From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Tue Jul 1 04:23:49 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Tue Jul 1 06:31:51 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/1/2003 - "Mel Gibson's THE PASSION" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever! July 1, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: Anything the ADL hates with such undisguised rage, I want to see! We all have been aware of the commotion around Mel Gibson's Passion in a tangential way, and here is a preview worth reading. I would strongly suggest that we get as many video and CD copies as we can get, as soon as they become availalbe, because my feeling is this film is going to be holocausted. Get a feel for The Passion: [START] FEATURE: REVIEW OF MEL GIBSON'S NEW FILM! June 26, 2003 'I Saw the Passion' Posted by Lew Rockwell at June 26, 2003 02:33 PM John Zmirak writes: "In case you were wondering what the film will be like..." I SAW THE PASSION By Barbara Nicolosi So I was at a private screening at Icon Productions yesterday, and got to see a rough cut of The Passion. There were about twelve people in the room, including Mel Gibson, his producing partner Steve and four or five other Icon staffers. After the screening, we talked to Mel and friends for about an hour. (As cool as that was, the quality of the film was such that the celebrity stuff was completely gone from the moment. I can't explain it really, except that it would be like standing in the Sistine Chapel next to, well, someone like Mel Gibson. Great art is a great leveler....) The rough cut we saw obviously didn't have the final score or special effects, and there were many more sub-titles than they will have in the finished film. So, here's my take... The Passion is a stunning work of art. It is a devout, act of worship from Mel and his collaborators - in the way that Handel's Messiah and Notre Dame were artistic acts of worship in previous times. Let's get the controversy out of the way right at the top. The film is faithful to the Gospel, particularly St. John. It is no more anti-Semitic than is the Gospel. [politicalsoldier.net says: And there's the rub! For groups like the ADL, the Gospel surely is 'Anti-Semitic'...] Having seen the film now, I can only marvel that the attacks are pretty much demonic. Hopefully, the Devil will end up spitefully biting his own tail on this one-- as he does in The Passion by inciting on the executioners of Christ, and thus being complicit in his own ultimate defeat. The Passion is high art. It is the greatest movie about Jesus ever made. In the discussion following the film, Mel and co. were asking us how mainstream theater audiences would react to the film. I told them, "Who cares? What you have here is so much more than just a product to sell. It will live forever, regardless of whether it is a commercial success for you or not." For those of us who love Jesus, The Passion is devastating to watch. It is so good, I almost couldn't stand it. There is one moment on the way of the cross sequence, in which the whole tragedy unfolding devolves into a vicious riot of hatred between Romans and Jews with the Savior on the ground in the middle of it getting it from both sides. It was so frenzied and terrible, I wanted to run from the room. But then, the film again finds Mary, Jesus's Mother on the sidelines, and her presence gets us through it. Kind of like how Mary's presence helped Jesus get through it, it seemed to me. The film is lovingly Marian. Mary is perfectly portrayed here. She is contrasted repeatedly with the really super creepy Satan character, who is also a woman (something for the feminist theologians here? heh heh...). The film is strongly Eucharistic. There is a beautiful juxtaposition of images that cuts from the stripping on Calvary to the unwrapping of the bread to be used at the last Supper. Fabulous stuff. Every Christian needs to see this film at least once. Just to remember, in our current comfort zones while evil is closing in, the price that was paid for us. On my way home from the screening, I found myself praying in the car, "Jesus, I'm so sorry, I forgot..." How many films have led you to compunction lately? The Passion is a miracle. [END] From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Thu Jul 3 05:23:37 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Thu Jul 3 07:30:56 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/2/2003 - "A Costly Friendship" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever July 2, 2003 Below an absolutely remarkable article/Book Review in The Nation: [START] A Costly Friendship by PATRICK SEALE Support Any Friend: Kennedy's Middle East and the Making of the US-Israel Alliance by Warren Bass [from the July 21, 2003 issue] Much of the talk in Europe these days--in newspaper offices, at dinner parties, in foreign ministries--is about how the United States and Britain were conned into going to war against Iraq, or perhaps how they conned the rest of us into believing that they had good reasons for doing so. It is now widely suspected that the war was a fraud, but who perpetuated the fraud and on whom? Were Bush and Blair fed fabricated intelligence, or did they knowingly massage and doctor the intelligence to exaggerate the threat from Iraq so as to justify an attack? Everyone agrees that Saddam Hussein was amonster, but the military invasion to depose him is seen by many, and certainly on this side of the Atlantic, as illegitimate and unprovoked, and a blatant violation of the UN Charter, setting an unfortunate precedent in international relations. Henceforth, in the jungle, only might is right. Various intelligence and foreign affairs committees of the British Parliament and the US Congress have started inquiries into how the decision to go to war was taken--when, why and on what basis. But it will require a superhuman effort to penetrate the murky thicket of competing government bureaucracies, spooks, exiles, defectors and other self-serving sources, pro-Israeli lobbyists, magazine editors, think-tank gurus and assorted ideologues who, in Washington at least, have a massive say in the shaping of foreign policy. How did it all begin? An important part of the story, though not the whole of it, is the special relationship