Ernst Zundel commenting on media coverage

[zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org]

Good Morning from the Zundelsite :

In a letter to a friend in France, Ernst Zundel comments on the media 
tsunami in the wake of his Holocaust Heresy Trial.  I would only like 
to add that here is a 66-year old human rights activist who has spend 
almost half a century demolishing the Holocaust Hoax - and now, in 
so-called « democratic » Germany, he is forbidden from mentioning the 
very word,  « Holocaust » ?  He has to circumvent the dreaded term by 
speaking of « the topic » ? 

Does not that rotten system, a colony of Israel, camouflaged as a « 
Democracy » advertise its abject fear that way - or what ?!

Here is Ernst's letter, edited by me:

8. March 06

I am preparing for another court appearance in the morning. Since the 
scheduled witnesses, who were to appear tomorrow, have apparently 
been canceled, it can only mean that only procedural topics will be 
dealt with at tomorrow's session. You will be informed via spectators 
and lawyers, no doubt, what will transpire in the courtroom.  It may 
well be a dramatic day, because the judge in the case had mentioned 
that although there is no legal mechanism in law currently in Germany 
to remove a lawyer because of conduct, he would "contemplate" 
removing my young lady lawyer Sylvia Stolz!  So I will see what will 
happen.

Yvonne, I am no prophet and certainly not an expert in German legal 
proceedings.  They are totally different from Anglo-Saxon proceedings 
and, therefore, alien to me.   They may as well be from Planet Mars, 
as far as I am concerned!

But!  And this "But" may well go down in postwar German legal 
history.  If my instinct does not deceive me completely, we will make 
and re-write legal history.

In Canada, I had some older Anglo-Saxon judges - one of them Judge 
Heald, another one by the name Howland, and a few others - who came 
down with startlingly independent judgements.  Some were over-ruled 
on appeal, but the principle is this:  one judge alone, especially of 
an older generation, a few years away from retirement, [might] turn 
recalcitrant or rebellious against the political correctness crowd! 
But this Paragraph 130 does not give the judges much leeway, short of 
risking a career-suicide, and I don't think it would be realistic to 
expect that three judges collectively would decide on a form of 
judicial harakiri, were they to decide to ignore the restrictions 
established by this "unique"  Paragraph. This will not happen in a 
troika !

There were at one time two such judges here in Mannheim, called 
Orlett and Müller, who came down with just such an unusual and 
courageous, startling judgment in the case of a German educator, 
Günter Deckert.  A tsunami of media vilification set in against these 
two judges, [of such force] that even I heard about it in Canada on 
the national news! This will not happen in this case, not before this 
court, not at this time.  The political situation has not yet 
deteriorated enough in Germany - not yet.  Timing is everything!

Things are eroding.  There is great nervousness and dissatisfaction 
amongst lawyers.  Some prosecutors and even retired judges have 
written about this abnormal state of affairs in this area of German 
law.  But such evolutions are painfully slow and usually need 
political, external impetus to actually take effect - and this 
judicial/societal ferment is not yet vocal enough to initiate a 
change.

The Irving case has kick-started such a ferment in the Austrian 
media,  in parts of the political elite, and even in the judiciary. 
Irving's fate has had a similar reaction in England and America, 
where even Deborah Lipstadt has come out in his defence.  Major 
newspapers in England have joined in this chorus.   Some of my 
English contacts have written me about it. 

Let me mention just a few you may not be aware of yet :

"The Independent" wrote on 29. Nov. 05: "Freedom of speech has to be 
there for everybody - including Irving."

"The Daily Express" wrote on 30. Nov. 05, in an article quoting a 
British lady MP called Ann Widdecombe : "Irving should not be in 
prison. »

"The Times" wrote on 20. January 06 : "Irving's rights are to be 
defendedŠThe actions of Austria in arresting Irving are offensive and 
against freedom of speechŠ"

"The Financial Times" on 18-19 Februar 06 wrote in a large article 
headlined "Historical Truth Speaks for Itself" quoting the eminent 
British legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin that these statutes [like 
Paragraph 130] - I have to be careful! This is a censored letter, 
after all! - should be challenged by the European Convention on Human 
Rights, to negate them.  By the way, Dr.  Dworkin condemned my 
treatment by Canadian courts and the system there, vociferously and 
repeatedly, over the years. He is Jewish, of course.


