like a trial in Hitler’s Germany of 1936 than one in a European country in 2007. As there was no one to defend the witnesses for the plaintiffs, the court launched into an infringement of their rights. In other words it constantly interrupted them, commented sarcastically about their being quaint or uneducated, did not concern itself at all with what was stated in the charges and forbade the witnesses to mention the laws against racial discrimination. In this way, it was like the witnesses for the plaintiffs were being accused right from the outset. It was the intention of the court to make the witnesses for the plaintiffs be regarded either as opponents of free speech (this coming from the public prosecutor) or quaint folk making a lot of fuss about a non-existent threat of racial discrimination (this coming from the presiding judge). The protagonist and “shining star” of this onslaught was Public Prosecutor Lazarakos whose rich verbal assault included declaring his stance that Mr Plevris’ Nazi monstrosity was a piece of “scientific writing” and that the author was a “qualified historian and a scientist”. As one of the witnesses for the plaintiffs fervently and vociferously refused to accept this definition of the author, the public prosecutor even reached the point of threatening to have her arrested and put in a cell.
This all took place amid applause, loud laughter and interruptions from the Nazis gathered in the courtroom.
What follows is taken from statements made in court:
– The Public Prosecutor started questioning Anna Stai of Antinazi Initiative and the first witness for the plaintiffs (it lasted an hour and a half). He began: “Let’s start with this question so that we can assess the validity of your testimony. What is your educational background?” The following exchange took place later with Irene Koutelou, the second witness for the plaintiffs who is also from Anti-Nazi Initiative:
Public Prosecutor: “So, you are qualified in law. Very good. Let me ask then what an offence of endangerment is. Never mind now. We might take it up later”.
Judge (sarcastically): “When she takes her examinations”.
Koutelou: “I have already passed my examinations. I am a practising lawyer”.
– The Public Prosecutor persistently referred to the anti-fascists’ attempt to “silence” the Nazi Plevris and when Mrs Stai refused to recognise Mr Plevris’ book as “a scientific treatise” he said:
«What I am trying to establish is that his (Mr Plevris’) work is a piece of scientific writing. The whole spirit of your statement is a refusal to accept that his work is of a scientific nature. Do you recognise a scientific nature and scientific terminology in Mr Plevris’ book?»
Witness: “Of course not! …That would be too much”.
Slightly later, when the witness said: «I did not come here to evaluate a scientific treatise,” the Public Prosecutor retorted:
«But it is a scientific treatise!”
And elsewhere:
Public Prosecutor: “Mr Plevris is a scientist!! Whether or not we like him as a scientist is a question of our own critical powers, it does not mean we should throw him into the dungeon”.
– The witness is adamant in not accepting Mr Plevris as a scientist. In defence of the Nazi’s right to deny that the Holocaust and genocide of the Jews ever took place, the Public Prosecutor said:
Public Prosecutor: “There has been discussion of history in this country recently, sparked by the publication of a book. Is that not so? The experts, one faction of the experts, that is, say that history repeats itself – that historical record renews itself. So you see that the science of history is at present in a state of uncertainty”.
At another point, when the witness says the Nazi is not expressing “opinions”, but blatantly inciting racial violence when he writes: «Jews should be executed within 24 hours because that is the only thing they understand”, the Public Prosecutor threatens with: “Look here madam. Let me explain something to you. This court is indulging you. But I can’t tolerate you! If you carry on like this, I will have you arrested and looked up in a cell!”
– At one point Public Prosecutor Mr Lazarakos overstepped the boundaries and even spoke about Nazi justice, in effect threatening the witness with it:
Public Prosecutor: “As an anti-Nazi, do you have the right to write a book against the Nazis?”
Witness: “I have an obligation to write a book against the Nazis”.
Public Prosecutor: “Excellent. Excellent. In your opinion you have an obligation to do so. And Mr Plevris believes that he is under an obligation to write the things that he wants to write. Now. Would you like to be tried and condemned by a Nazi court or a Nazi state?”
In an attempt to bring him under control but also to excuse him, the judge says:
Judge: “Oh, no! Let’s not go to such extremes”.
Witness (in surprise): “Can this possibly be happening!” …………..
– At another point, when the witness refers to a specific excerpt from the book, in which Mr Plevris openly says that all those who do not teach theoretical anti-Semitism of nazi type in schools are infidels and traitors and should be hanged, the Public Prosecutor interrupts with:
Public Prosecutor: “Nowadays schools teach that there was overcrowding in Smyrni”*.
– Later, when the witness draws attention to the fact that Nazism itself constitutes a call to racial violence and that Mr Plevris says in his book “I will not tolerate people who tell lies about my wonderful national socialists,” and also that, «The fall of Nazism is the fall of Europe and the white race,” the Public Prosecutor replies:
Public Prosecutor: “Has anybody condemned the Jews and persecuted them for their beliefs? IF (???) Hitler did, everyone condemned him; the whole of humanity, en masse. When the Jews say they are the chosen people on earth, does anyone prosecute them?”
