In a letter to a friend in France, Ernst Zundel comments on
the media tsunami in the wake of his Holocaust Heresy Trial. I would only
like to add that here is a 66-year old human rights activist who has spend
almost half a century demolishing the Holocaust Hoax - and now, in so-called
"democratic" Germany, he is forbidden from mentioning the very
word, "Holocaust"? He has to circumvent the dreaded term by
speaking of "the topic"?
Does not that rotten system, a colony of Israel, camouflaged
as a "Democracy" advertise its abject fear that way - or what ?!
8. March 06
I am preparing for another court appearance in the
morning. Since the scheduled witnesses, who were to appear tomorrow, have
apparently been canceled, it can only mean that only procedural topics
will be dealt with at tomorrow's session. You will be informed via
spectators and lawyers, no doubt, what will transpire in the courtroom. It
may well be a dramatic day, because the judge in the case had mentioned
that although there is no legal mechanism in law currently in Germany to
remove a lawyer because of conduct, he would "contemplate"
removing my young lady lawyer Sylvia Stolz! So I will see what will
Yvonne, I am no prophet and certainly not an expert in
German legal proceedings. They are totally different from Anglo-Saxon
proceedings and, therefore, alien to me. They may as well be from Planet
Mars, as far as I am concerned!
But! And this "But" may well go down in postwar
German legal history. If my instinct does not deceive me completely, we
will make and re-write legal history.
In Canada, I had some older Anglo-Saxon judges - one of
them Judge Heald, another one by the name Howland, and a few others - who
came down with startlingly independent judgements. Some were over-ruled on
appeal, but the principle is this: one judge alone, especially of an older
generation, a few years away from retirement, [might] turn recalcitrant or
rebellious against the political correctness crowd! But this Paragraph 130
does not give the judges much leeway, short of risking a career-suicide,
and I don't think it would be realistic to expect that three judges
collectively would decide on a form of judicial harakiri, were they to
decide to ignore the restrictions established by this "unique"
Paragraph. This will not happen in a troika !
There were at one time two such judges here in Mannheim,
called Orlett and Müller, who came down with just such an unusual and
courageous, startling judgment in the case of a German educator, Günter
Deckert. A tsunami of media vilification set in against these two judges,
[of such force] that even I heard about it in Canada on the national news!
This will not happen in this case, not before this court, not at this
time. The political situation has not yet deteriorated enough in Germany -
not yet. Timing is everything!
Things are eroding. There is great nervousness and
dissatisfaction amongst lawyers. Some prosecutors and even retired judges
have written about this abnormal state of affairs in this area of German
law. But such evolutions are painfully slow and usually need political,
external impetus to actually take effect - and this judicial/societal
ferment is not yet vocal enough to initiate a change.
The Irving case has kick-started such a ferment in the
Austrian media, in parts of the political elite, and even in the
judiciary. Irving's fate has had a similar reaction in England and
America, where even Deborah Lipstadt has come out in his defence. Major
newspapers in England have joined in this chorus. Some of my English
contacts have written me about it.
Let me mention just a few you may not be aware of yet :
"The Independent" wrote on 29. Nov. 05:
"Freedom of speech has to be there for everybody - including
"The Daily Express" wrote on 30. Nov.
05, in an article quoting a British lady MP called Ann Widdecombe :
"Irving should not be in prison."
"The Times" wrote on 20. January 06 :
"Irving's rights are to be defended The actions of Austria in
arresting Irving are offensive and against freedom of speech"
"The Financial Times" on 18-19 February
06 wrote in a large article headlined "Historical Truth Speaks
for Itself" quoting the eminent British legal philosopher
Ronald Dworkin that these statutes [like Paragraph 130] - I have to be
careful! This is a censored letter, after all! - should be challenged by
the European Convention on Human Rights, to negate them. By the way, Dr.
Dworkin condemned my treatment by Canadian courts and the system there,
vociferously and repeatedly, over the years. He is Jewish, of course.
