Free Ernst Zundel
Total Liberation
An Interview with Mark Weber by Kevin Alfred Strom
American Dissident Voices Broadcast of February 22, 2003
KAS: Welcome to American Dissident Voices. Today we welcome to
our microphones for the third time the director of the Institute
for Historical Review, Mr. Mark Weber. Welcome, Mark.
MW: Good evening, Kevin.
KAS: Eight years ago I interviewed Ernst Zundel on this radio
program. Mr. Zundel was living in Canada at that time; he had
just survived a firebombing of his home, an obvious attempt on
his life, one of several documented assassination attempts. Ernst
Zundel has been involved in publishing, broadcasting, and in
legal battles over many years in an effort to get past the
wartime propaganda and speak the truth about his people, the
German people -- particularly the Germans of the World War II
generation.
In recent years he's continued that fight from the United States,
depending on the First Amendment to guarantee him the right to
speak freely. But a few days ago, on February 5, 2003, that all
changed. Can you tell us what happened, Mark?
MW: Ernst Zundel was arrested in his home in east Tennessee. For
a little more than two years, he's been living there with his
wife, Ingrid Rimland. He was arrested by three agents of the
Immigration and Naturalization Service, and two local law
enforcement agents, and taken away to the local county jail. And
then, yesterday, he was deported from there, and taken up to the
Canadian border. He's now being held at a federal -- I.N.S. --
detention center near Buffalo, New York, in Batavia, close to the
Canadian border.
And there's a big three-way or four-way international tug of war
about what's going to happen to this man. There was a lot of fear
for a time that he would be deported to Germany. He's a German
citizen. He's tried to get Canadian citizenship, but he was
rejected. He was born in Germany, and there was fear that he
would be deported to Germany.
Fortunately, that didn't happen -- because, in Germany, as many
of your listeners know, there are harsh laws that are very
restrictive of freedom of speech. Anyone who, as they say,
"denies the holocaust," which Ernst Zundel is accused of doing,
can be thrown in jail for five years. And it's happened, in
Germany and in other countries in Europe that have passed these
laws.
But Ernst Zundel is instead, apparently, going to be deported to
Canada. He lived in Canada as a permanent resident, or "landed
immigrant" they call it up there, for 42 years. He still has some
rights there.
He's made headlines all over the world for his battle, as he sees
it, to redeem and defend the honor of his people. And this is an
immense struggle that he's fought: a very expensive one and a
very involved one. He's fought it all the way to the Supreme
Court in Canada. And it's cost him much violence. There have been
several attempts on his life and attempts to destroy his home in
Toronto.
Finally, he decided to move to the United States, after marrying
Ingrid Rimland, who for years has operated the Zundelsite Web
site. The immense irony of it, in a way, is that the final legal
battle he was fighting in Canada was over that Web site. I
testified in a hearing before a so-called "Human Rights Tribunal"
-- it's a really Orwellian-named thing -- in which the content of
that Web site, even though it wasn't headquartered in Canada, was
considered to be "spreading hate" against Jews. And all of
Canada's major Jewish groups were involved in trying to get Ernst
Zundel silenced and put in jail.
Ernst Zundel is best known for two big legal trials he was
involved in, the so-called Holocaust Trials in Toronto. These
occurred in 1985 and 1988 and there were a great number of
witnesses on both sides.
KAS: What were they trying to do in those trials?
MW: The charge under which he was brought to trial was "spreading
false news." It's an odd, bizarre, law that goes back to Old
English law, and it's even been abolished in England. But he was
tried there [in Canada] -- a Jewish woman brought the original
charges against him -- and he was convicted.
But he decided -- and made a tremendous effort -- to put the
"holocaust" on trial in these two great legal battles. There were
a number of prominent witnesses, including David Irving. Fred
Leuchter testified in the trial, he is an American gas chamber
expert who, at Ernst Zundel's commission, went to Poland to the
sites of the so-called "extermination camps," Auschwitz,
Majdanek, and so forth, and concluded, based on his expert
knowledge of this subject (he was universally recognized as the
American expert on gas chamber technology because he's been a
consultant to American states in executions) -- he concluded that
the purported way in which Jews were killed in gas chambers could
not have taken place as portrayed.
Even though at the first trial he was convicted, on appeal, a
mistrial was declared. The judge, it was found, had been biased,
and had given false or improper instructions to the jury. He went
to trial again in 1988. He was found guilty. But then it went to
the Supreme Court. And the Supreme Court of Canada threw out the
conviction because the law under which he had been tried all
those years was declared to be unconstitutional. It was an
unconstitutional law.
And this is a point I make over and over: Every citizen of Canada
should be grateful to Ernst Zundel for having won a victory for
their legal rights. His battle made all Canadians a little bit
freer by eliminating an arbitrary, out-of-date law that was used
to silence people. And it was a great vindication, because the
Supreme Court of Canada upheld and made many of the same
arguments that Ernst Zundel and his attorney had been making over
and over in both trials.
KAS: So the trial did not turn out anything like the way his
persecutors wanted it to turn out.
MW: That's right.
KAS: The Jewish establishment, or the "Holocaust Lobby," must
have been very disappointed in the outcome.
MW: They were especially disappointed, not only because the
Supreme Court eventually overthrew it, but in the first trial
especially, there was tremendous media coverage and the
contradictions, even absurdities, of many of the prosecution
witnesses was brought out.
For example, Rudolph Vrba was a well-known survivor of Auschwitz,
who claimed to have seen gassings of people. But in the 1985
trial in Toronto, for the first time he was questioned very
closely under oath, by Doug Christie, Ernst Zundel's attorney,
with advice and with help from Robert Faurisson, the French
revisionist scholar. And Rudolph Vrba collapsed, basically. He
admitted that many of the claims that he had been making, in a
bestselling book about his experiences, were false. And he
resorted, finally, to saying, well, it's "poetic license," it's
an exaggeration -- basically, it's a lie.
Another witness, Raul Hilberg, who is the author of a well-known
standard work on the "holocaust" question, was also forced to
concede things, too, that were very astonishing. And these were
reported in the newspapers very widely at the time. Now the
second trial did not receive the same media coverage in Canada,
but it did still receive some. And in the second trial, Fred
Leuchter was one of the most outstanding witnesses. Even David
Irving testified in that trial. I testified for five days in the
trial.
The Canadian Jewish groups, and the American Jewish groups, were
furious at the result, and have done everything in their power to
silence this man.
KAS: So, even after the Holocaust Trial 1 and Holocaust Trial 2
had concluded, and Zundel had been vindicated, they were still
after him to close down the zundelsite.org Web site. Is that
correct?
MW: Right. One of the supreme ironies involving the "Human Rights
Tribunal" was that they were declaring that a booklet called Did
Six Million Really Die?, which was posted on the Zundelsite, was
the first and foremost example of "hatred." The irony is that
this was the same booklet that was the object of dispute in the
two major trials -- and the Canadian Supreme Court affirmed the
legality and the lawfulness of publishing and distributing
precisely that booklet.
So, as it were, through the back door, these Canadian Jewish
groups tried to get Ernst Zundel silenced, put in jail, or fined,
for publishing on the Internet what the Canadian Supreme Court
said was legal in printed and published form! It's absurd!
KAS: In addition to this, he was getting violence and threats of
violence at his home in Canada. Can you fill us in on that a
little bit?
MW: He was the victim of numerous physical attacks by Jewish
terrorists. There were, I think, at least three attempts on his
life, including an arson attack. This was a devastating attack on
his home and residence, the so-called Zundelhaus, on Carlton
Street, not far from downtown Toronto.
KAS: Now Mr. Zundel is married to a German-American lady of some
repute as a novelist, lecturer, and historical writer herself.
MW: That's right. Ingrid Rimland is a noted, even distinguished,
author in her own right. She wrote a novel some years ago called
The Wanderers. She's a naturalized American citizen. And one of
the most bizarre, peculiar aspects of this recent arrest, which I
still don't quite know the answer to, is how it's possible for
the husband of an American citizen to be deported. Normally,
that's not done.
And Ernst Zundel has violated no law in the United States or in
Canada. I know -- and many others can testify -- that he's
scrupulous in obeying laws. But supposedly, having missed some
procedural matter, some hearing, this is again a little unclear,
he's being banned from the United States for twenty years! And
this even though he's married to an American citizen!
Now this is so unusual, this is so unique, that it gives every
appearance of being a targeted action by U.S. authorities against
a man for his political views.
KAS: Now, Dr. Rimland -- Mrs. Zundel -- is devoting every waking
hour, I presume, to her husband's battle for freedom.
MW: Right.
KAS: She has empowered you to be the public voice in this case.
Is that correct?
MW: She's asked me to do it, because she is pretty distraught,
pretty upset about all of this. And she says she's lost weight,
and it's been very distressing, because it's her husband.
KAS: I can imagine.
MW: Also, she is so close to the matter, she felt that I could
give a little more background or perspective to it all than
perhaps she could. But anyway, I am doing this because she asked
me to.
KAS: Is publicity helpful at this stage?
MW: Yes it is. There's been some coverage in the local newspaper
in Tennessee; there have also been some articles in the Canadian
press. But the more press about this the better. The more media
coverage the better. Because it is really an unfair and unjust
persecution of this man.
As all your listeners know, there are millions of illegal aliens
living here in the United States. For the United States to single
out Ernst Zundel is outrageous. The only groups which have a big
interest in deporting Ernst Zundel are the Jewish groups. And
they've been very vociferous in their demands that Ernst Zundel
be kicked out of the United States.
KAS: Well, he had trouble getting citizenship in Canada, did he
not? And Canada is famous for having a very lax immigration and
naturalization policy. Was it due to Jewish pressure that he
could not obtain Canadian citizenship?
MW: There were no real valid reasons given. His citizenship
request was rejected, even though, as I said, he has no criminal
record in Canada. He's been, actually, a very productive citizen.
Before he became involved in this campaign, he built a very good
career as a graphic artist. He's a very talented artist, and his
artwork appeared widely and commercially in Canada, including
once on the front cover of Maclean's magazine, the equivalent of
Newsweek or Time, the leading news magazine in that country. He's
a man who, I think, would be successful in almost any endeavor,
any field that he had decided to go into.
But even though he has a clean record as far as the law is
concerned in Canada, even though he's been a successful man, a
man who has been no charge on the public system in that country,
his citizenship was rejected. And, as I say, all the Canadian
Jewish organizations, and American Jewish organizations, were
rabid and vociferous in demanding that he not be given
citizenship, that he be silenced, that any pretext be found to
shut this man up.
KAS: So finally, I believe in the year 2000, he decided to become
a naturalized American. He was married to an American citizen. He
was living completely legally in Tennessee. He had followed
through with all the necessary permits and paperwork. What
happened? What was the pretext for this arrest?
MW: It's claimed that he missed a hearing. Now, anyone who knows
Ernst Zundel knows that this is a man who is extremely careful
about dotting the "i"s and crossing the "t"s of laws and
regulations.
We're also told that his implicit visa or permission to stay in
the United States had expired. But we don't really know yet quite
what the actual reason is. Those are the reasons we're given. But
they don't stand up, they don't make sense.
In any case, it seems that the authorities have seized upon a
pretext to nab him, grab him, and throw him out of the country.
KAS: Initial reports suggest that the order for the arrest came
from "a very high level." What do you know about that?
MW: Well, I don't really know about that. But when heard of the
arrest of Ernst Zundel I immediately thought of an American
Dissident Voices broadcast just a few weeks ago about the
activities of a Mr. Chertoff in the Justice Department, who has
been taking measures to silence Americans whom he doesn't like.
Now, I can't prove any connection -- but there do seem to be
increasing activities by American authorities to find pretexts to
silence people. We just don't know the whole story yet.
But it's a very ominous thing, especially during the time that
we're living in right now. Your listeners may know that the Bush
administration is already drafting a new so-called "Patriot Act
2" law, which will give the Attorney General sweeping powers to
arrest and hold people indefinitely as so called "supporters of
terrorism" on very, very flimsy grounds. These are ominous
developments for all Americans.
And the Ernst Zundel arrest seems to be completely consistent
with this effort by the U.S. government in its so-called "War
Against Terrorism" to stamp down dissent of any kind.
KAS: Indeed these are ominous signs.
MW: One of my fears is that, as the attention of the world is
drawn to the impending war against Iraq, measures like the arrest
of Ernst Zundel will not get the attention that they normally
would. Just as with the brutal treatment of the Palestinians --
which is now just incredible. The Palestinians are now living in
a kind of quasi-ghetto or concentration camp. It's just
unbelievable the repression that they're subjected to. But this
is getting a lot less attention and has elicited a lot less
outrage right now, because I think that the attention of most of
the world is turned toward the prospect of a devastating war in
Iraq that may cause the deaths of enormous numbers of people.
KAS: Here we have almost an open border policy in the United
States. Millions of illegal aliens are here. More are pouring
into this country every day. They're openly flouting the law and
taking over huge sections of the United States. They get away
with it. The politicians offer them amnesty. And yet an artist, a
writer, a lifelong pacifist -- Ernst Zundel -- dares to speak
some criticisms of the Jewish lobby, and he's hounded like a
felon.
MW: Yes. You know, there are two contradictory trends going on in
the United States. The same government that wants to "crack down"
and ensure so-called security against so-called terrorism is the
same government that permits millions of illegal aliens to live
here. It's almost schizophrenic. It's crazy. Supposedly, since
September 11th, some 700,000 additional illegal aliens have come
into the United States. At the same time, the American government
is supposedly "cracking down" on security in this country. The
end result of all of this is that it's only able to crack down on
obvious and basically harmless targets like Ernst Zundel. People
who are really dedicated terrorists can easily slip through all
of this precisely because our laws in so many other areas are so
lax.