– The witness accuses the Nazi author of wanting the annihilation of the Jews purely and simply because they exist. This exchange follows:
Mrs Stai: » …Exactly as Hitler did».
Public Prosecutor (cutting her short): “Leave Hitler alone!!”
Mrs Stai: “Yes, «What! Leave Hitler alone». This is Hitler writing in here (meaning the book).
Public Prosecutor (cutting her short): “Leave Hitler alone!”
– The witness asked that a video tape showing a meeting of Nazis at the Hotel “President” with Mr Plevris speaking in favour of annihilating all Jews and the audience, readers of the book, shouting “to the gallows” and applauding enthusiastically, be accepted as evidence. The Public Prosecutor answered: «No, you will not deposit this tape Mrs Stai”. Later on the witness made the same request of the presiding judge, hoping to show that Mr Plevris already had followers, and added that at the Hotel “President” Mr Plevris himself said: “I did not say that all Jews should die. It is another issue if I have thought so ”. The presiding judge interrupted her saying: “What’s that got to do with us now?”
– The presiding judge was sarcastic towards the witness and said: «Let me tell you something. When you are trying to support positions here… try to avoid too descriptive language.»
The witness mentions another excerpt from the book:
Mrs Stai: (Mr Plevris writes): “They are doing the right thing in keeping Auschwitz in good condition.”
Presiding Judge: “So that people can visit it”.
Mrs Stai: “No, no, of course not! «Because (Mr Plevris writes) no one knows what the future will bring”.
Presiding Judge (sarcastically): “So why don’t we just build another? It’ can’t be that difficult”.
– While the second witness for the plaintiffs, Mrs Irene Koutelou, who is also a member of Anti-Nazi Initiative, was giving evidence she pointed out that the Nazi author deliberately preached hatred and violence and the Public Prosecutor asked: “But where do you see this intention?»
Witness: “The intention is evident in his writing”.
Public Prosecutor: “Because he is a bit eager in his use of his pen?”
– At another point the witness said that the Holocaust was one of the reasons why the Greek government established the law against racial discrimination.
Public Prosecutor: “So the law against racial discrimination was established by the Jews and their Holocaust?”
Public Prosecutor: “Are you serious? What are you talking about, madam? What are you talking about? …Now though the Germans may have feelings of guilt and condemn those who dispute the Holocaust, it is not so in Greece.» And shortly after this he says:
Public Prosecutor: “In 1979 nobody suspected anything about the Holocaust. Now in these last two years some things have been going on in Europe and in France and Germany there have been some cases of courts convicting people on the basis of constitutionally dubious laws”. The witness continues and tells him that the laws against non-recognition of the Holocaust were made because we do not want this sort of thing to be repeated and the Public Prosecutor then says: “Listen here, madam. So that “this sort of thing is not repeated”? … That is the mentality of Nasredin Hodja. Right? “So that you don’t break the jug” Hodja says to his son, “I’ll beat you in advance and then you’ll be more careful!”. Then the Public Prosecutor starts an incredibly fervent defence of the Nazi’s right to “speak his mind” and adds:
«Here you see all sorts of perverts and drug addicts around, and along come all the woolly-minded intelligentsia and the liberals and they say: “Oh! What about the right to diversity? Oh! What about the right to freedom of speech?” And we all say: “That’s nice and rosy!»
Towards the end of this witness’s giving evidence the Public Prosecutor defended Mr Plevris, saying:
Public Prosecutor: “Madam, I shall read you something he (Mr Plevris) says. What do you have to say about this? At this point he says: «Again and again I must stress that I do not set myself against the Jews as individuals or as a people, a race or nation. But against their religion. Because it teaches that the Jews made a covenant with their God, Jehovah, under which they would worship him and he would ensure that they would govern all nations of the world.” And if anybody is racist, it is the people who write this into their religion”. The Nazis in the courtroom applaud him enthusiastically at this and Irene Koutelou answers: «Mr Plevris writes that precisely so that he can use it as camouflage, in exactly the same way as you have just used it».
This atmosphere that prevailed in the Athens Appeals Court on 11th September did not come about as the result of pure coincidence in the composition of the court. It is no coincidence that not only did the political parties not make a political issue of the case, but they did everything in their power to keep it out of the press and also out of their own parties’ printed matter and electronic means of communication. Neither it is coincidence that all political factions, mobilizing or non-mobilizing, with few exceptions, studiously discouraged members of their parties from attending the trial and thereby lending their support, if only by their presence, against the “uniformed” Nazi audience in the courtroom. It was not by coincidence that parties and political undercurrents took this stance when the defendants at the trial (Mr K Plevris), witnesses for the defence (Mr Naxakis), defending counsel (Mr Th Plevris) and others who defended the book (Mr A Georgiades, who has called it his favourite book) have been candidates in the past and were also standing in the recent national elections as candidates for the LAOS party that was trying to gain marginal representation in the Parliament. (Mr Georgiades and Mr Th Plevris have been elected members of parliament). Even if they had any delusions about the nature of this trial before it began, they knew what happened after the trial because some large circulation newspapers at least wrote about the parody of 11th September. Yet all parties still kept quiet about it until 16th September, the date of the elections. They were therefore knowing accomplices in preventing the people of Greece from finding out what LAOS party really is, so many people who are politically unaware, conservative or desperate, voted for this party, helping it to get into Parliament and even putting the Nazi defenders of the book in the House. This is only possible because the country is sinking deeper and deeper into the darkest and most absurd form of chauvinism with every day that passes.
