March 1, 1998

Good Morning from the Zundelsite:

Peter Herngaard of the Netherlands, one of the fight-censorship group participants, is one of the few on that list whom I consider to have a fairly astute eye for what is really playing in Europe with the ever more terrorizing tactics of the traditional Holocaust Promotion Lobby.

Not that he has come out and said so openly - who does? - but he is smart, and he can think, and here is what he said, commenting on the Roger Garaudy sentence of a fat $40,000 for questioning the Holocaust:

"The following very well proves the claim that France is a dictatorial police state lacking basic expression and association rights. Germany could have a case for prohibiting hate speech, as I recognized before, but neither France nor Denmark can use history as a justification
for censorship.

On the other hand, I find it very amusing that Islamic states, which are among the most censorious in the world, suddenly have found out 'freedom of expression' is a good thing.'"

Since Peter started reading Revisionism, as he has done, to Ingrid's joy, he has moved a bit closer to understanding what Mr. Zundel has been saying all along: The Holocaust has been, for fifty years, both shield and sword that has kept Israel, shekel-wise, in very lavish fettle and has kept criticism of Israeli policies at bay!

And there are porous borders between France and Germany - and now there is the Internet, obliterating borders! So why not put the screws on France in the Garaudy trial? It's really very simple.

To put it very bluntly one more time: the state of Israel is sucking at the udders of two mighty placid cash cows - Germany and the United States, and if those countries' citizens at long last realize what's happening - no more unlimited support of Israel!

***That's*** why we now have the Garaudy circus which we Revisionists world-wide observe with grins ear to ear. :)

Here's the story, in part, according to Reuters, February 27, 1998:

"Garaudy, an 84-year-old convert to Islam who has become a hero for many Arab intellectuals, was fined 80,000 francs ($13,340) on a charge of denying crimes against humanity.

"He was fined another 40,000 francs ($6,660) on a charge of racist defamation for accusing a Jewish lobby of controlling western media."

Actually, according to our own correspondent, the sentence was more complicated and for more than twice the amount. Here's how the breakdown reads, replete with explanatory preface:

"Actually, there had been 5 legal proceedings against Garaudy, one of which being also against Pierre Guillaume (of La Vieille Taupe). In January, the 5 cases had been joined for the trial itself. But judge Monfort decided he could not give only one sentence for the 5 cases and had been obliged to give 5 different sentences:

- the first case was that regarding the first edition of "Les Mythes fondateurs de la politique israélienne", i.e. the one P. Guillaume had brought out and sent to his subscribers only.

Both Garaudy and Guillaume had been charged (with) questioning crimes against humanity in the book. But the judge considered that the plaintiffs had not supplied sufficient proof that the book had been publicized, therefore he considered that it had remained more or less confidential, and he discharged the two men.

- the second case was against Garaudy on account of his Samiszdat (second) edition of the book. Again, Garaudy had been charged for questioning crimes against humanity and had been sued by the public prosecutor and 10 (mostly Jewish) associations.

The judge ordered: a fine of 50,000 FF, a publication in the "Journal officiel de la Republique française" (the French Government's official "Gazette") (this is the second time we see that, the first time being on October 23, 1997 for Dr Faurisson), and 10,000 FF damages to each of eight associations (the other two being inadmissible).

- in the third case Garaudy was also charged of questioning crimes against humanity, but this time the passages of the book were different and only one Jewish association was concerned. The sentence was: 30,000 FF plus 10,000 FF damages.

- Case #4 was the action brought by the LICRA (well known to all of you) and other two associations for defaming a private individual on account of his race, religion, etc.

Garaudy was fined 20,000 FF and will have to pay the following trial fees: 10,000 FF to the LICRA and 5,000 FF to one of the two associations.

- Case #5 was the action brought by the MRAP (idem) and other two associations for incitement to racial discrimination and for defaming a private individual on account of his race, religion, etc.

Garaudy was acquitted (on) the first charge but was found guilty (on) the second one. He was fined 20,000 FF and will have to pay the following trial fees: 10,000 FF to the MRAP and 5,000 FF to one of the two associations."

When Ernst read that, his comment was: "Wow! Vive la France! That makes Canadian justice fair by comparison!"

The Reuter article goes on to say:

"A few dozen activists shouted ``Garaudy Nazi'' and ``Garaudy to prison'' outside the courtroom, insulting Arab journalists flocking to cover the verdict.

"Garaudy had argued at his trial last month that he was only calling for a historical and scientific review of Nazi crimes. But chief judge Jen-Yves Montfort said the 1995 book 'outspokenly and systematically disputed' the Holocaust."

Our correspondent wrote, furthermore:

"This time, the pressure outside the courtroom (but inside the Palace of Justice!) was worse than ever. Neither Garaudy nor his lawyers were there. But lots of people had come and especially about 25 or 30 (maybe more) Betarim were there. (Betarim are the French version of the Jewish Defence League).

"They had come to fight, and fight they did.

"While I was inside the courtroom, I heard people screaming outside but of course I didn't see any of the fights. Only after did I see, with my own eyes, one of our friends, rather a nice and quiet gentleman, with a long wound on his leg bleeding, and I know others were injured. The Betarim must have been particularly violent because even the TV tonight mentioned their violent behaviour."

Reuter again, speaking of Garaudy:

"His book, and his charges that western media were 95 percent controlled by Zionists, have made him a hero for for many Arab and Moslem intellectuals.

"His book was prominently displayed at Cairo's government-run International Book Fair this month.

"However, some critics saw overwhelming Arab sympathy for Garaudy as an embarrassment, and others lashed out at Arab human rights activists for campaigning in favour of Garaudy while failing to condemn rights violations on their own turf.

"The CRIF said Garaudy's book had 'an anti-semitic bias' and support from Arab intellectuals and officials in Iran and Syria was 'a serious step backwards for Israel and the Jewish people.'''

A giant leap for mankind, though! Our correspondent wrote of the lively interest of the Garaudy case even ***within*** France:

"1/ Several times during the morning the (French radio stations) reminded (its listeners) that the result of Garaudy's trial was to be expected early in the afternoon - usually they keep silent about revisionist trials, even once the verdict is delivered;

"2/ "France-Inter Radio", a state radio, mentioned at 9 a.m. that: - Garaudy's work had been largely inspired by professor Faurisson's works."

And well-deserved - and overdue!

Please click here to get the full impact of our opposition's tactics: that ". . . questioning the Holocaust" does not exactly come for free.

Ingrid

Thought for the Day:

"Holocaust orthodoxy is Western democracies' substitute for Original Sin and the guilt of Adam and Eve."

(Letter to the Zundelsite)

Comments? E-Mail: irimland@cts.com

Back to Table of Contents of the March 1998 ZGrams