KAS: I understand that B'nai Brith Canada has issued a statement
urging Canada not to take Ernst Zundel back. Is there some sort
of deeper game being played here?
MW: It's obvious. Both B'nai Brith Canada, which is their
counterpart of the ADL in this country, and the Simon Wiesenthal
Center, another powerful Jewish Zionist organization both in the
United States and Canada, are both demanding that the Canadian
government not accept Ernst Zundel. It's obvious that the only
really important, vociferous, dedicated enemies of Ernst Zundel
are the Jewish groups. No one else, really, regards Ernst Zundel
as any kind of danger.
To me, the outrage of it is that Ernst Zundel is asking for
freedom of speech. The organizations arrayed against him are all
dedicated, staunch apologists for a regime, namely Israel, that
by all standards is violating international law: killing people,
invading other countries. If standards are applied in any kind of
consistent way, it struck me as I was testifying, that the
lawyers of those organizations, and those organizations
themselves, should be in the dock -- not Ernst Zundel.
KAS: Indeed. It's a supreme irony: When Ariel Sharon comes to the
United States, he's feted like a hero.
MW: I've said it many times: If the United States applied to
Israel the standards it applies to Serbia or Iraq or other
countries, U.S. bombers would be preparing to bomb Tel Aviv, and
not Baghdad.
KAS: Do you think there is any plan -- or any chance -- that
Ernst Zundel will be forced to go to Germany?
MW: Apparently there seems to be no immediate prospect of that.
When I spoke to him the other day, he seemed fairly certain that
the next step is that he'll be deported to Canada. But looming
behind all of this is the great danger that he'll be deported to
Europe and thrown in jail.
Just the other week, an 82-year-old man in Switzerland was forced
to start a 13-month prison sentence: Gaston Amaudruz. He's an
82-year-old fellow. He publishes a little newsletter; and for
so-called "denying the holocaust," he's now serving 13 months in
a Swiss prison. Another man, Jean Plantin, has also been
sentenced to imprisonment for his defiance of these same kinds of
laws in France. And similar laws exist in Germany, in Austria, in
the Netherlands, in Belgium, and in other countries. They're
palpably unjust laws because they are selective laws: They apply
only to one chapter of history, the so-called "denying" of the
so-called Jewish "holocaust." No other chapter of history is
treated in this way.
KAS: Is there anything that our listeners can do, any sort of
pressure that we can exert, to prevent this horrible miscarriage
of justice?
MW: They can spread the word, by notifying their newspapers,
their Congressmen, and other people. They can get information
about all this both from the Web site of the Institute for
Historical Review, which is http://www.ihr.org or from the
Zundelsite http://www.zundelsite.org -- which is linked to our
site, by the way -- which has an immense amount of information as
well.
Again, as Ingrid Rimland says: always be firm but polite. Don't
be vindictive, don't use crude language. You can also talk to the
immigration authorities, the I.N.S. Ingrid Rimland, in her recent
daily messages, has provided lists of media and other outlets she
is urging people to contact. But the main thing for information
on all this is to check the IHR site and the Zundelsite.
Robert Faurisson wrote in 1988 about Ernst Zundel, just before
the verdict was handed down in that trial, and I quote:
Zundel may once again go to prison for his research and beliefs,
or be threatened with deportation. All this is possible. Anything
may happen when there is an intellectual crisis and a realignment
of historical concepts on such a dimension. Revisionism is the
great intellectual adventure of the end of this century. Whatever
happens, Ernst Zundel is already the victor.
And that's very true. The great victory is that Ernst Zundel put
on the public record -- and made the world much more aware than
it ever was before -- of the shoddy, fragile, and bogus nature of
much of what is called the "holocaust" story. And he fortified --
immensely -- the international community of those people who have
spent tremendous amounts of time and energy to look at this in a
dissident way.
KAS: Thank you very much, Mark Weber. I urge all of our listeners
to contact you via your Web site and keep updated on this
situation -- and to do everything you can to help free Ernst
Zundel.
MW: Thanks a lot, Kevin, and all the best to you.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
The text above is based on a broadcast of the American Dissident
Voices radio program sponsored by National Vanguard Books.
It is distributed by e-mail each Saturday to subscribers of
ADV-list.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
==> To subscribe send an e-mail message to:
adv-list...@NatVan.com
The subject of the message should be: Subscribe
==> TO BE REMOVED send an e-mail message to:
adv-list...@NatVan.com
The subject of the message should be: Unsubscribe
==> The National Alliance has a strict anti-spamming policy.
This
information is intended for interested parties only and is not to
be
indiscriminately distributed via mass e-mailing or newsgroup
posting.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
To comment on this broadcast, please write to:
nati...@natvan.com To report typos and technical errors in
ADV-list or our web site, please write to: webm...@natvan.com
To contact us via "snail mail," write to:
National Vanguard Books
Attention: ADVlist
P.O. Box 330
Hillsboro, WV 24946
The National Alliance: http://www.natvan.com
http://www.natall.com
Ken McVay
Total Liberation <promet...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Free Ernst Zundel:
The German government will do that, just as soon as his sentence has
been served.
http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/z/zundel-ernst
--
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0465021522/thenizkorproject:
Lying About Hitler, by Dr. Richard Evans
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0393020444/thenizkorproject
The Holocaust on Trial, by D.D. Guttenplan
Kenneth McVay
news:ee493006.03022...@posting.google.com...
> Free Ernst Zundel:
> An Interview with Mark Weber by Kevin Alfred Strom
Mark Weber? The man with close ties to German NAZIS? THAT Mark Weber?
http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/orgs/american/wiesenthal.center/swc.oprep
[...]
> KAS: Welcome to American Dissident Voices. Today we welcome to
> our microphones for the third time the director of the Institute
> for Historical Review, Mr. Mark Weber. Welcome, Mark.
The Institute for Historical Review? The racist site devoted to
hatemongering and Holocaust denial? THAT IHR?
http://www.nizkor.org/faqs/ihr
>
> In recent years he's continued that fight from the United States,
> depending on the First Amendment to guarantee him the right to
> speak freely. But a few days ago, on February 5, 2003, that all
> changed. Can you tell us what happened, Mark?
>
> MW: Ernst Zundel was arrested in his home in east Tennessee. For
> a little more than two years, he's been living there with his
> wife, Ingrid Rimland. He was arrested by three agents of the
> Immigration and Naturalization Service, and two local law
> enforcement agents, and taken away to the local county jail. And
> then, yesterday, he was deported from there, and taken up to the
> Canadian border. He's now being held at a federal -- I.N.S. --
> detention center near Buffalo, New York, in Batavia, close to the
> Canadian border.
>
> And there's a big three-way or four-way international tug of war
> about what's going to happen to this man. There was a lot of fear
> for a time that he would be deported to Germany. He's a German
> citizen. He's tried to get Canadian citizenship, but he was
> rejected. He was born in Germany, and there was fear that he
> would be deported to Germany.
Gosh... Mr. Weber forgot to mention that Mr. Zundel's VISA expired, and he
did not attend a meeting with the INS to sort it out.
He also forgot to mention that Zundel was forbidden to enter the United
States for 20 years.
He also forgot to mention that Zundel himself WITHDREW his application for
Canadian citizenship, rather than face the certainty of deportation because
he was considered a threat to Canada's security.
I guess he just forgot, eh?
[...]
> But Ernst Zundel is instead, apparently, going to be deported to
> Canada. He lived in Canada as a permanent resident, or "landed
> immigrant" they call it up there, for 42 years. He still has some
> rights there.
Zundel has been declared a threat to Canada's national security, because of
his documented close contacts with extremist groups. Funny Weber didn't
mention that.
Why is that?
Methinks Mr. Weber's been fibbing, Bubba.
http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/z/zundel-ernst - There's a great photo
there of Zundel and his janitors. They have really neat outfits.
Brad Scott
McVay" <kmc...@island.net> wrote:
>Mark Weber? The man with close ties to German NAZIS?
Proof?
What about B'nai Brith's ties with communists?
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=s86e5vkk4ncqftdsjmt9vq20li7okv7t6r%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: Tax exempt religious organization uses exempt status to give communist
financial aid -V3 R_0222
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 00:37:54 -0600
Message-ID: <s86e5vkk4ncqftdsj...@4ax.com>
Jason James
"Kenneth McVay" <kmc...@island.net> wrote in message
news:b38jr...@enews4.newsguy.com...
Just love Zundel's construction site hat. I wonder if it has tin foil
lining?
Ohh and the dudes with the crew-cuts and dark pilot's style sunnies,...must
have hang-overs.
Jason James
Steven Mock
news:mcmf5v0dbbi9ak0nm...@4ax.com:
> On Sat, 22 Feb 2003 11:42:39 -0800, <b38jr...@enews4.newsguy.com>
> "Kenneth McVay" <kmc...@island.net> wrote:
>
>>Mark Weber? The man with close ties to German NAZIS?
>
> Proof?
You snipped the URL
http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/orgs/american/wiesenthal.center/swc.oprep
Steven Mock
--
"I may not agree with your bumper sticker;
but I'll defend your right to stick it." - Ed Anger
yp11
Still, Zundel came to Canada when he was 19 years old and lived 40
years in Canada. So basically he is a Canadian and should be permitted
to stay here if he wants to.
Hilary Ostrov
<l6pf5vs3pfc3u1lic...@4ax.com>, yp11 <yp...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
[...]
>Still, Zundel came to Canada when he was 19 years old and lived 40
>years in Canada. So basically he is a Canadian and should be permitted
>to stay here if he wants to.
Wrong. He's not a Canadian. Zundel was a landed immigrant whose
application for Canadian citizenship was denied. He fled the country
vowing that he would never return. Now he's back - making a liar of
himself, as usual - and making a mockery of our refugee system.
The Toronto Star sums up the situation quite well:
"We are pinning our hopes on the fact that Canada can throw out a
refugee claim for an individual who has already been ruled a security
risk, as Zundel has. That should speed the process for him to be
deported.
"It may take some time to sort out the legal issues. But the court of
public opinion has already decided. We want no more of Zundel or his
type. The faster he is removed, the better.
"Zundel thrives on the limelight. It is how he attracts his warped
followers. Journalists know this. We struggle each time we write about
him. With luck, this will be our farewell editorial on the subject."
Canada took Zundel in once, and once was too many.
hro
=====================
Hilary Ostrov
E-mail: hos...@telus.net
WWW: http://www3.telus.net/myssiwyg/
The Nizkor Project http://www.nizkor.org/
Ken McVay
He is not, and never has been, a Canadian. He voluntarily withdrew his
2nd application for Canadian citizenship, then turned his back on the
country and left, He is, further, a threat to our national security,
because of his documented ties with extremist groups. A German prison
cell is a fitting place for him.
Roger
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
someone claiming to be yp11 wrote
in message <l6pf5vs3pfc3u1lic...@4ax.com>:
>Still, Zundel came to Canada
You misspelled "fled from Germany to avoid the draft"
>when he was 19 years old and lived 40
>years in Canada. So basically he is a Canadian
Ummm. No.
He *was* a Landed Immigrant. Which meant he could stay in Canada as
long as he broke no laws.
Guess what? He did, and as a result was declared a threat to Canadian
national security. This was why he withdrew his application for
citizenship -- to avoid official notice of his persona non grata
status
>and should be permitted to stay here if he wants to.
Only one problem: he left in a tizzy, forfeiting his "Landed" status
and declaring that he would never again step foot in Canada.
The only reason he now wants to stay is to duck the consequences of
the crimes he committed in Germany. "Because I might go to jail" is
not sufficient reason to achieve refugee status in Canada.
The State of Alberta
"yp11" <yp...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:l6pf5vs3pfc3u1lic...@4ax.com...
> Still, Zundel came to Canada when he was 19 years old and lived 40
> years in Canada. So basically he is a Canadian and should be permitted
> to stay here if he wants to.
I always knew you Ontarians/Canadians thought this way.
Zundel could be of great use in Ontario/Canada:
-He and Tom Wappell could give lectures on how to deal with veterans -
Ontarians/Canadians don't like veterans.
-He could help the Nazi Film Board with its next pro-Nazi documentary at
taxpayer's expense.
-He could give race-relations lessons to Ontario cops
-He could advise the "criminal justice" system on how to deal with
terrorists
Best of all, he can give the West yet another reason to laugh at
Ontario/Canada's inept immigration system.
Before you self-righteous Easterners say how he'd be welcome in Alberta,
think again. Currently, Alberta has no power to deport people, but it
should do so in Zundel's case and send him back to Ontario/Canada.
Sara Salzman
Really? You mean all those illegal aliens in the US are US citizens?
Sara
--
"You know why conservatives love the Saudi government? Because it
stands for everything they do. It oppresses women, it forces religion
down people's throats, and it loves money above everything else.
Those are the three fundamentals of conservatism."
- James Carville, Crossfire, 11/25/02, on U.S. "conservatives".
Honest John
>He *was* a Landed Immigrant. Which meant he could stay in Canada as
>long as he broke no laws.
>
>Guess what? He did, and as a result was declared a threat to Canadian
>national security.
What law did he break?
One notes that the press recently described an immigrant who had a
whole string of convictions including eight for impaired driving but
was not deported because the adjudicator ruled that those convictions
were not serious enough to warrant deportation. Are you sure Ernst
wasn't thrown out just because he has unpopular views?
