With so many exciting things on the Revisionist scene going on, we are actually turning a bit blasé about the ending of the Human Rights Tribunal.
That war has been fought to the end, and all of us are proud of what we did achieve, what is now enshrined for centuries to come in the court records and transcripts - documents of shame for Canada where truth is no longer a defense and intent does not matter in writings about history.
How deep has that once-pristine Canada sunk! My last visit was a sad one, for I lived there once some forty years ago and thought I had landed in Paradise!
More than one person commented to me how Claude Pensa, the Chairman of the Tribunal, looked very ill at ease and uncomfortable, once it became clear that there was going to be no ritual kosher slaughter of Ernst Zündel in his quasi courtroom - and that all the Commission had achieved in five long years would be a very bad, flawed precedent with which Canada will have to wrestle anew when the next victims will be dragged before another tribunal and the circus will start all over again.
We also anticipate the "two-person Tribunal" will try to stick Ernst with a fine to please their hidden handlers - which will be illegal and appealed again, since Ernst was prosecuted under the "old" law then on the books that only permitted "remedies" - whereas a "new" amendment to the law, passed a few years ago to placate the noisy Holocaust Lobby, allows for horrid fines to be paid to the "victims" whose feelings had been allegedly hurt by truthful statements on the Zundelsite.
Whatever happens, the struggle is expected to spread to the US where Internet freedom is taken far more seriously by a great many segments of society, and where people are closely watching their neighbors to the North who have already lost so much of their hitherto taken-for-granted freedom to the unconscionable leftist Kommissars and Zion's Fifth Column.
Already there are sharp, condemnatory editorials in important papers like the Globe and Mail of Toronto. These are laments coming a little late in the day from media outlets that hardly ever sent a reporter in five years to cover the hearings. Mainstream Canadian media now wail that this entire circus should never have happened - because who knows who will be next? Their own heads are now on the block.
Thanks to this brazen Tribunal, Internet freedom has become a very troubling question left for Canadians.
I bring you this morning Ernst Zündel's summary of the last days of the hearings, and why and how he arrived at the decision to forego a formal summation before the people who denied him the right to tell the truth.
That summation, however, was carefully written and will be on the Internet in just a few days for the entire world to look at - and will become another landmark Revisionist document.
(His friends and supporters will get a printed version.)
Ernst Zündel in his Power Letter of February 2001:
<start>
Like some bad but somewhat distant dream, the Tribunal hearing have not (yet) ended; only my participation in them has ended.
After I decided a few months back to put an end to the financial hemorrhaging of my company and myself and called a halt to the still anticipated and planned line-up of witnesses, I discussed the situation with my attorneys. My legal advisors, and my common sense, told me that there was no sense in going on any longer. It was very clear that Zion's Fifth Column had so thoroughly corrupted the legal scene that justice from fair and impartial courts was no longer to be had. My expectations that the Canadian courts would do their duty, the way my attorneys still hoped and Canadian tradition and the law itself dictated, had proved illusory. That was the reality that was staring me in the face.
By then I was no longer living in Canada; in fact, I had lived in the US for quite some time - and my attorneys and Ingrid kept asking: "Why carry on? You are now living in the USA. The case is over!"
As you all know, the case was about my allegedly using a communications facility under the control of the Canadian Parliament etc. etc. for allegedly hurting my detractors' feelings with stuff on the American-based Zundelsite owned and operated from Day One by an American citizen. With me in the US, that changed the picture in many respects.
I could have, and very badly wanted to, fight this case to the bitter end all the way up to the Supreme Court, as I had done in other trials, but once the Supreme Court had genuflected the politically correct way and decided in December that it would not even hear my judicial review application that "Truth is not a defense", I decided that that was IT for me! Canadians could have their politicized justice system! I was not going to play in their rigged sandbox any more!
Now what to do? We had reached almost the end of the road except for the summation - since, one by one, our expert witnesses, all of them quality material, had landed in the trash bin of so-called "human rights" - disqualified by the political appointee "judges".
I had asked (my attorneys) to answer every one of my opponents' shrill accusations, for I wanted things on record and in granite. My lead attorney, experienced lawyer that he is, advised against it. He said to save the money, simply make a minimalist summation and response, and to battle the entire judgment, expected to be vile, out in the Appeal Court all the way up to the Supreme Court - where truth surely WAS a defense!
Yes, sure! In German we say: "Pious hope!"
One of my other attorneys, on the other hand, wanted to respond fully and exhaustively, point for point. This attorney loves the law, the majesty of the Anglo-Saxon tradition - and no matter how often we have been been knocked down, it is hard to get over the flagrantly prejudiced, off-the-wall, non-legal, Stalinist rulings by the Tribunal!
This attorney set to work and did a brilliant, in-depth rebuttal and summation.
In the meantime, I was tallying up the ever more skyrocketing costs, especially as every level of the courts, including the Supreme Court, now asked me to pay the legal fees of the largely Jewish opposition lawyers who had nosed their way into this sham of a trial via so-called "intervenors" and "interested parties" in the first place!