Anti-Nazi Initiative calls upon all democratically-minded people to smash this political protectionism of Nazis, who are already brazen enough to physically assault immigrants and speak as if they are the up and coming political power. In particular it calls upon them to stamp out the groundless, liberal or anarchic argument that it is wrong to impose any sort of restrictions on anyone for holding any beliefs whatsoever or that genuine social revolutionaries cannot form alliances with restrictive bourgeois repressive mechanisms against anyone. The call for the annihilation of a people whose only “crime” is that they were born as members of a certain race or nationality does not anymore constitute an opinion. It is the first step towards an act of mass savage murder and could only be punished after it had plunged humanity into the first mass international and «scientific» experience of its kind in the guise of Hitlerism in World War II. Not all calls for violence are punished under international laws against racial discrimination, ONLY calls for RACIAL violence. Punishment for violence of this sort was not enforced by the bourgeois state due to an initiative of bourgeois class, but because such was the position, the will and the demand of the prospective victims of the savagery, and of all peoples in the world who know that each time the «guilty and demonic people” becomes target, their turn comes next.
That is why every democratically-minded person should be at the trial on 3rd December and should mobilise himself in anticipation of it to denounce Nazis and those who protect them. No one should be under any delusions. When on 11th September the Greek political establishment allowed the court to remove the counsel for the plaintiff from the court and allowed Public Prosecutor Mr Lazarakos to sing the praises of Mr Plevris, it was not for bringing in a guilty verdict against him eventually. The first act in particular was done so that it could be regarded as “ground gained” when the case comes to court on 3rd December, without holding the composition of the new court liable, but only that of the 11th September court. All this took place to prevent the conviction of Mr Plevris. The establishment does not want Mr Plevris to be found guilty of a criminal offence so that LAOS is not politically condemned with him. It does not want LAOS party to be condemned politically because this mostly overt, very well promoted pro-Nazi monster within the EU has now become an integral part of the core political establishment in Greece. We must not let it get another booster shot on 3rd December. In general terms, we must not let the most sickly form of chauvinism, anti-Semitism and the huge new social fears that poison the people become a strong and massive undercurrent. They are already large in numbers but still restrained. Let us not allow them to acquire moral and political legitimacy.
Note: Anti-Nazi Initiative has gathered data from this trial and has recorded the greater part of the proceedings in a text which you will find here: http://www.antinazi.gr/articles/prakt_dik.doc Unfortunately it is only in the Greek Language. The part concerning the removal of the counsel for the plaintiffs from the court is missing, but every effort is being made to acquire it as soon as possible.
Athens, 26th October 2007
* About the reference to history of Smyrni (Greek word for the city Izmir in Turkey). The public prosecutor refers scornfully to a new history book written for last class of elementary school, where the war conflict between Greece and Turkey of 1919-1922 is being described in moderate spirit in an attempt to avoid cultivating anti-Turkish sentiment. During that conflict the part of the city where Greek population resided was set to fire and there were thousands of refugees forced to flee by sea. To describe this event the authors used the phrase “the seaside of Izmir was overcrowded”. The book was publicly burnt by members of nazi “Golden Dawn” and after a strong general nationalistic outcry has been withdrawn.
ANTINAZI INITIATIVE – 35 CHALKOKONDYLI STR, ATHENS, GR 10432, TEL-FAX 0030 2105232553, e-mail: info@antinazi.gr, http://www.antinazi.gr
mugworticus said
«Prosecutor: Look here madam. Let me explain something to you: The court is tolerating you. I, myself, cannot tolerate you! If you continue in this fashion I will order your arrest and detention! (…)»
Priceless!
abravanel said
Indeed though I doubt many more will understand how innately insane is this situation. :)
THIS IS NOT MY COUNTRY » » Remember said
[…] UPDATE: Please also check out the more detailed post from Abravanel […]
Ενα συγνώμη στον Αδωνη τον Γεωργιάδη, η Αριστερά με έκανε να δω το φως « Abravanel, the Blog said
[…] τώρα υπήρξα σκληρός με τον Αδωνη τον Γεωργιάδη. Το 2007 έγραφα οτι υπήρξε τηλεπωλητής και ευαγγελιστής ενός […]