Ian King
news:O9U5a.305934$Yo4.11...@news1.calgary.shaw.ca...
I love the seletive amnesia of S of A. Have you forgotten how the people of
small-town Alberta rallied 'round Jim Keegstra and considered him one of
their own? Looks like Zundel's not the only historical revisionist...
Come to think of it, ol' Jim still lives in Bentley, Alberta if I'm not
mistaken and you don't have to look too hard to find an Albertan willing to
defend him and his kooky beliefs. Should I start on how Alberta kept Social
Credit, a party with an ignoble history of railing against an (imaginary)
international Jewish banking conspiracy, in power for 36 years?
--
ian a. king / east vancouver, bc / ianking [at] shaw [dat] ca
more at http://vancouverscrum.blogspot.com
Terry Pearson
news:catamont-D57A23...@tribune.sj.sys.us.xo.net...
It's amazing how Carville loves Iraq on the other hand
--
Terry Pearson
http://www.rightpoint.ca
Lefties Don't Debate They just yell
Ken McVay
Honest John <H...@taxpayers.ca> wrote:
>On Sat, 22 Feb 2003 15:54:01 -0600, Roger <roger@.> wrote:
>
>>He *was* a Landed Immigrant. Which meant he could stay in Canada as
>>long as he broke no laws.
>>
>>Guess what? He did, and as a result was declared a threat to Canadian
>>national security.
>
>What law did he break?
One does not have to be charged or convicted in order to be a threat
to national security. In Zundel's case, it was probably his open ties
to extremist groups in Germany, Canada, the United States and Russia
that got him classified as such a threat.
>One notes that the press recently described an immigrant who had a
>whole string of convictions including eight for impaired driving but
>was not deported because the adjudicator ruled that those convictions
>were not serious enough to warrant deportation. Are you sure Ernst
>wasn't thrown out just because he has unpopular views?
He wasn't thrown out - he left of his own volition, and swore he'd
never return.
Zundel peddles hate for profit, and we don't need him or his hate
machine in Canada.
Roger
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
in message <3e581a27...@news.eagle.ca>:
>On Sat, 22 Feb 2003 15:54:01 -0600, Roger <roger@.> wrote:
>>He *was* a Landed Immigrant. Which meant he could stay in Canada as
>>long as he broke no laws.
>>
>>Guess what? He did, and as a result was declared a threat to Canadian
>>national security.
>What law did he break?
He was convicted, *twice*, of spreading false news. And he has a nice
fat contempt citation waiting for him.
>One notes that the press recently described an immigrant who had a
>whole string of convictions including eight for impaired driving but
>was not deported because the adjudicator ruled that those convictions
>were not serious enough to warrant deportation. Are you sure Ernst
>wasn't thrown out just because he has unpopular views?
And is it your contention that one completely unreferenced story about
one immigrant dodging the bullet means *no one* should *ever* be
deported?
Honest John
>He was convicted, *twice*, of spreading false news. And he has a nice
>fat contempt citation waiting for him.
What "news" did he spread that was false? Does this mean that our
newspapers, who often report false news, are also at risk of criminal
charges?
>
>>One notes that the press recently described an immigrant who had a
>>whole string of convictions including eight for impaired driving but
>>was not deported because the adjudicator ruled that those convictions
>>were not serious enough to warrant deportation. Are you sure Ernst
>>wasn't thrown out just because he has unpopular views?
>
>And is it your contention that one completely unreferenced story about
>one immigrant dodging the bullet means *no one* should *ever* be
>deported?
No, I believe all criminals should be deported. It's just that it
very, very rarely happens so I wonder why they are picking on Ernst
when so many other terrorists, criminals, torturers and so on are
welcomed to Canada with open arms and the address of the nearest legal
aid lawyer and welfare office? Those people haven't lived here for
forty years either. I also question any law that makes it illegal to
simply hold unpopular views.
Honest John
>Zundel peddles hate for profit, and we don't need him or his hate
>machine in Canada.
Well some Moslem Mullahs and other extremists peddle anti-western and
anti-Jewish hate yet they are never deported.
Ken McVay
Honest John <H...@taxpayers.ca> wrote:
>On Sat, 22 Feb 2003 19:13:43 -0600, Roger <roger@.> wrote:
>
>
>>He was convicted, *twice*, of spreading false news. And he has a nice
>>fat contempt citation waiting for him.
>
>What "news" did he spread that was false? Does this mean that our
>newspapers, who often report false news, are also at risk of criminal
>charges?
It isn't relevant to the current situation, in any event, and the
Supreme Court of Canada threw out the law under which he was twice
convicted.
http://nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/people/z/zundel.ernst/supreme.court/judgement.1992
>No, I believe all criminals should be deported. It's just that it
>very, very rarely happens so I wonder why they are picking on Ernst
>when so many other terrorists, criminals, torturers and so on are
>welcomed to Canada with open arms and the address of the nearest legal
>aid lawyer and welfare office? Those people haven't lived here for
>forty years either. I also question any law that makes it illegal to
>simply hold unpopular views.
None of which has anything to do with the fact that the man has been
deemed a threat to our national security.
Ken McVay
Take it up with the Minister. In Zundel's case, he *left* the country
voluntarily, and *voluntarily* gave up his landed status. As far as
Canada is concerned, I believe he is personna non grata. He has no
status here, and "I don't want to go to jail" is hardly sufficient
reason to justify refugee status.
The German government has issued an arrent warrant, which should solve
the problem.
Roger
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
someone claiming to be Honest John wrote
>On Sat, 22 Feb 2003 19:13:43 -0600, Roger <roger@.> wrote:
>>He was convicted, *twice*, of spreading false news. And he has a nice
>>fat contempt citation waiting for him.
>What "news" did he spread that was false?
IIRC, it was for his part in publishing in Canada the pamphlet "Did
Six Million Really Die?" and writing a foreword and postscript for the
same.
In case you are unfamiliar, this ... work ... champions the premise
that the Holocaust never occurred, and is simply a myth promulgated by
a worldwide Jewish conspiracy.
>Does this mean that our
>newspapers, who often report false news, are also at risk of criminal
>charges?
Only if they, like Zundel, wilfully publish a statement, tale or news
that they know is false and that causes or is likely to cause injury
or mischief to a public interest, which is an indictable offence and
carried the penalty of imprisonment for a term of not exceeding two
years.
See, Zundel not only spread false news, he knew it was false when he
did so.
>>>One notes that the press recently described an immigrant who had a
>>>whole string of convictions including eight for impaired driving but
>>>was not deported because the adjudicator ruled that those convictions
>>>were not serious enough to warrant deportation. Are you sure Ernst
>>>wasn't thrown out just because he has unpopular views?
>>And is it your contention that one completely unreferenced story about
>>one immigrant dodging the bullet means *no one* should *ever* be
>>deported?
>No, I believe all criminals should be deported.
Then what is your beef with Zundel being sent back to Germany?
>It's just that it
>very, very rarely happens so I wonder why they are picking on Ernst
>when so many other terrorists, criminals, torturers and so on are
>welcomed to Canada with open arms and the address of the nearest legal
>aid lawyer and welfare office?
"Picking on?"
Have you given consideration to the fact that these other folks don't
have web sites celebrating the various ways in which those folks thumb
their nose at the law?
>Those people haven't lived here for
>forty years either. I also question any law that makes it illegal to
>simply hold unpopular views.
Well, if you can find one, we can discuss it. I am unaware of *any*
law in *any* western democracy which makes it illegal to hold
unpopular views.
Sara Salzman
"Terry Pearson" <rtpt...@shaw.ca> wrote:
A shame you couldn't address the issue at hand and could only yell about
my sig line. (Guess that makes YOU a leftie....)
Ah well, perhaps you'll like this one better.
Sara
--
War will exist until that distant day when the conscientious objector
enjoys the same reputation and prestige that the warrior does today.
- John F. Kennedy, 1917-1963
Werner Knoll
Ken McVay wrote:
>
> In article <3e5826b9...@news.eagle.ca>,
> Honest John <H...@taxpayers.ca> wrote:
> >On Sun, 23 Feb 2003 01:20:55 GMT, kmc...@vex.net (Ken McVay) wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Zundel peddles hate for profit, and we don't need him or his hate
> >>machine in Canada.
> >
> >Well some Moslem Mullahs and other extremists peddle anti-western and
> >anti-Jewish hate yet they are never deported.
>
> Take it up with the Minister. In Zundel's case, he *left* the country
> voluntarily, and *voluntarily* gave up his landed status. As far as
> Canada is concerned, I believe he is personna non grata. He has no
> status here, and "I don't want to go to jail" is hardly sufficient
> reason to justify refugee status.
>
> The German government has issued an arrent warrant, which should solve
> the problem.
>
> --
Perhaps the Canadian Government should ask Israel to extradite a certain
Jewish turd who killed a boy in Eastern Canada and fled to Israel?
Werner Knoll
Jewish Organizations have made the deed of the Nazi's into a shield
against criticism.
Brad Scott
<Xns932A9C63CE17...@207.35.177.135> Steven Mock <sm...@nizkor.org>
wrote:
>Brad Scott <t--avi-...@RemoveHyphens2MAILix.n-etc-om.com> wrote in
>news:mcmf5v0dbbi9ak0nm...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Sat, 22 Feb 2003 11:42:39 -0800, <b38jr...@enews4.newsguy.com>
>> "Kenneth McVay" <kmc...@island.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Mark Weber? The man with close ties to German NAZIS?
>>
>> Proof?
>
>You snipped the URL
I don't believe a known and proven liar Ken McVay on anything and the following
archives are filled with me proving numerous instances McVay is a liar!
Count the lies I caught McVay in now!
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=3df2a771.119319192%40news5.uncensored-news.com&rnum=5
Subject: Nanaimo BC Resident Ken McVay lies about his agenda to stifle FREE
SPEECH R_1207
Message-ID: <3df2a771....@news5.uncensored-news.com>
Date: 8 Dec 2002 01:58:44 GMT
FREE SPEECH WORLDWIDE UNDER ASSAULT BY B'NAI BRITH AND NIZKOR.ORG
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=rhao2v4fbuij94mcmi6sicj73sa4eifsns%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: Nizkor LHR Fund; Just Another Self Serving FUND Like the Nizkor
Endowment and Trust Funds?
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 10:56:49 -0600
Message-ID: <rhao2v4fbuij94mcm...@4ax.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=3e060868_1%40news2.uncensored-news.com&rnum=1
Subject: Is NIZKOR Running a Self Serving Endowment Fund Scam?
Message-ID: <3e060...@news2.uncensored-news.com>
Date: 22 Dec 2002 18:46:15 GMT
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=3e235877_3%40news2.uncensored-news.com&rnum=1
Subject: Did Ken McVay pay tax on those $50,000+ donations he denies receiving?
Message-ID: <3e235...@news2.uncensored-news.com>
Date: 14 Jan 2003 00:23:26 GMT
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=kpbl2v8od8empt5mdkt30k3t8ehs5q3jeh%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: Nizkor's Ken McVay Caught Lying Big Time About his San Antonio
Connection!
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 08:17:47 -0600
Message-ID: <kpbl2v8od8empt5md...@4ax.com>
BTW the people who provide McVay with funds also financed communist David
Lethbridge.
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=s86e5vkk4ncqftdsjmt9vq20li7okv7t6r%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: Tax exempt religious organization uses exempt status to give communist
financial aid -V3 R_0222
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 00:37:54 -0600
Message-ID: <s86e5vkk4ncqftdsj...@4ax.com>
>Steven Mock
Honest John
>>What "news" did he spread that was false?
>
>IIRC, it was for his part in publishing in Canada the pamphlet "Did
>Six Million Really Die?" and writing a foreword and postscript for the
>same.
>
>In case you are unfamiliar, this ... work ... champions the premise
>that the Holocaust never occurred, and is simply a myth promulgated by
>a worldwide Jewish conspiracy.
A disagreement about events that happened over half a century ago is
hardly "spreading false news." Spreading false history perhaps? The
Soviets did that for nearly 70 years, should Russian immigrants be
locked up as well?
>>Does this mean that our
>>newspapers, who often report false news, are also at risk of criminal
>>charges?
>
>Only if they, like Zundel, wilfully publish a statement, tale or news
>that they know is false and that causes or is likely to cause injury
>or mischief to a public interest, which is an indictable offence and
>carried the penalty of imprisonment for a term of not exceeding two
>years.
>
>See, Zundel not only spread false news, he knew it was false when he
>did so.
How do you know that? Can you read his mind? If someone goes around
claiming to be Napoleon, you and I may well know that is false but we
do not know that the person in question knows it to be false as well.
People hold all manner of bizarre and false beliefs....for example
that the Holocaust didn't happen or that socialism works....just check
out some of the strange posting on the newsgroups. Should all those
believers in strange things be thrown in jail?
>>No, I believe all criminals should be deported.
>
>Then what is your beef with Zundel being sent back to Germany?
>
He shouldn't be punished for simply holdong unpopular views. But if he
is thrown out I would just like to see the same law applied to those
who champion other types of hate speech, like militant Islam, send
them back where they came from, as well.
>>It's just that it
>>very, very rarely happens so I wonder why they are picking on Ernst
>>when so many other terrorists, criminals, torturers and so on are
>>welcomed to Canada with open arms and the address of the nearest legal
>>aid lawyer and welfare office?
>
>"Picking on?"
Yep. He lived her for 40 years and as far as I am aware assaulted no
one and stole nothing during that time.