"The Times" of 21. Feb. 06, carried a
large headline on the front page : "Intense Reaction to the
Prison Term for Irving!"
The coverage of the stop-start-abort-stop-start-postpone
jo-jo of my case has repeatedly created attention and resulted in
startlingly frank and surprisingly detailed coverage of the case, some of
it actually irreverent. The "Frankfurter Allgemeine", a
large, serious circulation paper, on 21. February 06, Nr. 44, page 3, had
an article about my case, and an entire column about Irving. The articles
about my case were written by a writer named Volker Zastrow who had
another [article] on 27. Feb. 06, Nr. 49, page 3, in the "Politik"
section of the paper, read by the business and political elite in Germany.
This one was hilarious as well as serious and had a color picture of
Sylvia Stolz. The other one had a very sinister picture [of me], but
interesting from a photographic layout and perspective point of view! I
look like the twin brother of Michael Gorbachev of all things! Weird !
There were numerous articles in the "Frankfurter
Allgemeine Zeitung" of a smaller size on the 10.2.06 ; a larger
one in the "Rhein-Neckar-Zeitung" (Heidelberg) of 10.2.06
with a picture of me saluting, headlined : "Seine Anhänger sehen
Zündel als Kämpfer für die Freiheit"/His supporters see Zundel as
a fighter for freedom. Die "Stuttgart Zeitung" also had
[a write-up] on the same day.
There was one in "Süddeutsche Zeitung"
on 17. Feb. 06. Actually that paper carried surprisingly detailed coverage
about the Irving case and mine - over and over again! Amazing !
The two news magazines, "Focus" and
"Der Spiegel", which have a huge, Germany-wide
circulation, devoted in one issue four pages to Irving's case, including
Die semi-pornographic "Bild Zeitung", a
working class, mass circulation [tabloid] - 4 million readers - carried a
huge color photo reportage with pictures of Dr. Meinerzhagen, the legal
team, and me saluting. It filled over half a page. Since it was surrounded
by naked women in suggestive, crude poses, those German readers cannot
have missed the story! Sex sells obviously in democratic Germany!
Ingrid reported that the search engine Google.com
had 480,000 websites mentioning the Zündel case before it slowly fell
to just below 250,000 websites, [due to Google censoring certain content].
Ingrid said she did a Google search by typing in "Zundel plus
Meinerzhagen" and she came up with 451 websites mentioning the two
names in stories together. Some were on important professional websites
like "Jurist/Legal News and Research". Last November, after the
court appearance, she typed in Zundel or Ernst Zündel and got 211,000
websites responding as having articles about the case. A friend in Texas
typed in my name misspelled "Zundle" and got over 10,000
mentions even with the name misspelled!
That's what I mean by the erosion of the monolith of media
So you can certainly see from just these very few examples
that at least in the Anglo-Saxon world there is a groundswell - and I am
sure the ferment and the erosion of the once almost monolithic spin-doctor
power block is in full swing overseas !
Not in the same way YET in Germany! Not yet! But we are on
the right track. Patience is needed.
And, of course, we should not forget that the whole Moslem
Crescent from Tangier to Malaysia is aflame with a raging debate about the
forbidden topic - the results of which we cannot fathom! For the first
time whole nations, presidents, spiritual leaders, parliaments like in
Iran and Egypt, are passing resolutions and are taking sides and a
determined stand! This was never the case!
Iran has 27 % of the world's natural gas, has contracts of
$100 billion with China alone about energy development. Thus geopolitical,
geostrategic considerations are for the first time entering the debate!
1.6 billion Moslems are catching on to the topic - what are 30 million
Canadians and 82 million Germans, compared to those numbers ? A drop in
This is a new phenomenon of the Global Village of instant
communication. Thus, by my sacrifice, and of course those of the others,
the forces of intellectual freedom are slowly pushing back the curtain of
censorship - a new age is dawning!
We need only to keep the flame of intellectual freedom
alive - and victory will be ours - IN TIME !