I promised you an update on the The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal Hearings against Ernst Zündel for texts posted on the Zundelsite. The summary below is an excerpt from the Zündel October Power letter sent to his financial supporters in 41 countries around the world.
These hearing have re-convened. Mark Weber, Director of the Institute for Historical Review, was the expert witness in the October 5-7 round. Important documents about Holocaust blackmail and Holocaust extortion were made part of the hearing's historical record and transcripts. Mark Weber was severely restricted in his testimony by arbitrarily imposed limitations on what he could say.
To refresh my readers' memories, and to illustrate why I have fought so tenaciously in these hearings, I reprint once more the original "Cease and Desist" order the Human Rights Tribunal Torquemadas want to impose on me:
Letter to Douglas Christie, lead Zundel attorney, from the Canadian Human Rights Commission, dated October 8, 1997:
This is in reply to your letter of September 18, 1997 inquiring as to the nature of the remedy being sought by the Canadian Human Rights Commission at the Tribunal.
As you are aware the remedy in complaints brought under section 13(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act is described in section 54(1) as being limited to an order that the person (against whom the complaint is made) cease the discriminatory practice and, in order to prevent the same or a similar practice from occurring in the future, take certain measures.
In this case the Commission proposes the following Order which would become a Consent Order of the Tribunal.
"This Tribunal orders that the Respondent Ernst Zündel, acting alone or in concert with Samisdat Publishers 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 Zündel, which are of the type complained of in the complaints B44395 and T44149 (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 aforementioned refrain from any such action in the future."
A Consent Order of the Tribunal would be filed in the Federal Court pursuant to section 57 of the CHRA for purposes of enforcement.
I trust this information is sufficient for your purposes and if I can be of further assistance, please feel free to call.
Sincerely,
Eddie Taylor
Legal Counsel
253 Words all in one breath - all in one sentence in this "Cease and Desist" order! Not even the Germans write that convoluted!
Mark Weber testifies
Next to Dr. Faurisson, Mark Weber knows undoubtedly more about Revisionism, Revisionists and where the real skeletons are buried in World War II and after. He also knows what are lies and what is truth. He has a keen mind and nice personality - he is suave, cultured, controlled, scholarly, as we say in German "von der Sohle bis zum Scheitel," that is, from the soles of his feet to his parting hair. I feel privileged to know this man, and that he has offered himself time and again as a witness to truth in history. Thus, when I asked him years ago if he would testify one more time, this time in the Human Rights Tribunal hearings in Toronto, there was no hesitation on Mark's part. His only concerns were organizational: could the IHR spare his absence for such a length of time? A quick consultation with Greg Raven, who runs the ship from the bridge at IHR headquarters, solved that problem. Yes, Mark could go to Toronto. The rest was niggling details, air line schedules, air fares and costs etc.
Mark was brutally grilled by the Commission and Jewish lawyers in order to even be qualified as a witness for me in a disgusting, acrimonious proceeding in 1999, and was slated to testify when our court victory before Judge Campbell put the whole proceedings on ice for 1 1/2 years. Only Dr. Faurisson was treated more viciously and more disdainfully than Mark by this pack of lawyers. Still, brave man that he is, Mark came back to Toronto to testify and to face his latter-day Torquemadas one more time.
(My attorney) worked exhaustively with Mark, going over stacks of documents and several important fat compilations of articles prepared with Mark's input and which we wished to have put into the historical record and thus into the transcripts and supporting documents of these Kafkaesque proceedings, which researchers and historians will mine for decades and perhaps centuries to come. Mark and I agreed that these compiled documents from around the world about the Finkelstein controversy, the Errol Morris "Mr Death" film on Fred Leuchter, as well as compilations from standard mainstream media sources - all of which had referred to Holocaust extortion and blackmail, the use of the Holocaust as a political weapon etc. - were dynamite. These documents clearly revealed that I might have been considered somewhat strident in my tone and perhaps a bit brash in my phrases, choice of words etc. years ago - but that my polemical style and especially my vocabulary were merely ahead of the times. Now Finkelstein and others wrote and spoke as I did, as reproduced in the Times of London, the Guardian, the Independent, even the Jewish Commentary and the Jerusalem Post!