>Have you given consideration to the fact that these other folks don't
>have web sites celebrating the various ways in which those folks thumb
>their nose at the law?
It's called free speech.
>>Those people haven't lived here for
>>forty years either. I also question any law that makes it illegal to
>>simply hold unpopular views.
>
>Well, if you can find one, we can discuss it. I am unaware of *any*
>law in *any* western democracy which makes it illegal to hold
>unpopular views.
That's what Zundel is being punished for, under Canada's so called
hate laws. They should be called the political correctness laws.
Honest John
>In article <3e5826b9...@news.eagle.ca>,
>Honest John <H...@taxpayers.ca> wrote:
>>On Sun, 23 Feb 2003 01:20:55 GMT, kmc...@vex.net (Ken McVay) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Zundel peddles hate for profit, and we don't need him or his hate
>>>machine in Canada.
>>
>>Well some Moslem Mullahs and other extremists peddle anti-western and
>>anti-Jewish hate yet they are never deported.
>
>Take it up with the Minister. In Zundel's case, he *left* the country
>voluntarily, and *voluntarily* gave up his landed status. As far as
>Canada is concerned, I believe he is personna non grata. He has no
>status here, and "I don't want to go to jail" is hardly sufficient
>reason to justify refugee status.
So why is Zundel singled out while swarthy skinned types are let in
without any identification after they lie to immigration? Why is the
minister so keen to enforce the law with Zundel but backs off with
everyone else? All of a sudden our joke of an immigration system
starts to actually work?
Honest John
wrote:
>> The German government has issued an arrent warrant, which should solve
>> the problem.
>>
>> --
>
>Perhaps the Canadian Government should ask Israel to extradite a certain
>Jewish turd who killed a boy in Eastern Canada and fled to Israel?
I thought they did and he was returned here to stand trial?
Waldo
"Roger" <roger@.> wrote in message
news:dt7g5vs08incejj2r...@4ax.com...
> In one age, called the Second Age by some,
> (an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
> someone claiming to be Honest John wrote
> in message <3e581a27...@news.eagle.ca>:
>
> >On Sat, 22 Feb 2003 15:54:01 -0600, Roger <roger@.> wrote:
>
> >>He *was* a Landed Immigrant. Which meant he could stay in Canada as
> >>long as he broke no laws.
> >>
> >>Guess what? He did, and as a result was declared a threat to Canadian
> >>national security.
>
> >What law did he break?
>
> He was convicted, *twice*, of spreading false news.
That Kosher fish went belly up. Zundel took the case to the Canadian Supreme
Court, and the law (ancient, archaic and never-used, except by desperately
vengeful Semitists) was ruled unconstitutional.
Zundel prevailed.
> And he has a nice
> fat contempt citation waiting for him.
Contempt? On what grounds is this charge based?
> >One notes that the press recently described an immigrant who had a
> >whole string of convictions including eight for impaired driving but
> >was not deported because the adjudicator ruled that those convictions
> >were not serious enough to warrant deportation. Are you sure Ernst
> >wasn't thrown out just because he has unpopular views?
>
> And is it your contention that one completely unreferenced story about
> one immigrant dodging the bullet means *no one* should *ever* be
> deported?
Well . . . if they won't stop saying things that Jews don't want heard . . .
**
Waldo
Observer at Large
Roger
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
someone claiming to be Honest John wrote
>On Sat, 22 Feb 2003 20:32:14 -0600, Roger <roger@.> wrote:
>>>What "news" did he spread that was false?
>>IIRC, it was for his part in publishing in Canada the pamphlet "Did
>>Six Million Really Die?" and writing a foreword and postscript for the
>>same.
>>
>>In case you are unfamiliar, this ... work ... champions the premise
>>that the Holocaust never occurred, and is simply a myth promulgated by
>>a worldwide Jewish conspiracy.
>A disagreement about events that happened over half a century ago is
>hardly "spreading false news."
You misspelled "lying about events..." above.
And the legal definition includes "a statement, tale or news."
>Spreading false history perhaps? The
>Soviets did that for nearly 70 years, should Russian immigrants be
>locked up as well?
If they did so in Canada while residing in Canada, yes.
>>>Does this mean that our
>>>newspapers, who often report false news, are also at risk of criminal
>>>charges?
>>Only if they, like Zundel, wilfully publish a statement, tale or news
>>that they know is false and that causes or is likely to cause injury
>>or mischief to a public interest, which is an indictable offence and
>>carried the penalty of imprisonment for a term of not exceeding two
>>years.
>>
>>See, Zundel not only spread false news, he knew it was false when he
>>did so.
>How do you know that?
'Twas proved *twice* in a Canadian court.
>Can you read his mind? If someone goes around
>claiming to be Napoleon, you and I may well know that is false but we
>do not know that the person in question knows it to be false as well.
>People hold all manner of bizarre and false beliefs....for example
>that the Holocaust didn't happen or that socialism works....just check
>out some of the strange posting on the newsgroups. Should all those
>believers in strange things be thrown in jail?
Only if they also break the law.
Is there a particular reason you keep trying analogies that fail so
trivially?
>>>No, I believe all criminals should be deported.
>>Then what is your beef with Zundel being sent back to Germany?
>He shouldn't be punished for simply holdong unpopular views.
And he isn't -- so again, what is your beef?
>But if he is thrown out I would just like to see the same law applied to those
>who champion other types of hate speech, like militant Islam, send
>them back where they came from, as well.
Nor was Zundel convicted of "hate speech."
Why is it that you have to lie about this situation to make your
points?
>>>It's just that it
>>>very, very rarely happens so I wonder why they are picking on Ernst
>>>when so many other terrorists, criminals, torturers and so on are
>>>welcomed to Canada with open arms and the address of the nearest legal
>>>aid lawyer and welfare office?
>>"Picking on?"
>Yep. He lived her for 40 years and as far as I am aware assaulted no
>one and stole nothing during that time.
Those being the only things that are against the law?
>>Have you given consideration to the fact that these other folks don't
>>have web sites celebrating the various ways in which those folks thumb
>>their nose at the law?
>It's called free speech.
Absolutely. And his exercise of free speech served to draw attention
to the fact that he *revelled* in thumbing his nose at the law.
Now, *whose* fault is it that notice was taken of it?
>>>Those people haven't lived here for
>>>forty years either. I also question any law that makes it illegal to
>>>simply hold unpopular views.
>>Well, if you can find one, we can discuss it. I am unaware of *any*
>>law in *any* western democracy which makes it illegal to hold
>>unpopular views.
>That's what Zundel is being punished for, under Canada's so called
>hate laws.
Ummm. No.
I quoted the relevant portion. Here it is again:
Criminal Code s. 181
181. Every one who wilfully publishes a statement, tale or news that
he knows is false and that causes or is likely to cause injury or
mischief to a public interest is guilty of an indictable offence and
liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.
>They should be called the political correctness laws.
Of course, doing so would not actually *make* them political
correctness laws.
But feel free.
You won't mind if I point out the intellectual poverty of your doing
so, will you?
JohnR
Hmmmmm.....couldn't a hate monger just put in a disclaimer?
Somebody could make a disclaimer that states that the published
article is fictitious, further stating that he/she must state it as
being fictitious because of a repressive political regime.
Roger
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
in message <vmhh5vccq17549mpj...@4ax.com>:
>>>>>Those people haven't lived here for
>>>>>forty years either. I also question any law that makes it illegal to
>>>>>simply hold unpopular views.
>>>>Well, if you can find one, we can discuss it. I am unaware of *any*
>>>>law in *any* western democracy which makes it illegal to hold
>>>>unpopular views.
Are you going to attempt to document such laws, or simply admit that
you were trying to score rhetorical points?
>>>That's what Zundel is being punished for, under Canada's so called
>>>hate laws.
>>Ummm. No.
>>
>>I quoted the relevant portion. Here it is again:
>>
>>Criminal Code s. 181
>>
>>181. Every one who wilfully publishes a statement, tale or news that
>>he knows is false and that causes or is likely to cause injury or
>>mischief to a public interest is guilty of an indictable offence and
>>liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.
>Hmmmmm.....couldn't a hate monger just put in a disclaimer?
>Somebody could make a disclaimer that states that the published
>article is fictitious, further stating that he/she must state it as
>being fictitious because of a repressive political regime.
So now it's repressive that known lies not be presented as truth when
they are likely to cause injury or cause mischief to a public
interest?
Or is this simply more empty rhetoric designed to help you avoid
acknowledging the idiocy of what you said before?
yp11
Let's not kid ourselves. The only reason why Zundel is singled out is
because he "questioned the Holocaust" and wrote some other articles
regarding how the Jews profited from the Holocaust etc. A Jewish
professor called Finkel wrote a book about the same think, and
although he is not liked by many Jews, because he is a Jew himself, he
is not being expelled from anywhere.
If Zundel had criticized the Muslims or the Quebecers or the Irish or
the Catholics, he would not be bothered at all and could live in
Canada or the U.S. as long as he wants. However, you cannot criticize
the chosen people without being severely punished. Look at the recent
Ahenakew case as another example.
Andrew Golebiowski
> Criminal Code s. 181
>
> 181. Every one who wilfully publishes a statement, tale or news that
> he knows is false and that causes or is likely to cause injury or
> mischief to a public interest is guilty of an indictable offence and
> liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.
This applies to the situations like one when someone screams "FIRE!!!!!" in
the room full of people when actually there is no fire at all.
How does publishing one's views, whether historically correct or not, fall
into this paragraph?
AG
KARTOFFELKANONE
"Hate Crimes, A Savage Hypocrisy"
It's called thought crime. Welcome to the NWO.
Andrew Golebiowski <andrewgo...@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:CE76a.45093$b8v1....@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
Werner Knoll
How come there was nothing in the paper and TV? What would have happened
if it was somebody else doing it?
Werner Knoll
Ken McVay
It was all over BCTV and the CBC for months, you moraknollic idiot.
--
If Ernst Zundel is a refugee, Daffy Duck is Albert Einstein. Some
propositions are so ludicrous that they are a betrayal of common
sense and human dignity if allowed a moment's oxygen.
-REX MURPHY, The Globe and Mail
Werner Knoll
How come there was nothing in the paper and TV? What would have happened
if it was somebody else doing it?
Werner Knoll
Roger
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
in message
<CE76a.45093$b8v1....@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>:
Zundel went far beyond "publishing his views." Come back and talk
when you are familiar with what he *does* publish.
KARTOFFELKANONE
Roger <roger@.> wrote in message
He spoke his views too, that makes him a thought criminal and he should be
locked up and his brain sanitized. We must not allow certain thoughts,
because people can't make up their own minds. We must not allow people to
form their own opinions. The government should legislate freedom of speech
to only include legitimate speech. Zundel and others who are unproper must
be silenced.
Jason James
"Terry Pearson" <rtpt...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:bdV5a.53094$na.12...@news2.calgary.shaw.ca...
Fuck'in hell,..your site has more pop-ups than a shooting gallery!
Jason
Werner Knoll
I seen the beginning but not the end...
How come your friend are after Zundel for asking questioning some aspect
of the Holocaust?
How come your friends after David Ahenakew a former leader of the
Assembly of First Nation, who is not denying the Holocaust:
Here is what he said about the chosen ones:
Selbst David Ahenakew ein Kandischer Indianer Häupling sagte:
"How do you get rid of a disease like that, that's going to take over,
that's going to dominate?" he replied.
"The Jews near owned all of Germany prior to the war. That's how Hitler
came in. He was going to make damn sure that the Jews didn't take over
Germany or Europe. THat's why he fried six million of those guys, you
know. Jews would have owned the whole damned world...
End
And when will the people of Israel send Ariel Sharon to Belgium to stand
on trail for the massacre of Palestinian refugee's
Werner Knoll
Patrick Keenan
news:3e5826b9...@news.eagle.ca...
Zundel wasn't deported from Canada. He left on his own. He said he'd
never be back.
Zundel *was* deported from the US because he isn't smart enough to
understand that now is not a good time to be in the US with a long-expired
visa.
-pk
Ken McVay
Werner Knoll <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>Ken McVay wrote:
>>
>> In article <3E5910DE...@hotmail.com>,
>> Werner Knoll <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >Honest John wrote:
>
>
>> >How come there was nothing in the paper and TV? What would have happened
>> >if it was somebody else doing it?
>>
>> It was all over BCTV and the CBC for months, you moraknollic idiot.
>> --
>> If Ernst Zundel is a refugee, Daffy Duck is Albert Einstein. Some
>> propositions are so ludicrous that they are a betrayal of common
>> sense and human dignity if allowed a moment's oxygen.
>> -REX MURPHY, The Globe and Mail
>
>
>I seen the beginning but not the end...
>
>How come your friend are after Zundel for asking questioning some aspect
>of the Holocaust?
Mr. Zundel is a wanted felon. Live with it.
KARTOFFELKANONE
Ken McVay <kmc...@vex.net> wrote in message
news:3_c6a.2826$S71.30...@news.nnrp.ca...
> In article <3E59495F...@hotmail.com>,
> Werner Knoll <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >Ken McVay wrote:
> >>
> >> In article <3E5910DE...@hotmail.com>,
> >> Werner Knoll <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Honest John wrote:
> >
> >
> >> >How come there was nothing in the paper and TV? What would have
happened
> >> >if it was somebody else doing it?
> >>
> >> It was all over BCTV and the CBC for months, you moraknollic idiot.
> >> --
> >> If Ernst Zundel is a refugee, Daffy Duck is Albert Einstein. Some
> >> propositions are so ludicrous that they are a betrayal of common
> >> sense and human dignity if allowed a moment's oxygen.
