September 19, 1997

Good Morning from the Zundelsite:

Tomorrow, I will do a column on columnist Doug Collins who is quitting the Northshore News, having concluded the Human Rights Hearings, also known as the B.C. Inquisition. I quote here from the Vancouver Sun:

"Collins, who turns 77 next week and lives in West Vancouver, has been at the centre of controversy since he wrote a column in 1994 that said the movie Schindlers List was typical Jewish Holocaust propaganda to make billions of dollars. The Canadian Jewish Congress complained to the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal that the column exposed Jews to hatred based on their religion. It was the first human rights complaint issued against a journalist in Canada. Eight parties, including the B.C. Press Council and the B.C. Civil Liberties Association, eventually became involved in the hearing, which pitted freedom of speech against anti-hate laws."

Well summarized.

Meanwhile, I have an old clipping in front of me from the North Shore News (May 16, 1997) illustrating and describing what Collins and his paper were up against:

1. "Bill 33": ". . . (is) the 1993 Human Rights Act, which restricts the publication of material that 'indicates discrimination' or is 'likely to expose a person or group of persons to hatred or contempt.'"

This vaguely worded legislation, according to this Northshore write-up, ". . . is policed by a non-elected Human Rights Commission empowered to apply unlimited penalties upon those ruled to have violated the legislation."

As if that were not enough, there is, additionally, in British Columbia:

2. "Bill 32", to go into effect his year: ". . . the new Human Rights Amendment Act, which empowers the Human Rights Commission to seek out alleged Human Rights violations or complaints about discrimination, be they real or perceived, without a complainant. It allows the Human Rights branch to obtain a warrant to enter premises and determine whether 'human rights contraventions' have been committed.

"Human Rights personnel have the power to seize books, records, notes, photographs and other material, and the right to lay charges. Investigations can be launched without 'reasonable and probable cause.' The bill provides for no trial by impartial judge or jury. All three members of the Human Rights Commission are partisan political appointments by the provincial Cabinet. The Commission, in effect, becomes an arm of the government empowered to censor public discussion."

Re-read that, please.

If that does not put a chill on your spine, I don't know what will. This is Canada, right to the north of the United States! As the Northshore article emphasizes, "It must be stressed that there does not need to be a complainant for this to happen."

In other words, all you need is a self-appointed censor in bed with the "Human Rights Commission."

Against that background, read this internal memorandum that has come into our possession because a Guardian Angel thought we ought to have it. It clearly was not meant for our eyes - or yours:

MEMORANDUM

To: Wiesenthal Center Legal Committee

From: Sol Littman

Subject: Canadian Human Rights Commission vs. Zundel

Date: July 29, 1997

The Canadian Friends of the Simon Wiesenthal Center is deeply involved in the case brought by the Canadian Human Rights Commission against Ernst Zundel for discriminatory postings on his Internet site.

We have been granted intervenor status with the full right to present and cross-examine along with B'nai Brith and Sabina Citron. The charges were laid by the Toronto Mayor's Committee on Community and Race Relations and Sabina Citron. Copies of the charges are appended.

John Rosen and Robyn Bell are representing us in the proceedings. Both have met with lawyer's representing the Commission on numerous occasions.

Fortunately, the Wiesenthal Center can offer its legal staff strong support. We have been carefully, systematically ploughing the Internet in search of hate materials. As a result we have downloaded almost everything Zundel has posted on his site.

The Canadian Human Rights Code gives the Commission specific responsibility for guarding against discriminatory material conveyed by telephone lines. Since the Internet depends almost entirely on telephone wires to maintain the world wide web and e-mail, the Commission, in a first case of its kind, is claiming that the Internet is an extension of its mandate over telephone wires.

As you are undoubtedly aware, the Commission has been extremely successful in obtaining cease and desist orders against several well-known bigots who operated telephone hate lines. Wolfgang Droege and others advertised telephone numbers on which you could receive a taped racial hate message. Efforts to evade or defy the cease and desist order led to contempt of court proceedings and short jail terms.

A B.C. hate-monger by the name of MacAleer tried to evade the Commission's order by opening a phone line in Seattle, claiming that he was, therefore, out of the Commission's jurisdiction. The courts ruled that so long as his message was addressed to Canadians and could be received in Canada, the order was valid.

(Some text may have been cut off by fax transmission here)

The MacAleer case is important because Zundel is claiming that that (sic) his website is located in California and is served by a U.S. provider.

There are numerous issues the Commission will have to clarify. For example, Zundel claims that he is not the owner of the "Zundelsite," that it is owned and operated by a Ms. Ingrid Rimland, a California resident. He claims that Rimland is the site's webmaster, writer and editor, that the "Zgrams" she sends out daily are controlled by her entirely. Rimland is also prepared to give evidence that the congruity between her postings and Zundel's is a matter of serendipity, rather than collusion, just two people who happen to think alike because of similar backgrounds and similar ideals.

Zundel claims further that the Internet is not a form of telephonic communication but something sui generis. As he puts it, a book, although made from wood pulp is, nevertheless, not a tree.

Because both sets of charges deal with the postings of two booklets, namely Did Six Million Really Die and 66 Questions and Answers on the Holocaust, which served as the gist of the two previous Zundel trials, Zundel's lawyer, Doug Christie will undoubtedly have a third try at putting the Holocaust on trial. Although the Crown succeeded in winning both trials - only to be reversed on appeal on technical and constitutional grounds - the Jewish community suffered severely as the newspapers gave us headlines such as: "Expert Witness Says No Gas Chambers." Zundel will again insist the Holocaust was nothing more than a typhus epidemic that took a few thousand lives at most.

We will keep you posted as things develop. Meanwhile, if you are curious about any aspect of the proceedings, please give John Rosen a call. We are always interested in your ideas and suggestions."

(end of memorandum)

Even as you read this, Ernst and one of his attorneys are being cross-examined for an entire week on the contents of the Zundelsite - specifically, on the ZGrams, which I write in California and which are copyrighted in my name.

This memorandum is important and telling on many different levels, but I think THE most telling statement is Sol Littman's cavalier dismissal of the all-important Supreme Court 1992 decision on freedom of speech as having been a ". . . reversal...on constitutional ground."

That is exactly right! That's what it was, Mr. Littman!

The Zundel Supreme Court decision WAS a reversal of censorship ON CONSTITUTIONAL GROUNDS!

When will these people ever learn?

Ingrid

Thought for the Day:

"It is only the self-anointed (who) have made themselves spokesrats. It is no different than if you made yourself a spokesrat for all Poles or all Christians."

(An original Giwer Gem)

Comments? E-Mail: irimland@cts.com

Back to Table of Contents of the Sept. 1997 ZGrams