July 18, 1996

Good Morning from the Zundelsite:


This missive is going to be a bit long, but it is an extremely important milestone in the ever-widening struggle to get to the bottom of the so-called "Holocaust."

The message I want to convey today is very simple: That if you plant oats, you will definitely get oats and not wheat. Or, paraphrased: The words you call into the forest are bound to boomerang as echo.

Sabina Citron, who is suing Ernst Zundel for things he posted on the Zundelsite, has called into the forest. The echo will contain this: The political, financial and institutional anatomy embodying the "Holocaust". The blueprint of the Holohoax. The game plan of the Holohuggers - and why it is so easy, so profitable and so safe to snuggle up to it.

On May 28, 1996, Ernst Zundel wrote in a press release:

". . . The Holocaust promoters seem to have shifted strategy in their relentless efforts to keep a challenge to dubious "Holocaust" assertions away from the Internet.

The latest move is a privately laid civil law suit for personal libel against Ernst Zündel, the world's foremost proponent of impartial public investigation into scientifically and forensically challenged "Holocaust" claims.

Sabina Citron of Toronto, Canada, an immensely wealthy auto parts factory owner and one-time president of the "Canadian Holocaust Remembrance Association", has hired one of Toronto's top legal firms to sue Zündel in Civil Court for material published on the Zundelsite.

Citron is an old nemesis and fierce political opponent of Zündel's who has for years waged a protracted struggle to silence his message. This is her 6th attempt to silence Zündel. She has lost, or failed in, all previous ones.

This latest move will be of special interest to civil litigation lawyers, law professors, law students, etc. who are involved in watching what is happening as Freedom of Speech - especially concerning the Holocaust and related issues - is being curtailed by special interests on the Internet and elsewhere.

There are few precedents yet relating to Internet censorship as they pertain to "libel". . . .

In previous legal challenges initiated by Sabina Citron and her Holocaust Remembrance Association to Zündel's writings that appeared in conventional print and were dispursed by conventional means, a judge imposed a draconian gag order on Zündel lasting off and on for almost 9 years while litigation was going on. As a result, Zündel could not refute media slander and libel and even outright lies about him.

This litigation was ultimately won by Ernst Zundel in the Canadian Supreme Court on August 27, 1992.

Should a similar move succeed this time, it would be an effective way of silencing a politically inconvenient voice on the Internet by finding ways of making it appear as though this was a private matter between two antagonistic parties and not a discussion of differing views on a controversial historical topic with diametrically opposed German and Jewish viewpoints.

The world-wide Internet community is well acquainted with the Zundelsite efforts to get to the bottom of many of the fraudulent Holocaust claims - as was amply demonstrated in the Simon Wiesenthal Center efforts at the beginning of this year to curtail, censor and ultimately shut down websites like the Zundelsite.

Deutsche Telekom even got involved by blocking all access to the 1,500 clients on Zundel's server, Webcom, in the hope that Webcom would kick Zündel off, as others had done before - a move that was soundly defeated through technical counter-moves by world-wide, computer-wise Freedom-of-Speech proponents.

This unfolding "libel" strategy will be immensely interesting for the legal professions as well as communicators and broadcasters world-wide - and media law people specifically. . . "

These are the points enumerated in the communications from Citron's lawyers, brought to you here in somewhat shortened form:

"TAKE NOTICE that Sabina Citron complains in the following articles, published on the "Zundelsite" Internet Website and seen by her on May 15, 1996, are defamatory of her. In each case, Mrs. Citron states that the articles contain false and defamatory statements about her and that the articles were published maliciously.

Without limiting the natural and ordinary meanings and innuendos of the article, Mrs. Citron complains that the article was maliciously intended, meant and understood to mean that:

 

So there you have it. Remember: Ernst has NO CHOICE BUT to fight back and to address the charges above. And try to imagine the Revisionist gold that is embedded in these 39 charges - fought in the open on the Zundelsite - for all the world to see?

Of course, the crucial question next will be: Will there still BE a Zundelsite once mano-a-mano gets underway? Ernst certainly expects an interlocutory decree attempting to close shop.

We'll see. You may be SURE there's going to be a struggle to make the feathers fly.

Ingrid

Thought for the Day:

"What contemptible scoundrel stole the cork from my lunch?"

(W. C. Fields)



  • Back to Table of Contents of the July 1996 ZGrams