I consulted back and forth, and finally a frightening scenario emerged. I would have to pay the court transcribing service for the 52-some volumes and 8,245 pages of Tribunal hearing transcripts anew - at $2 a page, for each level of court we fought up to, because the privately contracted transcribing service was of the opinion that they were entitled to a new fee each time we used the transcripts again, since they were owners of the copyright.
That meant I had to multiply $16,490 by 11 sets for the Federal Court of Canada Trial Division alone, in addition for sets for all the Jewish organizations allowed virtual co-prosecutor status by the Tribunal with the express blessing of the Federal Courts, where we had unsuccessfully fought this way back in 1997-98.
This meant, in copyright costs alone, if I am correct in my present mathematics, this would amount to $181,390 - without one single hour or day's legal fees paid for my attorneys' work.
And we are still talking only the very first level!|
With an exhaustive summation with many points addressed, this translated into some very serious financial ramifications.
The next level, the Federal Appeal Court, would need an extra five sets, again at $2 a page - which would be another $82,450.
If the case ended up before the Supreme Court, as almost surely it would, and this court actually decided to hear the case, which was iffy, we were talking another 21 sets or so - brand new ones! - because that court requires different layout and different colored covers etc. That could have amounted to $345,450 in copyright costs alone!
Add to that the cost of the paper itself, photocopying and binding this massive amount of paper, plus labor, plus of course the fees for my attorneys for preparing these massive appeals, their flights, their hotels, all the extra costs that come with such exhaustive trials - I think it is clear to all decent and right-thinking people that at these prices, only the super-rich and international corporate giants can afford "justice" in battling out principles of freedom of speech!
In Canada at least it has become financially impossible to get natural justice - as it was possible even a couple of decades ago. The whole setup is utterly perverse and meant to bleed dry any defendant who dares to stand up to these political kommissars and enforcers of the Jewish viewpoint!
It is a system running amok! I do not see how judges, judicial councils and justice ministries can let such a system develop - much less carry on!
I had held the Canadian Internet censors at bay for five long years- with little help from any quarters - except my loyal supporters. I searched my heart, my mind, my conscience. What could I do? What should I do? We had fought so hard for so long - should we forego a hard-hitting legal conclusion? We had kept Canadian Internet freedom alive and a reality - we, a small handful of people!
The donations of little old ladies, of war veteran pensioners, of students, teachers, nurses, stewardesses, housewives in 41 countries had accomplished this incredible task. Had it not been for the occasional bequest in a will, the end would have come much sooner.
I knew I had to find a way to finish what we had set out to do - nail into history and make available for generations to come the essence of this struggle. I meditated and prayed for an answer. I spent a small fortune on calls to advisors and strained my relationship with my lawyers. (...) Should we have our say as we all knew we needed to, at horrendous financial expense, or should we try to find a "loophole technicality"?
That was the background against which Ingrid and I celebrated our first Christmas as a married couple, and that was still the situation as we celebrated our first anniversary. By Valentine's Day, we were groping our way to a solution. It nagged at me and nagged at me: How would all my friends and supporters feel - after so much sacrifice, once I told them the stark reality, once I revealed to them what I felt I had to do?
Would they think that I was running, or would they understand I was regrouping?
I felt like the fabled Alexander the Great of antiquity, presented with a new version of the fabled Gordian Knot. I knew that only a bold stroke could save me from utter financial ruin. I went through the various options, costs, pain, tedious, potentially endless proceedings - and decided less than 48 hours before the deadline to sever with one bold stroke my imaginary Gordian Knot. My attorney was to write a letter to the Canadian Human Rights Commission and all parties, announcing that I was no longer residing in Canada, living in the United States, and married to Ingrid Rimland! Legally, they could not touch me any more.
Here is that letter, sent at 4:15 p.m. on 22 February 2001 to the complainants as well as to all the Jewish organizations who had persecuted me so mercilessly for decades and who had wormed their way into this obscene, so-called "Human Rights" Tribunal farce:
<start>
Thursday, February 22, 2001
Tribunal Registry
Human Rights Tribunal
900-473 Albert Street
Ottawa, Ont K1A 1J4
Re: Toronto Mayorís Committee and Citron v.Zündel/Case No.T460/1596
Dear Ms. Desormeaux,
I have been instructed by Mr. Zündel to inform the Tribunal and the other parties to this proceeding that he has moved to the United States where he now makes his permanent home with his wife, Ingrid Rimland. Unfortunately, the Canadian "brain drain" continues unabated.
The complaints against Mr. Zündel revolved around the "Zundelsite", a website owned, operated and located in the United States by Ms. Rimland. Since Mr. Zündel himself now resides in the United States, the case before this Tribunal is moot as there can be no violation of section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act in these circumstances.
Pursuant to the principles enunciated by the Supreme Court of Canada in Borowski v. Canada (Attorney General), [1989] I S.C.R. 342, the complaints must be dismissed. The Court held:
"The doctrine of mootness is an aspect of a general policy or practice that a court may decline to decide a case which raises merely a hypothetical or abstract question. The general principle applies when the decision of the court will not have the effect of resolving some controversy which affects or may affect the rights of the parties. If the decision of the court will have no practical effect on such rights, the court will decline to decide the case. This essential ingredient must be present not only when the action or proceeding is commenced but also at the time when the court is called upon to reach a decision. Accordingly if, subsequent to the initiation of the action or proceeding, events occur which affect the relationship of the parties so that no present live controversy exists which affects the rights of the parties, the case is said to be moot."
