Copyright (c) 1997 - Ingrid A. Rimland
"You have been quoted in the press and in Hansard in reference to your discussions with some five federal ministers of justice and your constant consultation with the committee of lawyers in your ministry regarding the content of my writings which your ministry has been assiduously studying for years.
You have declared publicly that these ongoing studies of my publications are being conducted with the purpose of discovering grounds sufficient for the laying of criminal charges against me and against Samisdat Publishers Limited, and you have unjustly and erroneously gone on to accuse me of being 'behind a lot of the very vicious material that has been disseminated', although you yourself admit that this is merely a belief on your part and that insufficient proof exists with which to substantiate your allegations. (...)
I would like to suggest and request that your committee of lawyers supply me with their guidelines and criteria on 'hate' content so that I may apply them to my writings in advance of publication.
Similarly, these guidelines should be available to all writers, educators, media representatives, etc. so that everyone in the community can know exactly what the rules are in Ontario.
I make this request solely in the interests of insuring greater community harmony, the lessening of inter-ethnic tensions and misunderstandings and for the relief of current anxieties and uncertainties on the subject of 'hate literature.'
If your motive is really the elimination of so-called 'hate literature' from our society and not actually the malicious persecution, entrapment and victimization of Ernst Zundel and Samisdat, then I see no reason why you would be reluctant or embarrassed to provide me and the general public with information abut your thought-crime guidelines; otherwise you are keeping us all in ignorance of the law as it is currently interpreted and enforced."
Ernst never received an answer from the Attorney General. McMurtry, however,
refused requests by the Jewish lobby groups to lay hate charges against
him.
On November 18, 1983, Sabina Citron of the Canadian Holocaust Remembrance
Association laid two private charges against Ernst of "spreading false
news" in the publications "Did Six Million Really Die?" and
"The West, War and Islam."
Both publications had previously been the subject of the postal review and
found NOT to constitute hate literature within the meaning of the Criminal
Code.
Notwithstanding this, Citron's charges were taken over by the Crown which
meant the state assumed the entire cost for the persecution of Ernst Zundel
through prosecution on behalf of the Zionists.
Thus, Ernst began what was to become a nine year costly legal battle for
his civil rights.
In the fall of 1984, officials from the Ontario Attorney General's office
visited Holocaust author and "survivor" Elie Wiesel, asking him
for advice and assistance in the preparation of the case against Zundel.
(!)
Wiesel refused, telling the prosecutors that "on the basis of his own
personal experience he had decided that it was imprudent to use the courts
in fighting the Holocaust debunkers."
(Smart man!)
The personal experience Wiesel referred to was a meeting of leading American
judges who had cautioned him that a "verdict overturned on the basis
of legal technicalities would be used by neo-Nazis as a validation of their
doctrines." (Canadian Jewish News, May 21, 1987)
Ernst wrote to Premier Bob Rae in September of 1992 indicating that he and
members of the German-Canadian community had repeatedly requested a meeting
with Attorney General Howard Hampton to obtain:
". . . some kind of guidelines from your government as to what we German-Canadians can or cannot say or write in order to avoid and prevent running afoul of the hate law, especially when debating or writing about the thorny Holocaust topic, which is of particular importance to our ethnic group...
"Speaking for myself, I have lived with pesky and restraining gag-orders which have restricted my freedom of speech, so your guidelines would be followed to the letter of the law.
"The current policy seems to be to scare writers, such as myself, by government officials stating in the media 'We are studying and watching everything he writes, does and says' - and this is truly intolerable.
"Either we have freedom of speech or we do not. If we do not, then you are duty-bound to inform the citizenry via guidelines as to what is permissible and what is not."
Four months later, by letter dated January 7, 1993, the Attorney General
of Ontario, Howard Hampton, wrote back informing Ernst that it "would
be neither necessary nor appropriate to meet with you at this time. Further,
it is not the intention of the Ministry to issue guidelines as to the scope
of section 319 of the Criminal Code, as suggested by you."
To his supporters in his newsletter (Jan. 17, 1993) , Ernst wrote the following:
"The Attorney General had met with Jewish leaders already, who wanted to have me re-charged under a different law, this time the Hate Law Section (Section 319 of the Criminal Code).
No meeting with German-Canadians ever took place, which is typical of politicians in this country. They demand our taxes, our unquestioning loyalty, if not our subservience. There is an obvious double standard at work here. You get to see government officials if you are Jewish but the brush-off if you are German."
A definition of what constitutes a "hate crime" is still desired
greatly.
Ingrid
Thought for the Day:
"Your world spins in a joyous illusion of progress; we, untouched by that illusion, destructive of your mood, stand aside, static, serious. We will be satisfied with nothing but the absolute."
(Maurice Samuel in "You Gentiles")