We both felt that what we had created to be put before the Tribunal was almost like a doctoral dissertation on this vexing Jewish issue. Thanks to Mark's fine mind and near-total recall, I was sure that we would score points and could not help but illustrate how society and the media had undergone a paradigm shift about this Holocaust topic in the last decade or two. Mark felt, and Dr. Faurisson, my lawyers and I agreed, that we were in a far better position to make our case than we had been before the Leuchter-Errol Morris film, the Irving trial, and now the Finkelstein controversy.
Thus, when the day of the hearings dawned, we were pretty confident, even though we knew that the other side, flush with court verdicts in their favour from Canada's appeal courts, were going to try every trick in the book and then some to defeat our efforts.
That's the way it at first turned out to be! That first day was a brutal battle that can only be compared to World War I-like legal trench warfare.
This time I was not present at the hearings, being occupied by other important matters elsewhere. Doug Christie assured me that my presence was not absolutely necessary. Therefore, I piece together what happened by snippets gleaned from conversations with my attorneys, Mark Weber, and friends who attended the hearings as my eyes and ears. More details will be available once we get the Weber testimony transcripts.
Doug fought and argued, pleaded, cajoled - in short, did all that competent attorneys do in such cases. He wrestled with objections over objections, with detrimental, outrageous rulings from a seemingly fatigued chairman, Mr. Pensa - who kept on glancing pleadingly and with a hangdog expression, or so it seemed, at (Jewish attorney) Freiman for approval, guidance and direction - and a far more alert Reva Esther Devins who, Judge Campbell had ruled, was biased against me, before he was overruled in an appeal by Canada's "retired" controversial former Chief Justice of the Federal Court. In the end, Doug fought off some outrageous ideas and rulings but could not prevent that the Chairman severely curtailed Mark Weber's leeway and freedom to testify fully and exhaustively. The transcripts will illustrate the grotesqueness of the situation!
In the afternoon, I had a few phone calls from those who had been inside the Tribunal room, which sounded pretty awful and had even a slight undertone of resignation in them. I knew we had faced situations like these before time and again in past proceedings. Court cases and Tribunal hearings are emotional roller coasters for all. But the team held its own in spite of these disgusting restrictions. In the evening we conferred by phone. I was briefed more fully about what went on and what it all meant. I asked for a little time to meditate - some would say to pray for guidance about what to do next. By nine-o-clock in the evening I had made some tactical decisions and sorted out the priorities in my mind, which I put into a letter faxed to Toronto to be shown to Doug, Barbara and Mark at the earliest possibility.
The next morning, Mark Weber and the team were in fine form. All matters had been thoroughly discussed, the documents had one more time been studied. The afternoon before, the opposition had been given their sets of copies of the compilations from the world's media so painstakingly prepared.
These books of documents seemed to have had a profound effect on some of those present, and Doug soon won the upper hand. There were a few more restrictive rulings against what Mark could testify to and discuss - in two instances, he was even forbidden to testify about things he had personally written and which were complained about in the original charges! That is the stuff appeal courts like to use in order to overturn verdicts or grant new trials. My attorneys and Mark were flabbergasted about such a flagrant abuse of the process! That's why historical controversies should not be settled via court proceedings, but by thorough, open, public debate of all facts of the issues.
However, and this is important: All of a sudden, the steam seemed to have gone out of these people; the whole feeling at these hearings was one of perfunctory performance by all those who had originally set out to do harm to me. They seemed to have the once-inflated air, as one observer put it, let out of them, as if someone had pricked their balloon with the proverbial needle. Gone was the old cockiness - now there was simply a mood to ". . . get it over with!" as fast as possible - even if it meant to bend or break the rules.
And something else played there as well: The fact that I, their punching bag of many years, was not there in that hearing room seemed to have an almost eerily strange depressing, almost paralyzing effect on some of the participants. So I was told at least.
The evening of the second night everybody at the Zündel-Haus was in high spirits!