> >> -REX MURPHY, The Globe and Mail
> >
> >
> >I seen the beginning but not the end...
> >
> >How come your friend are after Zundel for asking questioning some aspect
> >of the Holocaust?
>
> Mr. Zundel is a wanted felon. Live with it.
>
Thought Crime.
Gord McFee
> Free Ernst Zundel:
No.
--
Gord McFee
I'll write no line before its time
Morghus
True. Zundel went far beyond just publishing his views; he also
published supporting facts and cogent arguments to back up those
views. That's why the Holocaust hawkers all over the world are
constantly attacking him. That's why we see a steady stream of posts
trying desperately to ridicule, demean, and demonize Zundel. That's
why they revel in his tribulations and gloat over every obstacle
placed in his path. The reason the Holocaust industry pays so much
attention to Ernst Zundel: they are frightened to death of him.
Sara Salzman
Gord McFee <gord....@rogers.com> wrote:
> On 2/22/2003 1:00 PM, Total Liberation wrote:
>
> > Free Ernst Zundel:
>
> No.
Oh, you're wrong, Gord. He should be completely free -- to return to
Germany as quickly as possible.
Sara
--
If Ernst Zundel is a refugee, Daffy Duck is Albert Einstein. Some
propositions are so ludicrous that they are a betrayal of common
sense and human dignity if allowed a moment's oxygen.
- REX MURPHY, The Globe and Mail
Werner Knoll
You should know. Considering the company you keep.
Werner Knoll
Sara Salzman
mor...@MailAndNews.com (Morghus) wrote:
He did?!? You mean he has PROOF that Hitler lives in a secret bunker in
the North Pole? How come I missed this one?
> That's why the Holocaust hawkers all over the world are
> constantly attacking him. That's why we see a steady stream of posts
> trying desperately to ridicule, demean, and demonize Zundel.
No need. Zundel does it well enough himself. (Well, Ingrid helps a lot.)
> That's
> why they revel in his tribulations and gloat over every obstacle
> placed in his path. The reason the Holocaust industry pays so much
> attention to Ernst Zundel: they are frightened to death of him.
Really? Personally, I think he's hysterically funny.
Sara
--
If Ernst Zundel is a refugee, Daffy Duck is Albert Einstein. Some
propositions are so ludicrous that they are a betrayal of common
sense and human dignity if allowed a moment's oxygen.
- REX MURPHY, The Globe and Mail
Roger
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
in message
<catamont-BEFB23...@spectator.sj.sys.us.xo.net>:
>> Roger <roger@.> wrote in message
>> news:<b58f76c73f1d9059...@news.teranews.com>...
>> > Zundel went far beyond "publishing his views." Come back and talk
>> > when you are familiar with what he *does* publish.
>> True. Zundel went far beyond just publishing his views; he also
>> published supporting facts and cogent arguments to back up those
>> views.
"Supporting facts" such as the Leuchter Report?
It is to laugh.
>He did?!? You mean he has PROOF that Hitler lives in a secret bunker in
>the North Pole? How come I missed this one?
Because the Nazi UFO's carried all the evidence away
>> That's why the Holocaust hawkers all over the world are
>> constantly attacking him. That's why we see a steady stream of posts
>> trying desperately to ridicule, demean, and demonize Zundel.
>No need. Zundel does it well enough himself. (Well, Ingrid helps a lot.)
Yes, after all: it's *her* web site and has nothing to do with
Ernst...
>> That's
>> why they revel in his tribulations and gloat over every obstacle
>> placed in his path. The reason the Holocaust industry pays so much
>> attention to Ernst Zundel: they are frightened to death of him.
In the same way that they are all afraid of a piano being dropped on
their <jewish collective> heads.
>Really? Personally, I think he's hysterically funny.
Come now -- you don't take seriously a man who challenges the
worldwide Jooish conspiracy wearing his superhero costume: a kangaroo
suit?
It's a liar! It's a coward! It's .... (naught) Z-man!
Roger
More powerful than a worldwide Jooish conspiracy!
Able to completely invert logic in a single lie!
Fighting for donations, suckers, and to stay out of jail in
Germany....
It's delusional! It's a coward! It's .... (naught) Z-man!
William Daffer
> On 2/22/2003 1:00 PM, Total Liberation wrote:
>
>> Free Ernst Zundel:
>
> No.
Even 'free' the price it too dear!
whd
--
Pat Blakely on the definition of terrorism
A terrorist act is an act by a group of people whom you oppose.
If you are a militant Moslem, the blowing up of the WTC was an act of
war, just as what the US is doing to the Taliban.
From <9rf4ur$4fn$1...@suaar1ab.prod.compuserve.com>
Ken McVay
Morghus <mor...@MailAndNews.com> wrote:
[...]
> True. Zundel went far beyond just publishing his views; he also
>published supporting facts and cogent arguments to back up those
>views. That's why the Holocaust hawkers all over the world are
>constantly attacking him. That's why we see a steady stream of posts
>trying desperately to ridicule, demean, and demonize Zundel. That's
>why they revel in his tribulations and gloat over every obstacle
>placed in his path. The reason the Holocaust industry pays so much
>attention to Ernst Zundel: they are frightened to death of him.
Sorry, Bubba. Two juries of Zundel's peers found that he not only
published lies, but that he *knew* they were lies when he published
them.
Nice try, though.
--
If Ernst Zundel is a refugee, Daffy Duck is Albert Einstein. Some
propositions are so ludicrous that they are a betrayal of common
sense and human dignity if allowed a moment's oxygen.
-REX MURPHY, The Globe and Mail
Joel Rosenberg
> On Sun, 23 Feb 2003 04:42:17 GMT, H...@taxpayers.ca (Honest John) wrote:
>
> >On Sun, 23 Feb 2003 02:18:12 GMT, kmc...@vex.net (Ken McVay) wrote:
> >
> >>In article <3e5826b9...@news.eagle.ca>,
> >>Honest John <H...@taxpayers.ca> wrote:
> >>>On Sun, 23 Feb 2003 01:20:55 GMT, kmc...@vex.net (Ken McVay) wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Zundel peddles hate for profit, and we don't need him or his hate
> >>>>machine in Canada.
> >>>
> >>>Well some Moslem Mullahs and other extremists peddle anti-western and
> >>>anti-Jewish hate yet they are never deported.
> >>
> >>Take it up with the Minister. In Zundel's case, he *left* the country
> >>voluntarily, and *voluntarily* gave up his landed status. As far as
> >>Canada is concerned, I believe he is personna non grata. He has no
> >>status here, and "I don't want to go to jail" is hardly sufficient
> >>reason to justify refugee status.
> >
> >So why is Zundel singled out while swarthy skinned types are let in
> >without any identification after they lie to immigration? Why is the
> >minister so keen to enforce the law with Zundel but backs off with
> >everyone else? All of a sudden our joke of an immigration system
> >starts to actually work?
> >
>
> Let's not kid ourselves. The only reason why Zundel is singled out is
> because he
...he violated Canadian law -- where, as a landed immigrant, he had
the right to be a boil on the butt of the Candian polity -- and then
left in a huff, giving up his status, and went to the US, where he
violated US immigration law by overstaying his visa.
He's a German citizen, and properly a German problem. Let them handle
him.
--
------------------------------------------------------------
http://islamthereligionofpeace.blogspot.com
Joel Rosenberg
> On 2/22/2003 1:00 PM, Total Liberation wrote:
>
> > Free Ernst Zundel:
>
> No.
Who would want a free Ernst Zundel? Free is far too expensive for
toxic waste.
--
------------------------------------------------------------
http://islamthereligionofpeace.blogspot.com
Andrew Golebiowski
> In article <73fedc95.03022...@posting.google.com>,
> Morghus <mor...@MailAndNews.com> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > True. Zundel went far beyond just publishing his views; he also
> >published supporting facts and cogent arguments to back up those
> >views. That's why the Holocaust hawkers all over the world are
> >constantly attacking him. That's why we see a steady stream of posts
> >trying desperately to ridicule, demean, and demonize Zundel. That's
> >why they revel in his tribulations and gloat over every obstacle
> >placed in his path. The reason the Holocaust industry pays so much
> >attention to Ernst Zundel: they are frightened to death of him.
>
> Sorry, Bubba. Two juries of Zundel's peers found that he not only
> published lies, but that he *knew* they were lies when he published
> them.
>
> Nice try, though.
Well, let me try...
I know British won the battle at the Plains of Abraham. If I create the
pamphlet stating the opposite, does this make me a criminal?
In other words, why some historical facts and interpratations require
protection of the state while others do not?
AG
Roger
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
someone claiming to be Andrew Golebiowski wrote
in message
>> In article <73fedc95.03022...@posting.google.com>,
>> Morghus <mor...@MailAndNews.com> wrote:
>> > True. Zundel went far beyond just publishing his views; he also
>> >published supporting facts and cogent arguments to back up those
>> >views.
<snip>
>> Sorry, Bubba. Two juries of Zundel's peers found that he not only
>> published lies, but that he *knew* they were lies when he published
>> them.
>>
>> Nice try, though.
>Well, let me try...
>
>I know British won the battle at the Plains of Abraham. If I create the
>pamphlet stating the opposite, does this make me a criminal?
>
>In other words, why some historical facts and interpratations require
>protection of the state while others do not?
Will your pamphlets cause or are they likely to cause injury or
mischief to a public interest? That's the other part of the law.
To relate this to Zundel: the pamphlet in question has as it's sole
purpose making Naziism a viable political philosophy. And since the
last time the Nazis were in a position to act on their racist theories
they managed to murder in the neighborhood of 12 million people,
roughly half of which were killed for no other reason than their
supposed Jewishness, don't you think there might be a compelling
public interest in making sure it doesn't happen again?
Ken McVay
It might have under the old law, which no longer exists. The elements
were these:
1. That you publish a lie,
2. That you knew it was a lie at the time of publication
In Zundel's case, the Supreme Court ruled that the law violated
Zundel's Charter rights, and threw it out. In short, the Court
determined that it was no longer an offense to knowingly publish a
lie.
>In other words, why some historical facts and interpratations require
>protection of the state while others do not?
I don't think the State has any business protecting historical fact,
and Holocaust denial, per se, is not, and never has been, against the
law in Canada.
steve wolk
No, but Zundel ultimately was not found to be a criminal in this regard.
But you, just as he is, would be a liar, a fool or both.
>
> In other words, why some historical facts and interpratations require
> protection of the state while others do not?
There are no historical facts protected by any state. If you know of any
laws that protect historical facts, feel free to reproduce the law(s) here.
I'll wait.
Roger
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
in message <5Jx6a.2912$907.33...@news.nnrp.ca>:
>In article <E8x6a.70338$Zr%.14358@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>,
>Andrew Golebiowski <andrewgo...@rogers.com> wrote:
>>I know British won the battle at the Plains of Abraham. If I create the
>>pamphlet stating the opposite, does this make me a criminal?
>It might have under the old law, which no longer exists. The elements
>were these:
>
>1. That you publish a lie,
>2. That you knew it was a lie at the time of publication
3. The lie causes or is likely to cause injury or mischief to a public
interest
>In Zundel's case, the Supreme Court ruled that the law violated
>Zundel's Charter rights, and threw it out. In short, the Court
>determined that it was no longer an offense to knowingly publish a
>lie.
>>In other words, why some historical facts and interpratations require
>>protection of the state while others do not?
>I don't think the State has any business protecting historical fact,
>and Holocaust denial, per se, is not, and never has been, against the
>law in Canada.
And of course. the purpose of the False News law was not the
protection of historical fact...
Thinker
"yp11" <yp...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:l6pf5vs3pfc3u1lic...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 23 Feb 2003 07:17:17 +1100, " Jason James"
> <strato...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Kenneth McVay" <kmc...@island.net> wrote in message
> >news:b38jr...@enews4.newsguy.com...
> >> "Total Liberation" <promet...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:ee493006.03022...@posting.google.com...
> >> > Free Ernst Zundel:
> >> > An Interview with Mark Weber by Kevin Alfred Strom
> >>
> >> Mark Weber? The man with close ties to German NAZIS? THAT Mark Weber?
> >> http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/orgs/american/wiesenthal.center/swc.oprep
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> > KAS: Welcome to American Dissident Voices. Today we welcome to
> >> > our microphones for the third time the director of the Institute
> >> > for Historical Review, Mr. Mark Weber. Welcome, Mark.
> >>
> >> The Institute for Historical Review? The racist site devoted to
> >> hatemongering and Holocaust denial? THAT IHR?
> >>
> >> http://www.nizkor.org/faqs/ihr
> >>
> >> >
> >> > In recent years he's continued that fight from the United States,
> >> > depending on the First Amendment to guarantee him the right to
> >> > speak freely. But a few days ago, on February 5, 2003, that all
> >> > changed. Can you tell us what happened, Mark?
> >> >
> >> > MW: Ernst Zundel was arrested in his home in east Tennessee. For
> >> > a little more than two years, he's been living there with his
> >> > wife, Ingrid Rimland. He was arrested by three agents of the
> >> > Immigration and Naturalization Service, and two local law
> >> > enforcement agents, and taken away to the local county jail. And
> >> > then, yesterday, he was deported from there, and taken up to the
> >> > Canadian border. He's now being held at a federal -- I.N.S. --
> >> > detention center near Buffalo, New York, in Batavia, close to the
> >> > Canadian border.