"The Times" of 21. Feb. 06, carried a large headline on the front 
page : "Intense Reaction to the Prison Term for Irving!"

The coverage of the stop-start-abort-stop-start-postpone jo-jo of my 
case has repeatedly created attention and resulted in startlingly 
frank and surprisingly detailed coverage of the case, some of it 
actually irreverent.  The "Frankfurter Allgemeine", a large, serious 
circulation paper, on 21. February 06, Nr. 44, page 3, had an article 
about my case, and an entire column about Irving.  The articles about 
my case were written by a writer named Volker Zastrow who had another 
[article] on 27. Feb. 06, Nr. 49, page 3, in the "Politik" section of 
the paper, read by the business and political elite in Germany. This 
one was hilarious as well as serious and had a color picture of 
Sylvia Stolz.   The other one had a very sinister picture [of me], 
but interesting from a photographic layout and perspective point of 
view! I look like the twin brother of Michael Gorbachev of all 
things!  Weird !

There were numerous articles in the "Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung" 
of a smaller size on the 10.2.06 ;  a larger one in the 
"Rhein-Neckar-Zeitung" (Heidelberg) of 10.2.06 with a picture of me 
saluting, headlined : "Seine Anhänger sehen Zündel als Kämpfer für 
die Freiheit"/His supporters see Zundel as a fighter for freedom. 
Die "Stuttgart Zeitung" also had [a write-up] on the same day.   

There was one in "Süddeutsche Zeitung" on 17. Feb. 06.  Actually that 
paper carried surprisingly detailed coverage about the Irving case 
and mine - over and over again!  Amazing !

The two news magazines, "Focus" and "Der Spiegel", which have a huge, 
Germany-wide circulation, devoted in one issue four pages to Irving's 
case, including color photos.

Die semi-pornographic "Bild Zeitung", a working class, mass 
circulation [tabloid] - 4 million readers - carried a huge color 
photo reportage with pictures of Dr. Meinerzhagen, the legal team, 
and me saluting.  It filled over half a page.  Since it was 
surrounded by naked women in suggestive, crude poses, those German 
readers cannot have missed the story!  Sex sells obviously in 
democratic Germany!  Disgusting!

Ingrid reported that the search engine Google.com had 480,000 
websites mentioning the Zündel case before it slowly fell to just 
below 250,000 websites, [due to Google censoring certain content]. 
Ingrid said she did a Google search by typing in "Zundel plus 
Meinerzhagen" and she came up with 451 websites mentioning the two 
names in stories together.  Some were on important professional 
websites like "Jurist/Legal News and Research".  Last November, after 
the court appearance,  she typed in Zundel or Ernst Zündel and got 
211,000 websites responding as having articles about the case.  A 
friend in Texas typed in my name misspelled "Zundle" and got over 
10,000 mentions even with the name misspelled!

That's what I mean by the erosion of the monolith of media control!

So you can certainly see from just these very few examples that at 
least in the Anglo-Saxon world there is a groundswell - and I am sure 
the ferment and the erosion of the once almost monolithic spin-doctor 
power block is in full swing overseas !

Not in the same way YET in Germany! Not yet! But we are on the right 
track.  Patience is needed.

And, of course, we should not forget that the whole Moslem Crescent 
from Tangier to Malaysia is aflame with a raging debate about the 
forbidden topic - the results of which we cannot fathom!  For the 
first time whole nations, presidents, spiritual leaders, parliaments 
like in Iran and Egypt, are passing resolutions and are taking sides 
and a determined stand!  This was never the case!

Iran has 27 % of the world's natural gas, has contracts of $100 
billion with China alone about energy development.   Thus 
geopolitical, geostrategic considerations are for the first time 
entering the debate!  1.6 billion Moslems are catching on to the 
topic - what are 30 million Canadians and 82 million Germans, 
compared to those numbers ? A drop in the bucket!

This is a new phenomenon of the Global Village of instant 
communication.   Thus, by my sacrifice, and of course those of the 
others, the forces of intellectual freedom are slowly pushing back 
the curtain of censorship - a new age is dawning!

We need only to keep the flame of intellectual freedom alive - and 
victory will be ours - IN TIME !

Ernst Zundel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20060318/a9980a36/attachment.htm