The third day, this time of Mark Weber's cross-examination, started with Mark coming charging out of his corner like a revisionist Muhammed Ali, "dancing like butterfly and stinging like a bee". He tackled famed Jewish criminal lawyer Rosen, who represented the Simon Wiesenthal Center, head-on by practically accusing him of anti-German bigotry for using in his question the phrase ". . . the Germans exterminated the Jews". Mark asked: How would Rosen like such a blanket accusation leveled against the Israelis - that ". . . the Jews are exterminating the Palestinians"? The exchange must have hit a raw nerve, for I was told by a number of those present that the effect was spectacular: Rosen got beet-red in the face, lost emotional control and became embarrassingly loud for an otherwise suave star attorney. A few minutes later he mumbled something under his breath and beat a hasty retreat to his desk, ending his cross-examination abruptly.
Next was Mr. Freiman's turn. This is the attorney who had been so nasty to and so unprofessionally disrespectful of Dr. Faurisson. Everybody who reported to me was astonished how perfunctory and poorly the Freiman cross-examination was handled. They apparently were afraid to get into and discuss those devastating documents Barbara and Mark had prepared and were ready and eager to go through, line by (to our enemies!) painful line! In the end, Doug even managed to get those documents admitted as exhibits, practically unexamined - no small feat, since most of the time in these proceedings Chairman Pensa had refused to allow our documents as exhibits in the past!
This has an important added benefit: Now Doug Christie can refer to their content in his summation at the end of the hearings. That was a major victory for us - and for Truth in History! This is how these battles are won in the end - one legal inch at a time!
Before he left for Southern California, Mark gave a few speeches in Toronto and Southern Ontario to packed and enthusiastic audiences and then flew back to the relative freedom of the United States, where Revisionists are still able to work far more freely than in other parts of the world. We owe Mark a round of applause! Big job well done!
The legal struggle for me is obviously reaching some climax. My attorney is strangely hopeful that our appeal on 7. November 2000 of the Justice Reed decision before the Federal Appeal Court will end the Human Rights proceedings once and for all because of systemic bias in the way the old Human Rights Tribunal was constituted in my case. She says: "If the law reigns and is followed by the justices, you should win that case! The law is on your side!" For myself, I pray as if everything was up to God, and work as if everything depended on me and my legal team and supporters. This echoes an old English saying I read years ago!
There is no doubt in my mind, and none in those who have followed the Zündel saga for all those agonizing and sometimes exhilarating 40 years, that my enemies want me silenced! Preferably permanently! They have tried the courts, the tribunals, they did not shy away from jailings, beatings, bombs and even arson. Yet my friends as well as my attorneys have stood by me. My supporters, large and small, rich or poor, German, Canadian, English, French, Swiss, Australian and American, have stood by me, decade in and decade out, through many ups and downs. They have understood and forgiven me most of my misjudgments and some erroneous decisions I have made, often under trying circumstances, under pressure, under siege, desperately tired. How often have we come from what looked like certain defeat - and risen like the proverbial phoenix from the ashes! ***We have photos of some of my Jewish detractors dancing the hora on the sidewalk opposite my still smoldering house on May 8, 1995!*** Yet we came back from the fire, rolled up our sleeves, and in an unprecedentedly short time and in an outpouring of generosity rebuilt that symbol of resistance, the Zündel-Haus - better, newer, and more solid! - until it stood gleaming in white-red-and-black, in Germany's national colors, like a shining beacon in the sunlight in downtown Toronto, from whence we send our message of Truth in History around the world, using the newest of technologies!
I know that I am a thorn in the side of my political opponents. But we Germans, too, are people. We, too, have rights! Dreams! Aspirations! We, too, want to contribute our talents and ideas to secure and to improve the world for our children and grandchildren. We demand freedom from vilification, freedom from persecution - and I assure friends and foes that we will not tire, not rest and not give up until we have reclaimed what is rightfully ours: our heritage, our reputation, and above all our humanness of which our enemies have so long and so cruelly deprived us.
I thank you and salute you! With your help, this struggle continues!
Ernst Zündel
=====
Thought for the Day:
When will the Jews apologize for the Red Holocaust of millions of
Christians and Muslims? When will the Jews apologize for the slave trade in the New World ? When will the Jews apologize for calling Jesus a bastard, a dog, burning in hell in dung ? . . . When will the Jews apologize to GOD ?!!!
When ? When Hell freezes over, that's when!"
(Letter to the Zundelsite)
Back to Table of Contents of the Oct. 2000 ZGrams