> >> >
> >> > And there's a big three-way or four-way international tug of war
> >> > about what's going to happen to this man. There was a lot of fear
> >> > for a time that he would be deported to Germany. He's a German
> >> > citizen. He's tried to get Canadian citizenship, but he was
> >> > rejected. He was born in Germany, and there was fear that he
> >> > would be deported to Germany.
> >>
> >> Gosh... Mr. Weber forgot to mention that Mr. Zundel's VISA expired, and
he
> >> did not attend a meeting with the INS to sort it out.
> >>
> >> He also forgot to mention that Zundel was forbidden to enter the United
> >> States for 20 years.
> >>
> >> He also forgot to mention that Zundel himself WITHDREW his application
for
> >> Canadian citizenship, rather than face the certainty of deportation
> >because
> >> he was considered a threat to Canada's security.
> >>
> >> I guess he just forgot, eh?
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> > But Ernst Zundel is instead, apparently, going to be deported to
> >> > Canada. He lived in Canada as a permanent resident, or "landed
> >> > immigrant" they call it up there, for 42 years. He still has some
> >> > rights there.
> >>
> >> Zundel has been declared a threat to Canada's national security,
because
> >of
> >> his documented close contacts with extremist groups. Funny Weber
didn't
> >> mention that.
> >>
> >> Why is that?
> >>
> >> Methinks Mr. Weber's been fibbing, Bubba.
> >>
> >> http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/z/zundel-ernst - There's a great
photo
> >> there of Zundel and his janitors. They have really neat outfits.
> >
> >Just love Zundel's construction site hat. I wonder if it has tin foil
> >lining?
> >
> >Ohh and the dudes with the crew-cuts and dark pilot's style
sunnies,...must
> >have hang-overs.
> >
> >Jason James
> >
> Still, Zundel came to Canada when he was 19 years old and lived 40
> years in Canada. So basically he is a Canadian and should be permitted
> to stay here if he wants to.
That 40 years of lies and deception. Deport him!
Black Knight
I don't know about the gutter. I do know you'll find Fatboy Bradshit in the toilet.
Orac
> On 2/22/2003 1:00 PM, Total Liberation wrote:
>
> > Free Ernst Zundel:
>
> No.
Better, yet, send him home to his native land...
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"
Gord McFee
> In article <3E597FBF...@rogers.com>,
> Gord McFee <gord....@rogers.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2/22/2003 1:00 PM, Total Liberation wrote:
>>
>> > Free Ernst Zundel:
>>
>> No.
>
> Oh, you're wrong, Gord. He should be completely free -- to return to
> Germany as quickly as possible.
Sorry, I wasn't clear. I meant *after* he gets back to Germany. :-)
Gord McFee
> Gord McFee <gord....@rogers.com> writes:
>
>> On 2/22/2003 1:00 PM, Total Liberation wrote:
>>
>> > Free Ernst Zundel:
>>
>> No.
>
> Who would want a free Ernst Zundel? Free is far too expensive for
> toxic waste.
ROTFL!
Honest John
>To relate this to Zundel: the pamphlet in question has as it's sole
>purpose making Naziism a viable political philosophy. And since the
>last time the Nazis were in a position to act on their racist theories
>they managed to murder in the neighborhood of 12 million people,
>roughly half of which were killed for no other reason than their
>supposed Jewishness, don't you think there might be a compelling
>public interest in making sure it doesn't happen again?
So exactly how does adoption of the Nazi thought control approach stop
it happening again?
Roger
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
in message <3e5ad8a7...@news.eagle.ca>:
More rhetoric.
The *truth* will help prevent it, and Canadians thought to help that
process by outlawing known lies when they lead to such situations.
Honest John
>
>>So exactly how does adoption of the Nazi thought control approach stop
>>it happening again?
>
>More rhetoric.
>
>The *truth* will help prevent it, and Canadians thought to help that
>process by outlawing known lies when they lead to such situations.
So like in Nazi Germany the (Canadian) state will decide what the
authorized truth is?
Roger
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
someone claiming to be Honest John wrote
No, what the lies are. And remember, Canada has the presumption of
innocence so the lies have to be demonstrated, and then it must be
shown that the liar *knew* they were lies. So one honestly mistaken
on the facts will not be found guilty.
Black Knight
Since Ernstie overstayed his American visa, he has the same INS status
as an illegal alien from Mexico. Personally, I'd rather have the
Mexicans -at least they do something productive. They keep our produce
prices low by working in the fields for very low wages. All Ernstie
does is lie.
Bruno
Joel Rosenberg
Most countries allow the government, in many instances, to determine
what facts are. That is, for example, the purpose of the jury under
the US system.
As to the publication of defamatory untruths, Canada is hardly the
only nation to outlaw it.
--
------------------------------------------------------------
http://islamthereligionofpeace.blogspot.com
Ken McVay
No one can, or will, be found guilty regardless, as the "Publishing
False News" law was thrown out as unconsitutional.
Roger
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
>No one can, or will, be found guilty regardless, as the "Publishing
>False News" law was thrown out as unconsitutional.
Understood. But even while it was on the books, it did not constitute
"Nazi thought control" nor "authorized truth"
Dave Simpson
buried somewhere and have the place become a shrine. It's too late to
demand he be also returned! Sorry.
Dave Simpson
Morghus
> "Andrew Golebiowski" <andrewgo...@rogers.com> wrote in message
> news:E8x6a.70338$Zr%.14358@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
> > Well, let me try...
> >
> > I know British won the battle at the Plains of Abraham. If I create the
> > pamphlet stating the opposite, does this make me a criminal?
>
>
>
> No, but Zundel ultimately was not found to be a criminal in this regard.
> But you, just as he is, would be a liar, a fool or both.
>
>
>
> >
> > In other words, why some historical facts and interpratations require
> > protection of the state while others do not?
>
>
>
> There are no historical facts protected by any state. If you know of any
> laws that protect historical facts, feel free to reproduce the law(s) here.
> I'll wait.
Of course, you are absolutely right: no historical facts are
protected by any state in the world. On the other hand, many
outrageous lies about history are protected against contradiction in
the states of Germany, France, Austria, Switzerland, and a few others.
For example, it is a lie that the Germans deliberately murdered
millions of noncombatant Jews during World War II, but it is against
the law to publicly expose the lie. It is a lie that the Germans used
"gassing vans," but if anyone refutes that out loud in any of the
aforementioned states, they will go to jail. It is a lie that the
Germans used massive "gas chambers" to kill thousands at a time at the
concentratation camps, but to publish an article pointing out no one
has ever found a gas chamber will mean being hauled before a judge to
face a fine and imprisonment in those countries above named.
Historians in those countries can openly question any historical fact
no matter how well entrenched, they just can't contradict certain well
known historical lies.
steve wolk
"Morghus" <mor...@MailAndNews.com> wrote in message
news:73fedc95.03022...@posting.google.com...
> "steve wolk" <Bar...@Seville.com> wrote in message
news:<b3e97h$aj5$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>...
> > "Andrew Golebiowski" <andrewgo...@rogers.com> wrote in message
> > news:E8x6a.70338$Zr%.14358@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
>
> > > Well, let me try...
> > >
> > > I know British won the battle at the Plains of Abraham. If I create
the
> > > pamphlet stating the opposite, does this make me a criminal?
> >
> >
> >
> > No, but Zundel ultimately was not found to be a criminal in this regard.
> > But you, just as he is, would be a liar, a fool or both.
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > In other words, why some historical facts and interpratations require
> > > protection of the state while others do not?
> >
> >
> >
> > There are no historical facts protected by any state. If you know of
any
> > laws that protect historical facts, feel free to reproduce the law(s)
here.
> > I'll wait.
>
>
> Of course, you are absolutely right: no historical facts are
> protected by any state in the world. On the other hand, many
> outrageous lies about history are protected against contradiction in
> the states of Germany, France, Austria, Switzerland, and a few others.
>
> For example, it is a lie that the Germans deliberately murdered
> millions of noncombatant Jews during World War II,
Morghus lie #1.
but it is against
> the law to publicly expose the lie.
Morghus lie #2.
It is a lie that the Germans used
> "gassing vans,"
Morghus lie #3. Or was David Irving lying when he agreed this was true?
but if anyone refutes that out loud in any of the
> aforementioned states, they will go to jail.
Morghus lie #4.
It is a lie that the
> Germans used massive "gas chambers" to kill thousands at a time at the
> concentratation camps,
Morghus lie #5.
but to publish an article pointing out no one
> has ever found a gas chamber will mean being hauled before a judge to
> face a fine and imprisonment in those countries above named.
Morghus lie #6.
> Historians in those countries can openly question any historical fact
> no matter how well entrenched, they just can't contradict certain well
> known historical lies.
Morghus lie #7.
You know, you really should have your condition checked out by a
professional before a flock of Canadian geese on their way south perch on
your nose to rest.
Sara Salzman
mor...@MailAndNews.com (Morghus) wrote:
> "steve wolk" <Bar...@Seville.com> wrote in message
> news:<b3e97h$aj5$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>...
> > "Andrew Golebiowski" <andrewgo...@rogers.com> wrote in message
> > news:E8x6a.70338$Zr%.14358@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
>
> > > Well, let me try...
> > >
> > > I know British won the battle at the Plains of Abraham. If I create the
> > > pamphlet stating the opposite, does this make me a criminal?
> >
> >
> >
> > No, but Zundel ultimately was not found to be a criminal in this regard.
> > But you, just as he is, would be a liar, a fool or both.
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > In other words, why some historical facts and interpratations require
> > > protection of the state while others do not?
> >
> >
> >
> > There are no historical facts protected by any state. If you know of any
> > laws that protect historical facts, feel free to reproduce the law(s) here.
> > I'll wait.
>
>
> Of course, you are absolutely right: no historical facts are
> protected by any state in the world. On the other hand, many
> outrageous lies about history are protected against contradiction in
> the states of Germany, France, Austria, Switzerland, and a few others.
>
> For example, it is a lie that the Germans deliberately murdered
> millions of noncombatant Jews during World War II,
No, it isn't.
> but it is against
> the law to publicly expose the lie. It is a lie that the Germans used
> "gassing vans,"
No, it isn't.
> but if anyone refutes that out loud in any of the
> aforementioned states, they will go to jail. It is a lie that the
> Germans used massive "gas chambers" to kill thousands at a time at the
> concentratation camps,
No, it isn't.
> but to publish an article pointing out no one
> has ever found a gas chamber will mean being hauled before a judge to
> face a fine and imprisonment in those countries above named.
> Historians in those countries can openly question any historical fact
> no matter how well entrenched, they just can't contradict certain well
> known historical lies.
All three of your "lies" are simply Denier idiocy. Let's discuss just
one of them:
> For example, it is a lie that the Germans deliberately murdered
> millions of noncombatant Jews during World War II,
Are you familiar with the Eisatzgruppen? Are you familiar with the fate
of many Jewish ghettos and shtetls in Belarus and other areas? Are you
familiar with the written reports by the EG themselves describing and
detailing these murders?
If not, educate yourself.
If so, you're an asshole.
Sara
--
If Ernst Zundel is a refugee, Daffy Duck is Albert Einstein. Some
propositions are so ludicrous that they are a betrayal of common
sense and human dignity if allowed a moment's oxygen.
- REX MURPHY, The Globe and Mail
Honest John
Yes, it was anti-Nazi thought control and authorized truth.
Honest John
wrote:
>> So like in Nazi Germany the (Canadian) state will decide what the
>> authorized truth is?
>>
>>
>
>Most countries allow the government, in many instances, to determine
>what facts are. That is, for example, the purpose of the jury under
>the US system.
Do most contries use juries to determine what is allowed to be printed
in the history books?
>As to the publication of defamatory untruths, Canada is hardly the
>only nation to outlaw it.
Defamation of individuals is covered by the libel and slander laws.
Historical debate should not be shackled by laws that only allow
government approved history to be published.
Roger
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
No, it wasn't. One could think anything one wanted -- one just
couldn't pass off lies that one knew were lies as the truth, when
doing so would result in injury or the likelihood of same.
Roger
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
someone claiming to be Honest John wrote
Agreed. Of course, that's *not* what the law under discussion did...
John Morris
Hash: SHA1
In <3e5c3eec...@news.eagle.ca> in alt.revisionism, on Wed, 26
I'm sorry, but Zundel had a fair trial, presented any evidence he
wanted, and was convicted by two juries of being a liar.
Lucky for all of us, the law was overturned on constitutional
grounds.
- --
John Morris <John....@UAlberta.CA>
at University of Alberta <Multi pertransibunt & augebitur scientia>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBPlxGgpQgvG272fn9EQIgJQCfaHDlcw2tzY/vbxXPBrD5FVozRhEAnAqh
lDSoyf58+KwACXT5227BBacy
=8oEo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
William Daffer
> On 25 Feb 2003 07:58:44 -0600, Joel Rosenberg <jo...@ellegon.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>> So like in Nazi Germany the (Canadian) state will decide what the
>>> authorized truth is?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Most countries allow the government, in many instances, to determine
>>what facts are. That is, for example, the purpose of the jury under
>>the US system.
>
> Do most contries use juries to determine what is allowed to be printed
> in the history books?
>
No, but when someone lies about the truths of history, courts can be
used to determine that fact. This is what happened with Zuendel.
It's absolutely clear, whether one agrees with the law or not, that
Zuendel is guilty of spreading hate lies.
>>As to the publication of defamatory untruths, Canada is hardly the
>>only nation to outlaw it.
>
> Defamation of individuals is covered by the libel and slander laws.
Just in case you want to defame a whole group, right? Say, the Jews?