The complaints before the Tribunal alleged that Mr. Zündel was using the telecommunications facilities of Canada to transmit "hate messages" from the "Zundelsite" which they alleged he controlled from Canada. Whatever might be argued about Mr. Zündel's control of the Zundelsite, using unreliable evidence from an estranged former wife given several years ago, it is clear that no controversy now exists between the parties since he no longer resides within this jurisdiction and the Zundelsite is not located within Canada.
In the words of the Ontario Court of Appeal in Tamil Co-operative Homes Inc. v. Arulappah (2000) 192 D.L.R. (4th) 177:
"The parties remain adversarial only in the sense that they take different positions on the legal issues raised before the courts below. They are aptly described as opposing debaters taking affirmative and negative positions on legal propositions and not as litigants opposed in interest in an ongoing legal controversy."
Courts and Tribunals should not make orders to which effect cannot be given. While the questions of law raised in this case are interesting, they are not unique and will no doubt raise again. Potential Canadian respondents in future complaints about websites on the Internet should not be prejudiced by findings of fact and law in a case which has become moot due to changing circumstances.
Moreover, the Human Rights Tribunal has no power to make general declarations of law for future cases. Under section 50 (2) of the Canadian Human Rights Act, this Tribunal has only a limited jurisdiction to decide matters of law and fact. It provides:
"In the course of hearing and determining any matter under inquiry, the member or panel may decide all questions of law or fact necessary to determining this matter."
As the matter has become moot, there is no longer anything for this Tribunal to determine. We request that the complaints be dismissed."
<end>
The Canadian Human Rights Commission did not waste much time rejecting my attorney's letter. They announced they were carrying on - as I predicted that they would. Other lawyers followed suit.
By Saturday, 24 February 2001 the story was in the Globe and Mail - and a fire storm of media frenzy is sure to develop in the days and weeks to come. Once again, Ernst Zündel will cause many Revisionist headlines. The Tribunal or the Commission have alerted the Canadian media in an unprecedented move, giving the date, hour and location of the proceedings - which they never did before in five long years, to my knowledge!
I can just hear the howling hyenas baring their fangs, frothing at their mouths, in an orgy of verbal abuse and character assassination seldom witnessed since those kangaroo proceedings in Nuremberg over 50 years ago against the leaders of a defeated Germany!
Nobody will be there from my team!
My lead attorney informed the Tribunal - I believe it was in November of last year - that we would not appear for verbal submissions. This was repeated again and again in letters to those concerned.
I have no control over what they will say, do or decide. This case was a political hatchet job carried out by political appointees of a morally bankrupt regime from the beginning, and important Canadian leaders, all the way up to influential MPs, have commented how much they admired how long I held out.
I have already discussed with my advisors near and far if, when and how to react to their expected one-sided, politically motivated ruling. That Gordian Knot, too, will be cut - swiftly, cleanly and decisively.
And our struggle will go on!
Any fallout or persecution in this country, where I now live, will be dealt with in the usual Zündel way - within the law, with foresight, dignity and care, without fear - and with malice to none.
Revisionism is blossoming these days in ways we never dreamed possible! German people, too, have rights - equal rights! - wherever fate, life or love may take us! We are no second class citizens - not there, not here, not anywhere! That has been my credo for all my adult life - and that's how we are going to continue! (...)
The next newsletter will be full of more exciting new developments and directions, with reports from far and wide. I might rename the newsletter and expand its content. The United States has a strong and long-standing tradition of protecting free speech. The US Supreme Court decided in a landmark decision in the summer of 1998: "Hands off the Internet!" Maybe, just maybe there will be more of a chance for Ernst Zündel - for I was always more than a battler against the blood libel of the Holocaust. There is much more to me than that, just as there is more to the German people and their history than Dachau and Auschwitz. (...)
It has been my privilege to carry on this struggle for Truth in History not only for my German ethnic group but for everybody. Canada is not going to be a better place because I have gone - and America won't be poorer for having me live there. I have been a peaceful, productive, politically active, socially conscientious, at all times responsible citizen of that country called Canada I came to love and admire when I experienced it first as a wide-eyed, nineteen-year-old boy. The country I left is no longer the country I cherished.
I intend to conduct myself just as I did in Canada as a peaceful, productive, politically active, socially conscientious, at all times responsible person living in the United States of America - or wherever fate and destiny may take me. I want you to know that, and I ask you to help me, as you did before, in our struggle for our common interest. You are a wonderful group of people. I am proud of you, as I hope you are of me. We have come a long way together, and the journey into a better future continues.
Ernst Zündel
<end>
Thought for the Day:
The "Holocaust" must be investigated as thoroughly and as independently as Ken Starr's office investigated the allegations against President Clinton.
(Letter to the Zundelsite)