I didn't neglect my readership - as per usual, we have had to struggle with Internet sabotage, and I still cannot reach my translator as well as one of our attorneys through regular channels. (Being creative folks, we manage to communicate via back doors, of course)

Several important developments have occurred in the Ernst Zundel Saga - and much more is yet to come.

Very briefly: The trial in Mannheim has been postponed again - this time indefinitely. So far, in 6 or 7 hearing days, all the time was taken up with questions about protocol and about whether or not Ernst's attorneys might not be as politically correct as is expected - only the charges were being read.

There will not be another trial date for 3 or 4 weeks. We will keep you posted.

Meanwhile, there are some stunning developments that I can't talk about as yet, but I can tell you this much: We are now treating Ernst's arrest and deportation as a bona fide extrajudicial rendition - in other words, a political kidnapping, as it should have been dealt with all along. We are justified in doing this because we are in the possession of some 150 lbs (!) of Freedom of Information Act documents, many on official letterhead, that show clearly that three (possibly four) so-called "democratic" states were involved at the highest level in criminalizing and then railroading one man into incarceration whose only "weapon" was his old-fashioned fountain pen.

Here are two letters that will be of interest to Zundel-Watchers:

From: Christopher Bollyn, American Free Press, Washington, D.C.

To: Martina Nibbeling, Press Attache, Embassy of Germany

Re: Arrest and Deportation of Ernst Zundel, German Citizen

Date: March 15, 2006

 

Martina Nibbeling-Wriessnig

Press Attache

Embassy of Germany in Washington, D.C.

Dear Martina,

This is to confirm my email contact address after speaking with you this morning on the phone.

Regarding the arrest of Ernst Zundel at his home in Tennessee by agents of the local police and agents of the INS, I have a couple questions that I would like to pose to you as press representative of the German Embassy in Washington:

Ernst Zundel is a German citizen whose human and legal rights appear to have been grossly abused by U.S. and Canadian authorities. I have seen documents that indicate that the German authorities were asking about the legal basis of Zundel's arrest when it occurred on February 5, 2003.

Zundel was deported to Canada where he spent two years in solitary confinement as a national security threat to Canada. He was kept in a cold cell without shoes or socks in which the light was never turned off. He was not given a warm meal for two years. This sounds to me like a gross violation of his human rights.

Furthermore, Mr. Zundel and his wife Ingrid Rimland were not shown any document authorizing his arrest at the time of the arrest. The arresting officers did not present a court order or warrant for his arrest. Is this not a violation of Mr. Zundel's rights in the view of the German Embassy?

What actions did the German Embassy take to protect the human and legal rights of Mr. Zundel, a German citizen?

Why was Mr. Zundel not given a German passport? Documentation from the BKA Mecklenheim from February 2003 clearly indicate that the German authorities were conspiring on how they could deny issuing a new passport for Mr. Zundel.

Why would German authorities conspire against a German citizen who needed to have a new passport?

I look forward to hearing from you soon on these matters. I am working on an investigation of how Mr. Zundel was arrested and deported from the United States.

Having seen some of the documents concerning this matter, I am of the opinion that his arrest was illegal, coordinated with German authorities, and appears to have been a extra-judicial rendition.

Best wishes,

Christopher Bollyn

American Free Press

Washington, D.C.

From: Christopher Bollyn, American Free Press, Washington, D.C.

To: John Tackaberry and Elizabeth Berton-Hunter, Amnesty International (Canada)

Re: Extra-judicial Rendition of Ernst Zuendel (Zündel)

 

John Tackaberry, Media Relations

Amnesty International, Canada

Ottawa, Ontario

 

Elizabeth Berton-Hunter, Media Relations

Amnesty International, Toronto

Toronto, ON

Dear Amnesty International of Canada,

I am a journalist with American Free Press of Washington, D.C. My questions pertain to Ernst Zuendel, a landed immigrant in Canada of 40 years, and pertain to how he was treated in Canada by Canadian authorities prior to and during two years of solitary confinement in a Toronto lock-up.

First, I am interested in any papers written or actions taken by Amnesty International on behalf of, or concerning the arrest and deportation of, Ernst Zuendel from the United States in February 2003.

Having attended Zuendel's trial in Mannheim, Germany, I am aware of the grossly unfair jurisprudence he faces in that country. What concerns me now is how he was treated by U.S. and Canadian authorities prior to being deported to Germany.

After meeting with his wife Ingrid Rimland in Tennessee, I am convinced that his arrest on February 5, 2003 was illegal. No arrest warrants or court papers were presented and they were prevented from contacting their lawyer at the time. Everything that I have seen and heard about the deportation of Mr. Zuendel indicates that this action was an extra-judicial rendition.

Furthermore, when Zuendel was brought to Toronto he was held in solitary confinement in conditions that can only be described as torturous. He was kept in a cell in which the light was never turned off and in which the temperature was kept very low. During this two-year period he was not allowed to wear shoes or socks and was not given warm food. Nor was he provided with a chair or a table.

These conditions of his incarceration in Canada sound extreme to say the least and sound very much like those found in the U.S. prison at Guantanamo, Cuba.

Mr. Zuendel was held in Canada as a "national security" threat. Did Amnesty International (Canada) do anything for Mr. Zuendel during the two years that he was held without being charged of any criminal offense? If not, why not?

I look forward to your response on this matter.

Sincerely,

Christopher Bollyn

American Free Press