Copyright (c) 1997 - Ingrid A. Rimland
"I have employed basic analytic methods . . . to explicate the discourse strategies and principles used in those passages. These methods include analysis of the ways Gricean maxims, rhetorical strategies, lexical selection and collocations, syntactic structures, information distribution, topic continuity, and other discourse-founded principles have been used in the messages to advance particular claims and arguments.
In assessing the materials, I have treated the three documents "Did Six Million Really Die?" "66 Questions and Answers on the Holocaust", and "Jewish Soap" as a conceptual framework which is used to establish a particular perspective on the nature of the Holocaust, the duplicity of Jews, and the victimization of Germans."
In plain English - and in perspective - a fact, and then a question:
Fact first:
All three documents are very Old Hat that have been treated judicially before
and have been assigned to the dustbin.
Document One has already cost the Canadian taxpayers an estimated $6 million
in that it was the focal point of the two Great Holocaust Trials in 1985
and 1988, culminating in a Supreme Court judgment in Ernst Zundel's favor.
Documents Two and Three are classical Revisionist pamphlets first published
by the Institute for Historical Research. These pamphlets have been distributed
over the years by the hundreds of thousands and are NOT by any stretch of
the imagination a politically incorrect novelty on the Zundelsite.
Question next:
How can a non-elected, extra-judicial body, clearly bending to special interests
and a powerful lobby, overrule and override what has already been settled
judicially at the highest level of the judicial system on August 27, 1992
by the Supreme Court of Canada? If these so-called Human Rights Commission
people can do it with impunity to Ernst Zundel today, who is to stop them
from doing it to you and me tomorrow?
Now it is moving from the academic to the concrete and specific. Just a
few days ago, serendipity once again intervened - as has happened so many
times before in this Olympic Zundel Saga.
According to the Canadian Jewish News of October 9, 1997, several Jewish
groups were "approached with a grisly sale offer." That offer
was a "bar of soap made of fat from Jewish Holocaust victims."
The individual whose name is believed to be known but is not mentioned in
this article - one wonders why he wasn't mentioned! - was willing to sell
that bar of allegedly "Nazi-produced Jewish soap" to at least
two large Jewish organizations for a cool $1 million, so that "the
religious community might be interested in the item in order to give it
a proper Jewish burial, as prescribed by Jewish law."
No kidding!
Now those of you who have been involved in Revisionism for some time know
that this is not the first time such a chestnut has been peddled. In fact,
there have been ceremonious burials of bars of soap before, and someone
told me recently that there is actually a bar of soap on display in one
of the Southern states Holocaust museums. Shoah business is often grotesque,
and this Jewish soap story is no exception.
What is pertinent here, however, is that this article came out just a few
days prior to the pious grandstanding of the very organization that is acting
as an "intervenor" in these "Human Rights Commission"
hearings - the Simon Wiesenthal Centre.
This very "Jewish Soap" article disputing that cadavers of Jewish
victims have EVER been used to make soap is the one for which Ernst Zundel
has to pay thousands and thousands of dollars because it is posted on the
Net, exposing this story as a hoax!
(In fact, it has been KNOWN to be a hoax for years and years and was finally
admitted as a hoax by Yad Vashem authorities after Professor Yehuda Bauer
called it what it was: a hoax! This was reported in the Northern California
Jewish Bulletin, April 27, 1990 !)
Now listen to what Sol Littman of the Simon Wiesenthal Center just last
week has been quoted as saying:
"Littman said there's no historical evidence of soap manufactured from the bodies of Holocaust victims. The major historians say there was no such thing."
Also, according to this article:
"Prof. Jacques Kornberg, a Holocaust expert at the University of Toronto, agreed there's no evidence the Nazis made soap from human remains.
'My understanding is that this was never done,' said Kornberg, adding that mainstream historians feel the same way.
However, the Encyclopedia Judaica describes a war-time photograph of human remains in a large vat at a German soap factory in Danzig."
Now here is what you probably will want to know: Why, then, is Ernst Zundel
on the stand before a "Human Rights Commission" when what is claimed
in that specific instance has been ADMITTED as a hoax by his detractors?
Why is the Encyclopedia Judaica not on the stand for spreading hate against
the Germans?
Why is the Simon Wiesenthal Centre not before the Human Rights Commission
for draining a man of his life's savings - a man who is merely exercising
his right to speak a well-known fact about a grotesque hoax?
Let's say Ernst Zundel wins his case against all odds at the end of these
marathon proceedings. What is to stop these thought crimes terrorists from
starting harassment day after that ALL OVER AGAIN?
Here's what they really want, and it is food for thought for ANY Canadian
writer who dares to post politically incorrect things on the Net. Please
read this carefully. This is as serious as it can get, and Free Speech advocates
had better pay attention, whether they like Ernst Zundel or not.
The paragraph below comes right from the horse's mouth, sent in a letter
on Canadian Human Rights Commission stationary in response to Zundel defense
attorney Doug Christie's query as to ". . . the nature of the remedy
being sought by the Canadian Human Rights Commission at the Tribunal":
"This Tribunal orders that the Respondent Ernst Zundel, acting alone or in concert with Samisdat Publishing Ltd., Marc Lemire, Ingrid Rimland and/or any other individuals or organizations acting in his own name or in the name of these other named individuals cease and desist from communicating on the internet and/or by means of the operation of a site on the World Wide Web (commonly known as a website), whether under the name "Zundelsite" or under some other name, any message or messages, or from allowing to be communicated any message or messages directly, indirectly or inferentially attributed or attributable to Ernst Zundel, which are of the type complained of in the complaints referred to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal in complaints B44396 and T44148 (attached hereto) and particularized in the Notice of Particulars dated August 14, 1997 issued by the CHRC (Attached hereto and incorporated by reference into this Order) and thereby and otherwise cease and desist from the discriminatory practice of communicating telephonically or causing so to be communicated by means of the facilities of a telecommunications undertaking within the legislative authority of Parliament, matters of the type complained of in the said complaints and particulars, that is, matters which are likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt by reason that person or those persons are identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination, including colour, race, national or ethnic origin, sexual orientation and religion, and the respondent acting alone or in concert as afore mentioned refrain from any such action in the future."
Sorry to have done this to you - but what it means is that if the Holocaust
Promotion Lobby wins, Ernst Zundel will have pioneered another First.
He will be the first individual who will have been banned from the Net.
The order will then be that he is not to be mentioned by name by you or
me or anyone. His words on any aspects of the "Holocaust" will
be off-limits to anyone - on fear of you or I or ANYONE becoming the next
target of the so-called "Human Rights Commission".
How they must fear this man and what he has to say!
Ingrid
Thought for the Day:
"Question: 'When is spreading hate in Canada NOT a crime?'
Answer: (and please note the question mark. . . ) "If you are Jewish?"
(An overnight fax to the Zundelsite)