by Robert Frenz

Just when I thought that the body was reasonably cremated, I get new criticisms concerning my criticisms of the parasitic witch who uses the name Ingrid Rimland (what's REALLY on her birth certificate anyway?). This woman has no regard for the truth of anything and many argue that she doesn't know fact from fiction. Be that as it may, I am mainly denounced for (1) having personal envy and (2) trying to destroy some imaginative pie-in-the-sky right-wing "movement". More than one has mentioned that she "does some good" in spite of her long record of lying, evasiveness and violating even the sanctity of marriage. Others claim that I do not like this woman because I am convinced she is a jewess. Let me say this: I wouldn't associate with this protoplasmic pig sty even if she were some voluptuous blonde beauty from Iceland. I simply cannot abide parasites and liars, and associating with them brings to mind "birds of a feather."

I am fully aware that Rimland's books are mainly out of print and that most people wouldn't have access to them even if they were interested. People are, in general, intellectually lazy and prone to believe whatever appears to sit well with their previously defined notions. That's a formidable opponent for anyone, I well know. All beliefs are examples of prejudice, that is, holding an opinion without a previous examination of facts. (What facts have you considered before you accepted the belief that people can be turned into pillars of salt?) I assert that you believe certain things about Rimland and that you have never once attempted to gather any facts, nor even given consideration to the logic, and content, of her tripe. You believe, prejudicially, because certain things she says makes you "feel good." You, possibly being anti-jewish, feel a camaraderie with anyone else so perceived. Let's examine a small piece of her effusive yammering (in italics with my comments ** interspersed):

December 22, 1997

This ZGram will be short and to the point. There is a rumor floating around claiming that I stated in my autobiography that my father's father had been a Jew.

Not so.

** The so-called biography is not a biography. A biography is an account, a record of events. Events have dates and places. There is no enumeration or even a hint of precision in the whole book. If you need to examine a biography – in order to recognize one when you see one – launch a search for George Gershwin if you cannot think of someone else. You'll find enough dates, events and names, in those biographies to stuff an 18-wheeler.

** In a broader sense Ingrid rarely says anything which has any possibility of being verified. She's very sleazy, slippery and slimy, in this regard.

In "The Furies and the Flame," I commented on a rumor about my ex-husband's background. I have been divorced for twenty five years.

** The exact statement of reference appears on page 8, para.1: "Woldi was a solid Mennonite, for they themselves proclaimed him one – although a technical argument could have been made refuting this perception. My father had been a German Lutheran, and his, so rumor had it in those days, came from a distant Jewish family."

It is a rumor. Nothing more.

To my knowledge, there isn't one tiny little gene in me that can be called Jewish – but who is to say what my forefathers did in the hay?

** This is of the same caliber as was an earlier February statement uttered by Ernst Zündel during his interview by the Israeli, Yecheskeli, where he admitted that he just might have some jewish blood and furthermore that his grandfather's name was Izzy Meyer. Here again we see that Rimland relies heavily upon the words of others for her own "thoughts". This is pure parasitism.

** Rumors are not ipso facto false, either!

I am only telling you that I don't think that there is Jewish blood in me, have never said so, and am convinced this rumor has a purpose.

** Ah! The omnipresent paranoia which led her husband to leave her. Then again, Ingrid never says anything precise unless it is a quote from some other source.

It is a systematic political smear to discredit my work in the Revisionist field, no doubt born out of jealousy that I am having an impact on the Internet.

** What work in the Revisionist field? Name ONE item of research. Name one of your "revisionist" statements which was not a parroting of other people. Even the co-called impact is little other than a daily 'spam' to any available email address. What, pray tell, is original in any ZUDgram? Gossip, punctuated by opinion, is all that it is.

** And why would being a jew be tantamount to a discrediting? Would the beautiful music of Vernon Duke (Vladimar Dukelsky) be other than what it is if he weren't a jew?

** Jealousy? Of what? Lying? Adultery? Ugliness? A failed marriage? Children who despise you? A need for plastic surgery? A disdain for those whom who deem inferior? A diseased ego? Attention? (I am not a socialite.) What?

I do not want to deal with smears. I have now said all I need to say on that matter. That's it. There are no bagels hanging on my Christmas tree.


A smear is an adverse label and since the topic dealt with her being a jew, logic dictates that she views being called a jew as a demeaning statement. Ingrid thus becomes an anti-Semite and henceforth a nucleus for those also so inclined.

If your brain was turned on, then one obvious error in logic occurs when "I don't think..." is followed by "There are no..." First, an opinion and then, a factual statement (not to be confused with a statement of fact) concerning the same subject. Translated into Boolean algebra, the equation would result in "tilt" or "no compute".

It is my opinion that most adherents to revisionism are well-intentioned people. I've witnessed many good people getting the "royal screw" by Ernst Zündel. I do not want to see any more of them. Ingrid and Ernst are both soul-mates: they feed on the hopes of others. They are both users of people and to serve those ends, they both lie. Neither has any real feeling for anyone other than themselves. Both have a god-complex. ("I am 'the cause'," brags Ernst.) Whether they are jews, or not, is of no importance. They are a disgrace to any group of which they are a part.

That's my comment. Those who choose to lie down with dogs arise with fleas.

I wholeheartedly endorse any effort which promotes the welfare of White people but I shall never follow those of defective character no matter what "good" others think they might do. After all, a .02M solution of potassium cyanide is 99.9 percent "good" water. It's the little things that really make a big difference.

1 March 1999