> Historical debate should not be shackled by laws that only allow
> government approved history to be published.
You don't have anything to worry about in Canada, the supreme court
overturned the law. Don't make the mistake of thinking that this
exonerates Zuendel of the charge of lying about history, however. It
doesn't.
whd
--
In <20010827224114...@mb-mr.aol.com>,
posted: 2001-08-27 19:42:01 PST
Nicegoy said: "You are an idiot as well as a liar Daffy!"
On Aug 28, I asked him to produce the lie. He has yet to answer.
This .sig file will be used until he answers this question, or
retracts the claim.
Ken McVay
By MARVIN KURZ
The Globe & Mail
Wednesday, February 26, 2003 - Page A15
The recent barrage of publicity about Ernst Zundel and his ludicrous
claim for refugee status calls to mind an old joke.
Two elderly Jewish men were sitting on a park bench, discussing current
events. The first man, Sidney, sighed and said: "I don't listen to the
news any more. It's too depressing. All I hear is news about war, death
and terrorism. Worst of all, Israel is blamed for everything."
His friend, Harry, shakes his head. "I read the papers all the time,"
he says. "The Arabic newspapers from the Middle East. Every day, there
are stories about how the Jews control the banks and the newspapers.
We even secretly rule the world. When I read that, I don't feel so bad."
This little tale illustrates the most profound irony in Ernst Zundel's
return to the news. Forget the fact that his application for refugee
status makes a mockery of Canadian sanctuary for the persecuted. Forget
that he previously renounced his Canadian home. The real irony is far
sadder. His latest brush with fame coincides with the first anniversary
of the horrific murder of journalist Daniel Pearl, a Jew. Mr. Zundel
did not kill Daniel Pearl. But Mr. Pearl's murder was caused by a
hatred of Jews that Mr. Zundel and his ilk have eagerly spread
throughout the Muslim and Arab world for decades.
Mr. Zundel is notorious for denying the Holocaust, but what is not so
well known is that he was originally tried in 1985 on two separate
charges of spreading false news. The better-known charge concerned the
publication of a Holocaust-denial booklet. The lesser-known charge was
for his pamphlet titled "The West, War and Islam!" Mr. Zundel
distributed this tract widely, from Morocco to Pakistan. It alleged
a Jewish conspiracy "against the Islamic peoples" and called for
Islamic nations to mount a campaign against "Zionist disinformation
and hate propaganda."
He has luridly described Jews as "a rather paranoid, shrill, whining
group of shysters, common racketeers, distorters of history,
falsifiers of documents who created a gangster enclave in the Middle
East called Israel."
Sadly, Mr. Zundel's Islamic project has succeeded far beyond his
deluded dreams. In the past decade, Holocaust denial and anti-Semitic
conspiracy theories have become part of mainstream thought in many
Muslim and Arab countries. Mr. Zundel's relentless pamphleteering
and Internet propagandizing have powerfully abetted this process.
A look at the anti-Semitic Web site, Radio Islam, is instructive.
It displays several quotes from Mr. Zundel, links to Mr. Zundel's
"The West, War and Islam" pamphlet, and proudly shows photographs
of the works of Mr. Zundel and French anti-Semite Roger Garaudy,
on sale in prominent Cairo bookstores.
On his own Web site, Mr. Zundel attests to the authenticity of The
Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the most dangerous hate-propaganda
tract of the past century. Its fabricated allegations of an
international Jewish conspiracy inspired Hitler to write Mein Kampf
and call for the extermination of the Jews.
The Protocols were available in Egypt in the 1950s, but eventually
fell out of favour. However, new editions have been published since
the 1990s. After the events of Sept. 11, The Protocols has taken on
a life of its own in the Muslim and Arab worlds.
This past Ramadan, a 41-part miniseries based on The Protocols was
shown on Egyptian television. It described the founding of Israel as
part of an international Jewish conspiracy. Newspapers in Pakistan,
where Daniel Pearl was murdered, and throughout the Middle East,
recalled the conspiracy theories of The Protocols when they blamed
the Israelis for the events of Sept. 11.
There can be no doubt that a corrosively anti-Semitic ideology
motivated the fanatics who murdered Daniel Pearl. With no interest
in a ransom, they singled out their Jewish victim for kidnaping and
murder. In the year that has passed since Daniel Pearl's murder,
Mr. Zundel has remained unrepentant. He continues to operate his
Web site in defiance of the cease-and-desist order of the Canadian
Human Rights Tribunal. The hatred that he has spent decades spreading
continues to flourish.
On the other hand, Daniel Pearl's family has created a foundation in
his memory. Its mission is to "promote cross-cultural understanding
through journalism, music, and innovative communications." Remarkably,
Mr. Pearl's father has emerged as a voice of reason and reconciliation.
Perhaps the final irony is that the Pearl family understands the need
to move beyond hate, while Mr. Zundel remains obsessed with
disseminating it.
While Canada does not need the likes of Ernst Zundel, neither does the
Middle East nor the Muslim world. Better that Harry has nothing good
to read about, than more of Mr. Zundel's lies.
Marvin Kurz is national legal counsel of the League for Human Rights
of B'nai Brith Canada.
--
If Ernst Zundel is a refugee, Daffy Duck is Albert Einstein. Some
propositions are so ludicrous that they are a betrayal of common
sense and human dignity if allowed a moment's oxygen.
-REX MURPHY, The Globe and Mail
Black Knight
I suspect the attempt to blame Jews for 9/11 is an attempt to distract
attention from the fact that the terrorists involved were Arabs. The
non-Arab world is used to terrorism from Palestinians, Libyans, and
Iranians. However, Ossama Bin Laden is a Saudi. I suspect his identity
as such has been a public relations disaster for the Saudi Royal
family, who have always attempted to portray their country as
reasonable and moderate. I would not be surprised if they funded
Zundel's spreading of Anti-Semitism in the Arab world. They would love
to blame Israel for the attacks, so they could maintain the facade of
being peaceful and moderate.
Bruno
Honest John
<whda...@wabcmail.com> wrote:
>> Do most contries use juries to determine what is allowed to be printed
>> in the history books?
>>
>
> No, but when someone lies about the truths of history, courts can be
> used to determine that fact. This is what happened with Zuendel.
Why would courts have any special ability here? Are all historical
debates to be settled by the courts and not the historians?
>
> It's absolutely clear, whether one agrees with the law or not, that
> Zuendel is guilty of spreading hate lies.
Maybe, so why can't you folks be honest and simply say you want Zundel
thrown out because you don't like his politics? This is all about
making sure that only certain views of the world are allowed to be
believed in Canada. It's a slippery slope. What next group of
political views will you want banned?
>>>As to the publication of defamatory untruths, Canada is hardly the
>>>only nation to outlaw it.
>>
>> Defamation of individuals is covered by the libel and slander laws.
>
> Just in case you want to defame a whole group, right? Say, the Jews?
What about white men? Can we claim damages for the constant abuse
heaped on us by the feminazi, "victims of colour" and other groups.
>
>
>> Historical debate should not be shackled by laws that only allow
>> government approved history to be published.
>
>
> You don't have anything to worry about in Canada, the supreme court
> overturned the law. Don't make the mistake of thinking that this
> exonerates Zuendel of the charge of lying about history, however. It
> doesn't.
Persecuting Zundel was really, really stupid. We should have let him
hold whatever silly views he wants and just ignored him.
Ken McVay
Honest John <H...@taxpayers.ca> wrote:
>On Wed, 26 Feb 2003 15:11:01 GMT, William Daffer
><whda...@wabcmail.com> wrote:
>>> Do most contries use juries to determine what is allowed to be printed
>>> in the history books?
>>
>> No, but when someone lies about the truths of history, courts can be
>> used to determine that fact. This is what happened with Zuendel.
>
>Why would courts have any special ability here? Are all historical
>debates to be settled by the courts and not the historians?
No. That's why Mr. Irving's disaster in London was such a pleasure to
observe - it was the man himself that brought the action before the
Court to decide.
Irving's been going rapidly downhill ever since.
(http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/i/irving-david)
Be that as it may, the Zundel case has absolutely *nothing* to do with
any effort to determine historical accuracy. It isn't about history,
it's about a particularly vicious form of racism, and it is Zundel's
hatemongering, not his history, that has caused so many problems for
him.
(http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/z/zundel-ernst)
>>
>> It's absolutely clear, whether one agrees with the law or not, that
>> Zuendel is guilty of spreading hate lies.
>
>Maybe, so why can't you folks be honest and simply say you want Zundel
>thrown out because you don't like his politics? This is all about
>making sure that only certain views of the world are allowed to be
>believed in Canada. It's a slippery slope. What next group of
>political views will you want banned?
I don't like his politics. He encourages and supports terrorism, and I
don't think Canada needs that sort of resident, particularly when one
leaves of his own accord, thumbs his nose at the whole country, and
then returns to claim "refugee" status.
Phaap.
>What about white men? Can we claim damages for the constant abuse
>heaped on us by the feminazi, "victims of colour" and other groups.
Some folks have done - check the Canadian and Provincial Human Rights
Council procedings, and you'll find incidences where Whites have
brought complaints of discrimination based upon colour. The annual
reports often contain such items.
>> You don't have anything to worry about in Canada, the supreme court
>> overturned the law. Don't make the mistake of thinking that this
>> exonerates Zuendel of the charge of lying about history, however. It
>> doesn't.
>
>Persecuting Zundel was really, really stupid. We should have let him
>hold whatever silly views he wants and just ignored him.
Persecuting him? Hell, that's a laugh. He could have been charged
under sections 318 and 319 of the Criminal Code of Canada and deported
years ago. He wasn't - and if "persecution" was the watchword, he
would have been.
Werner Knoll
Ken McVay wrote:
>
> Ernst Zundel is more dangerous than you realize
>
> By MARVIN KURZ
> The Globe & Mail
> Wednesday, February 26, 2003 - Page A15
>
> The recent barrage of publicity about Ernst Zundel and his ludicrous
> claim for refugee status calls to mind an old joke.
>
> Two elderly Jewish men were sitting on a park bench, discussing current
> events. The first man, Sidney, sighed and said: "I don't listen to the
> news any more. It's too depressing. All I hear is news about war, death
> and terrorism. Worst of all, Israel is blamed for everything."
>
> His friend, Harry, shakes his head. "I read the papers all the time,"
> he says. "The Arabic newspapers from the Middle East. Every day, there
> are stories about how the Jews control the banks and the newspapers.
> We even secretly rule the world. When I read that, I don't feel so bad."
>
[...]
How is this to compare?
************************************************
Taken of the internet:
Here is an Example how the German Pashing by the Jews works.
As incredible as it may seem in this modern age, there are laws
prohibiting certain discussions of events and personalities
contemporaneous with Hitler's era. Germany, France, Switzerland,
Austria, Poland, even Canada, and some parts of South America will
quickly prosecute anyone who even innocently breaks the taboo. The
laws are very strict, and a person can be heavily fined or even go to
jail just for saying certain things about something that is supposed
to have happened over half-a-century ago.
Odd, isn't it? Actually, the laws are supposed to apply to any
statement that can be interpreted to cause resentment against any
identifiable group, or any statement that could be considered
insulting to the memory of the dead--any dead. That's the way most of
the laws read.
There is one identifiable group, however, that always falls
outside of the otherwise liberal and generous laws protecting
individual and group feelings and sensibilities: the Germans. For
some strange reason, those broad legal prohibitions are generally
enforced only against people who question even the most absurd stories
about the Holocaust legend. It is not against the law to bear false
witness, only to defend against it.
Anyone, especially the Jews, can insult and ridicule Germans as
they please. They can write whole novels, give public speeches, shoot
movies, sing songs, tell jokes, appear on television, and accuse
Germans of the the most heinous activities, the most horrible crimes,
and no law enforcement officer, no government leader, no judicial
figure, will blink an eye. Jews and their German-hating allies can
accuse German ancestors of theft, rape, torture, and mass murder.
They can insult the German soldiers of World Wars I and II. They can
engender group hatred against Germans, suggest some kind of genetic
defect, some trait of barbarism, or any other gross insult, for that
matter, and not only will the governments not prosecute such hateful
speech, the government officials will arrest and prosecute anyone who
dares defend the Germans.
Some of us consider that unfair. Some of us have decided to
offer a defence for the German people. We try to expose the
absurdities of the incredible tales of gas chambers and specially
engineered "gassing vans" that were not only implausible if not
impossible, but also seemed to evaporate into nothingness as soon as
the war was over. We try to point out the nonsense of the stories of
bodies being reduced to ashes in minutes, and gigantic mass graves
that have mysteriously disappeared along with the remains of millions
of bodies. We offer to cross examine eyewitnesses who claim they were
right there when it happened but miraculously escaped certain death,
not just once, but many times. We offer simple addition and
subtraction advice to help tally up all those victims who were
supposed to have been wiped out but who are still walking around and
seeking money from the public coffers. We offer to expose the
Holocaust numbers game for the scam that it is. It may be against the
law for us to do it, but we persist because we know it is the right
thing to do.
End
Werner Knoll
Ken McVay
Werner Knoll <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>Ken McVay wrote:
>>
>> Ernst Zundel is more dangerous than you realize
>>
>> By MARVIN KURZ
>> The Globe & Mail
>> Wednesday, February 26, 2003 - Page A15
>>
>> The recent barrage of publicity about Ernst Zundel and his ludicrous
>> claim for refugee status calls to mind an old joke.
