Court File No. T-567-96
"In late October 1993, the CSIS Source learned about a threat of serious physical violence against leaders in the Jewish community by a Heritage Front member. The threat was evaluated by CSIS, and the police were notified. Ernst Zündel wanted information on the Jewish community's leaders during this time and was provided with publicly available information (see chapter V, 5.10.6((22) Footnote 22, SIRC interview with Source.
And further at 5.10.6 at page 36, the respondent SIRC wrote:
"We asked the Source about the kinds of information collected on Jewish groups and their leaders. The Source stated that Zündel tasked Bristow to obtain specific information about the names, work places, home addresses, telephone numbers and profiles of prominent Jewish individuals and groups. (135)
Zündel said that he needed the addresses of members of the Jewish community so that he could serve subpoenas, but the Source said that Bristow did not believe this. Footnote 135 - Zündel denies this allegation.
The foregoing statements are utterly false allegations.
7. SIRC's source for this false information was Grant Bristow, co-founder and Security Chief of the Heritage Front and alleged CSIS agent.
8. In fact, I asked Bristow for the addresses of the Jewish leaders who had been harassing me relentlessly with threats of prosecution and deportation as a "hate monger" both before and after I won my appeal in the Supreme Court of Canada in August of 1992. The orchestrated harassment against me by these Jewish leaders generated a climate of violence against me that was palpable. Ultimately this hysteria resulted in violent demonstrations outside my home and posters with my head in the cross-hairs of a rifle sight, a devastating arson attack in 1995, and an attempted murder by pipe bomb the same year. I believed and still believe that these leaders of the Jewish organizations were and are guilty under the Criminal Code of intimidation, watching, besetting, stalking and harassment. I wished to charge them with these offenses and believed that I required the addresses of the leaders involved before the police would act on my complaint.
9. I also wrote to my lawyer, Barbara Kulaszka, asking for names and newspaper clippings of those Jews who were continually calling for my arrest and re-charging under the hate laws and deportation, and asked for legal advice on the feasibility of such charges being laid. I also had correspondence with the Attorney General, the Crown Attorney in Toronto and attended at the local police division office and Crown offices in order to try to bring criminal charges against the Jewish leaders harassing me. Attached to this my affidavit and marked Exhibit A is a copy of such correspondence.
10. An investigator for the respondent SIRC identifying himself as John Smith interviewed me over the telephone only days before the "Heritage Front Affair Report" was issued in December of 1994. On the basis of this telephone interview, with no further checking with my lawyers, the respondent SIRC saw fit to make these accusations against me. It did not accept my version of events as to why I wanted the addresses of the Jewish leaders and instead found that my request was tied to threats against the Jewish community leaders.
11. The respondent SIRC's own report "The Heritage Front Affair" is entered against me by the Minister of Citizenship in the hearings now going on before SIRC. The evidence of Grant Bristow contained in that report is the only evidence disclosed to me by the respondent Minister of Citizenship that forms a basis for alleging that I will use violence in the future in furtherance of my political beliefs. It is utterly false information which has proved extremely damaging to me, as these proceedings show.
12. I am unable to subpoena Bristow as I do not know his whereabouts.
13. The respondent SIRC has already proven that they accept the credibility of Bristow over the evidence of myself and other persons and based the whole of the Heritage Front Affair Report, in which it defends and praises CSIS's actions, on his version of events. They have accepted his testimony that my request for information is tied to threats against the Jewish community leaders. This finding was an important justification for the respondent SIRC's exoneration of Bristow and CSIS activities because in its words
(quote accidentally omitted from affidavit filed)
14. The oral testimony I wish to call is as follows:
(a) Wolfgang Droege - Droege was and is the leader of the Heritage Front and will testify as to the goals and strategies of the organization; the role of Grant Bristow in founding and supporting the Heritage Front financially; the actions of Grant Bristow with respect to the harassment campaign against anti-racists, the carrying of guns in the back of his car, the threats of coercion and bodily harm against members of the Heritage Front who did not want to participate in the harassment campaign; and his tampering with a witness in the criminal trial of Eric Fischer and his brother. Droege will also give evidence on the failure of the respondent SIRC to elicit crucial evidence to check what Bristow was saying.
(b) Tyrone Mason - Mason is a former member of the Heritage Front who was kidnapped, forcibly confined and beaten in 1993 by three other members of the Heritage Front, Eric and Elkar Fischer and Drew Maynard. Mason will testify that Bristow counselled Mason to commit perjury after Mason laid charges against the Fischers and Maynard. Mason will testify that the charges against Maynard were dropped because of Crown delay and that under a Crown deal the Fischers pleaded guilty to assault and received a sentence of 30 days. Mason had to be put into the witness protection programme.
(c) Elisse Hategan - Hategan is a former member of the Heritage Front who took part extensively in the harassment campaigns against anti-racists and has knowledge of Bristow's leading role in organizing and conducting the harassment campaign against anti-racists.
(d) Val Meredith, Derek Lee and Tom Wappel - These three persons are all members of the House of Commons Sub-Committee on National Security which investigated the Heritage Front Affair in 1995 and wrote a draft report which media accounts reported found that CSIS had broken the law in spying on the Heritage Front and covered up evidence in its report on the affair. This report was never released.
(e) Grant Bristow - Grant Bristow is the source of the information that I planned future violence against Jewish leaders. I should be entitled to cross-examine Bristow in open court to show that Bristow lied about me in the version accepted by the respondent SIRC in its report "The Heritage Front Affair." This is a matter of credibility which should take place in open court and for the public to see that justice is done.
(f) Ernst Zündel - My own testimony would show that the "Heritage Front Affair" report by the respondent SIRC falsely accuses me of eliciting the names of prominent Jews for some illicit purpose, that SIRC is biased against the Right wing and its ideas; that it falsely portrays the Right wing as a monolithic entity bent on political violence and destabilization; that the evidence of Grant Bristow regarding my requests for information was false; that the other findings of SIRC in its report concerning me were false and show an overwhelming political prejudice and hostility to me and to what it terms the "extreme right wing" of which it alleges I am a leading part.
15. This evidence should be open to public scrutiny and cross-examination in open court.
16. I believe this evidence will show reasonable apprehension of bias and conflict of interest by the respondent SIRC.
DATED this 9th day of May, 1996.
_________ Ernst Zündel
Sworn before me at
the City of Toronto in the
Province of Ontario
this 9th day of May 1996.
___________ Commissioner for Taking Affidavits, etc.