>>
>> Two elderly Jewish men were sitting on a park bench, discussing current
>> events. The first man, Sidney, sighed and said: "I don't listen to the
>> news any more. It's too depressing. All I hear is news about war, death
>> and terrorism. Worst of all, Israel is blamed for everything."
>>
>> His friend, Harry, shakes his head. "I read the papers all the time,"
>> he says. "The Arabic newspapers from the Middle East. Every day, there
>> are stories about how the Jews control the banks and the newspapers.
>> We even secretly rule the world. When I read that, I don't feel so bad."
>>
>
>
>[...]
>
>How is this to compare?
>
>************************************************
>
>Taken of the internet:
>
>Here is an Example how the German Pashing by the Jews works.
http://www2.ca.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/people/z/zundel.ernst/press/Globe_and_Mail.030226
[Non-relevant material flushed down the ol' michael]
I guess Mr. Knoll doesn't want to address Mr. Zundel's support for
terrorism, eh?
I wonder if that's why he clipped this part from his response:
~
~
William Daffer
> On Wed, 26 Feb 2003 15:11:01 GMT, William Daffer
> <whda...@wabcmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>> Do most contries use juries to determine what is allowed to be printed
>>> in the history books?
>>>
>>
>> No, but when someone lies about the truths of history, courts can be
>> used to determine that fact. This is what happened with Zuendel.
>
> Why would courts have any special ability here?
No. Nor did I say *or imply* anything of the sort. But when there is
a law which makes it illegal to spread hatefilled lies and someone
violates that law, then it's natural to expect a court to be
involved.
> Are all historical
> debates to be settled by the courts and not the historians?
Do you believe the historians in this matter?
>
>>
>> It's absolutely clear, whether one agrees with the law or not, that
>> Zuendel is guilty of spreading hate lies.
>
> Maybe, so why can't you folks be honest and simply say you want Zundel
> thrown out because you don't like his politics?
He isn't being thrown out of anywhere for his politics or for what
he's said. He's being deported for not abiding by immigration laws.
Apparently disdain for all laws, immigration and otherwise, as well
as an almost obsessive need to be in the spotlight has caught up
with Zundel.
> This is all about
> making sure that only certain views of the world are allowed to be
> believed in Canada. It's a slippery slope. What next group of
> political views will you want banned?
I keep telling you, but you aren't listening. The law in question
has been struck down in Canada and it's counterpart doesn't exist in
the U.S..
>
>
>>>>As to the publication of defamatory untruths, Canada is hardly the
>>>>only nation to outlaw it.
>>>
>>> Defamation of individuals is covered by the libel and slander laws.
>>
>> Just in case you want to defame a whole group, right? Say, the Jews?
>
> What about white men? Can we claim damages for the constant abuse
> heaped on us by the feminazi, "victims of colour" and other groups.
Oh please! Grow up!
>>
>>> Historical debate should not be shackled by laws that only allow
>>> government approved history to be published.
>>
>>
>> You don't have anything to worry about in Canada, the supreme court
>> overturned the law. Don't make the mistake of thinking that this
>> exonerates Zuendel of the charge of lying about history, however. It
>> doesn't.
>
> Persecuting Zundel was really, really stupid. We should have let him
> hold whatever silly views he wants and just ignored him.
Hatemongers generally are really, really stupid. But we shouldn't
allow him to violate immigration laws, particularly in the days
after 9/11.
whd
--
Morghus, in 73fedc95.01081...@posting.google.com, says:
The bogus farm-house chambers were also supposed to be able to
accomodate 2,000 people each. That's where the interrogators dreamed
up their peak capacity of 10,000 in 1941 at the farmhouses.
for the complete post.
Joel Rosenberg
> On Wed, 26 Feb 2003 15:11:01 GMT, William Daffer
> <whda...@wabcmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> >> Do most contries use juries to determine what is allowed to be printed
> >> in the history books?
> >>
> >
> > No, but when someone lies about the truths of history, courts can be
> > used to determine that fact. This is what happened with Zuendel.
>
> Why would courts have any special ability here?
Courts determine facts all the time.
--
------------------------------------------------------------
http://islamthereligionofpeace.blogspot.com
Werner Knoll
Zundel could be telling the truth...
>
> Sadly, Mr. Zundel's Islamic project has succeeded far beyond his
> deluded dreams. In the past decade, Holocaust denial and anti-Semitic
> conspiracy theories have become part of mainstream thought in many
> Muslim and Arab countries. Mr. Zundel's relentless pamphleteering
> and Internet propagandizing have powerfully abetted this process.
>
> A look at the anti-Semitic Web site, Radio Islam, is instructive.
> It displays several quotes from Mr. Zundel, links to Mr. Zundel's
> "The West, War and Islam" pamphlet, and proudly shows photographs
> of the works of Mr. Zundel and French anti-Semite Roger Garaudy,
> on sale in prominent Cairo bookstores.
[...]
Zundel could be telling the truth...
I assume you get all your information from the Canadian Security
Intelligence Review Committee? What guarantees do I have that this
committee is not a front office for Jewish organizations? :-)))
Vancouver Province Sunday, March 29, 1998
Trio charged in connection with razor blades in mail.
...Darren Todd Thursten 28 and David Nathan Barbarash 34 are jointly
charged with 27 counts of mailing explosives...
Police began the probe in 1995 after Toronto Holocaust denier Ernst
Zundel received a mouse trap rigged with razor blades in the mail...
Vancouver Province Tuesday, September 26, 2000
RCMP drop charges against eco - activists.
RCMP asked Crown counsel to stay the 22 joint charges against David
Barbarash of the Animal Liberation Front and activist Darren Thurston.
"The RCMP stayed the proceedings rather than disclose evidence ordered
by a judge that the police said could jeopardize a larger international
criminal investigation.
Why? Who is there to protect?
Believing in the Holocaust will get you into trouble... that's what
happened to Ahenakew a Canadian Indian leader:
*******************************************
"How do you get rid of a disease like that, that's going to take over,
that's going to dominate?" he replied.
"The Jews near owned all of Germany prior to the war. That's how Hitler
came in. He was going to make damn sure that the Jews didn't take over
Germany or Europe. That's why he fried six million of those guys, you
know. Jews would have owned the whole damned world...
End
Werner Knoll
William Daffer
> On Sat, 22 Feb 2003 20:32:14 -0600, Roger <roger@.> wrote:
>
>
>>>What "news" did he spread that was false?
>>
>>IIRC, it was for his part in publishing in Canada the pamphlet "Did
>>Six Million Really Die?" and writing a foreword and postscript for the
>>same.
>>
>>In case you are unfamiliar, this ... work ... champions the premise
>>that the Holocaust never occurred, and is simply a myth promulgated by
>>a worldwide Jewish conspiracy.
>
> A disagreement about events that happened over half a century ago is
> hardly "spreading false news." Spreading false history perhaps? The
> Soviets did that for nearly 70 years, should Russian immigrants be
> locked up as well?
It wasn't a mere 'disagreement about events.' Zuendel lied about
the evidence for racialist and political reasons.
[snip]
whd
--
"Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart
people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean
it." --Mark Twain
William Daffer
> On Sun, 23 Feb 2003 02:18:12 GMT, kmc...@vex.net (Ken McVay) wrote:
>
>>In article <3e5826b9...@news.eagle.ca>,
>>Honest John <H...@taxpayers.ca> wrote:
>>>On Sun, 23 Feb 2003 01:20:55 GMT, kmc...@vex.net (Ken McVay) wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Zundel peddles hate for profit, and we don't need him or his hate
>>>>machine in Canada.
>>>
>>>Well some Moslem Mullahs and other extremists peddle anti-western and
>>>anti-Jewish hate yet they are never deported.
>>
>>Take it up with the Minister. In Zundel's case, he *left* the country
>>voluntarily, and *voluntarily* gave up his landed status. As far as
>>Canada is concerned, I believe he is personna non grata. He has no
>>status here, and "I don't want to go to jail" is hardly sufficient
>>reason to justify refugee status.
>
> So why is Zundel singled out while swarthy skinned types are let in
> without any identification after they lie to immigration? Why is the
> minister so keen to enforce the law with Zundel but backs off with
> everyone else? All of a sudden our joke of an immigration system
> starts to actually work?
The bigger question is why you're so hot to see Zundel get off when
you accept that he's broken the law.
whd
--
Seneca, showing us his great understanding of logic
_The premise being wrong_, _the conclusion is wrong_.
William Daffer
> Roger <roger@.> wrote in message news:<b58f76c73f1d9059...@news.teranews.com>...
>> In one age, called the Second Age by some,
>> (an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
>> someone claiming to be Andrew Golebiowski wrote
>> in message
>> <CE76a.45093$b8v1....@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>:
>>
>> >"Roger" <roger@.> wrote in message
>> >news:bhlg5vklif86ho7aj...@4ax.com...
>> >> Criminal Code s. 181
>>
>> >> 181. Every one who wilfully publishes a statement, tale or news that
>> >> he knows is false and that causes or is likely to cause injury or
>> >> mischief to a public interest is guilty of an indictable offence and
>> >> liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.
>>
>> >This applies to the situations like one when someone screams "FIRE!!!!!" in
>> >the room full of people when actually there is no fire at all.
>> >
>> >How does publishing one's views, whether historically correct or not, fall
>> >into this paragraph?
>>
>> Zundel went far beyond "publishing his views." Come back and talk
>> when you are familiar with what he *does* publish.
>
>
> True. Zundel went far beyond just publishing his views; he also
> published supporting facts and cogent arguments to back up those
> views.
So you say. Given your tendentious arguments, that's hardly
surprising. However, the two juries who heard the case disagreed and
concluded that he was wilfully lying about history.
The same conclusion was reached about David Irving in the Lipstadt
case.
3 for 3: it's clear that revisionists lie about history alot.
[snip argument from a false premise]
whd
--
Ross, on the reason Hoess gave at Nuremberg for the 2.5 million deathtoll.
As I remember, it was "A jew US Army sargeant had six negro GI's hold
me down, stuck a broomstick up my ass and set fire to it....after that
I was ready to admit to anything".
For the complete exchange see:
http://groups.google.com/groups?as_umsgid=20010802014157.12518.00002213%40ng-fq1.aol.com
Honest John
<whda...@wabcmail.com> wrote:
>> So why is Zundel singled out while swarthy skinned types are let in
>> without any identification after they lie to immigration? Why is the
>> minister so keen to enforce the law with Zundel but backs off with
>> everyone else? All of a sudden our joke of an immigration system
>> starts to actually work?
>
> The bigger question is why you're so hot to see Zundel get off when
> you accept that he's broken the law.
What law has be broken?
William Daffer
Immigration.
whd
--
National Runt, demonstrating his idea of informed debate
Hello! I can barely make out the relevant portions of what you are
saying! Can you hear me? Hello! Are you in need of assistance?
Honest John
<whda...@wabcmail.com> wrote:
>H...@taxpayers.ca (Honest John) writes:
>
>> On Fri, 28 Feb 2003 17:25:04 GMT, William Daffer
>> <whda...@wabcmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> So why is Zundel singled out while swarthy skinned types are let in
>>>> without any identification after they lie to immigration? Why is the
>>>> minister so keen to enforce the law with Zundel but backs off with
>>>> everyone else? All of a sudden our joke of an immigration system
>>>> starts to actually work?
>>>
>>> The bigger question is why you're so hot to see Zundel get off when
>>> you accept that he's broken the law.
>>
>> What law has be broken?
>
> Immigration.
How so? He appeared at the border and made a claim that he was a
refugee. He didn't cross the border illegally or destroy his
documents. The Canadian immigration officers who interviewed him could
have simply refused admission. They were probably too busy processing
the flood of so called Paki refugees who have been criminals breaking
the immigration laws of the US by living their illegally for years.
How many of those criminals have been locked up?
William Daffer
> On Sat, 01 Mar 2003 02:11:38 GMT, William Daffer
> <whda...@wabcmail.com> wrote:
>
>>H...@taxpayers.ca (Honest John) writes:
>>
>>> On Fri, 28 Feb 2003 17:25:04 GMT, William Daffer
>>> <whda...@wabcmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> So why is Zundel singled out while swarthy skinned types are let in
>>>>> without any identification after they lie to immigration? Why is the
>>>>> minister so keen to enforce the law with Zundel but backs off with
>>>>> everyone else? All of a sudden our joke of an immigration system
>>>>> starts to actually work?
>>>>
>>>> The bigger question is why you're so hot to see Zundel get off when
>>>> you accept that he's broken the law.
>>>
>>> What law has be broken?
>>
>> Immigration.
>
> How so? He appeared at the border and made a claim that he was a
> refugee.
Really? He claimed he was a *refugee*? From where? Canada?
> He didn't cross the border illegally or destroy his
> documents. The Canadian immigration officers who interviewed him could
> have simply refused admission. They were probably too busy processing
> the flood of so called Paki refugees who have been criminals breaking
> the immigration laws of the US by living their illegally for years.
> How many of those criminals have been locked up?
Oh, I see. Try paying attention. You're about 40 years out of
date. He's being deported from the *UNITED STATES*. My understanding
is that he left Canada and came to the U.S. to escape prosecution
there. I neither know nor care what cause Canada had to prosecute
him, though I suspect it has to do with the fact that he's an
inveterate liar and liars frequently get caught in their lies.
To bring you up to date: Zuendel entered the U.S. on a visa which
required him to report to a hearing after a certain amount of
time. He didn't do that.
End of story.
whd
--
I myself am not an anti Semite I just don't like Jews.
Kurt Knoll in news:<10315319...@critter.monarch.net>