between the United States and Israel. Warren Bass's important and timely book Support Any Friend, written with candor and firmly rooted in primary sources, takes us back to the diplomacy of the 1960s, and to what he argues were the beginnings of today's extraordinarily intimate alliance between the two countries. It is in effect the story of how Israel and its American friends came to exercise a profound influence on American policy toward the Arab and Muslim world. Bass believes it all began with JFK. It is an interesting thesis and he argues it well, although in my view the US-Israeli entente actually began with LBJ, after Kennedy's assassination. The neocons--a powerful group at the heart of the Bush Administration--wanted war against Iraq and pressed for it with great determination, overriding and intimidating all those who expressed doubts, advised caution, urged the need for allies and for UN legitimacy, or recommended sticking with the well-tried cold war instruments of containment and deterrence. War it had to be, the neocons said, to deal with the imminent threat from Saddam's fearsome weapons, which, as Tony Blair was rash enough to claim in his tragicomic role as Bush's "poodle," could be fired within forty-five minutes of a launch order. This flight of blood-curdling rhetoric has now come home to haunt him, earning him a headline (in The Economist, no less) of "Prime Minister Bliar." Where did the information for his remarkable statement come from? How reliable was the prewar intelligence reaching Bush and Blair? The finger is increasingly being pointed at a special Pentagon intelligence cell, known as the Office of Special Plans, headed by Abram Shulsky. The office was created after 9/11 by two of the most fervent and determined neocons, Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Defense Secretary, and Douglas Feith, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, to probe into Saddam's WMD programs and his links with Al Qaeda because, it is alleged, they did not trust other intelligence agencies of the US government to come up with the goods. It has been suggested that this special Pentagon intelligence cell relied heavily on the shifty Ahmad Chalabi's network of exiled informants. If evidence was indeed fabricated, this may well have been where it was done. One way of looking at the decision-making process in Washington is to see it as the convergence of two currents or trends. The first was clearly the child of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, which both traumatized and enraged America, shattering its sense of invulnerability but also rousing it to "total war" against its enemies in the manner of a Hollywood blockbuster. Perhaps because they had more experience of wars and terrorist violence, Europeans were slow to comprehend the visceral impact of these events on the American psyche. Suddenly mighty America was afraid--afraid of mass-casualty terrorism; afraid of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction; afraid that "rogue states" might pass on such weapons to nebulous, elusive, fanatical, transnational terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda, enabling them perhaps to strike again with even more devastating effect. The aggressive National Security Strategy of September 2002 sprang from these fears. It proclaimed that containment and deterrence were now stone dead; that the United States had to achieve and maintain total military supremacy over all possible challengers; that any "rogue states" that might be tempted to acquire WMDs would be treated without mercy by means of preventive or pre-emptive war. Under this "Bush Doctrine," the United States gave itself the right to project its overwhelming power wherever and whenever it pleased, to invade countries it disliked, to overthrow their regimes and to transform hostile "tyrannies" into friendly--read pro-American--"democracies." It was a program for global dominance, driven by the perceived threat to America but also by a modern version of imperial ambition. The second, overlapping trend--overlapping because it involved many of the same people--was more narrowly focused on Israel in its conflict with the Palestinians and its Arab neighbors. Right-wing Jewish neocons--and most prominent neocons are right-wing Jews--tend to be pro-Israel zealots who believe that American and Israeli interests are inseparable (much to the alarm of liberal, pro-peace Jews, whether in America, Europe or Israel itself). Friends of Ariel Sharon's Likud, they tend to loathe Arabs and Muslims. For them, the cause of "liberating" Iraq had little to do with the well-being of Iraqis, just as the cause of "liberating" Iran and ending its nuclear program--recently advocated by Shimon Peres in a Wall Street Journal editorial--has little to do with the well-being of Iranians. What they wished for was an improvement in Israel's military and strategic environment. The Iraq crisis has made their names and organizations familiar to every newspaper and magazine reader: Wolfowitz and Feith, numbers 2 and 3 at the Pentagon; Richard Perle, former chairman and still a member of the influential Defense Policy Board, sometimes known as the neocons' political godfather and around whom a cloud of financial impropriety hangs; Elliott Abrams, senior director of Middle East affairs at the National Security Council, with a controversial background in Latin America and in the Iran/contra affair; and their many friends, relations and kindred spirits in the media, such as William Kristol and Robert Kagan of The Weekly Standard, and in the numerous pro-Israel think tanks, such as Frank Gaffney's Center for Security Policy, the American Enterprise Institute, the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, the Project for the New American Century, the Center for Middle East Policy at the Hudson Institute, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (born out of AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee) and many others. As has been observed by several commentators, 9/11 provided the neocons with a unique chance to harness (some would say hijack) America's Middle East policy--and America's military power--in Israel's interest by succeeding in getting the United States to apply the doctrine of pre-emptive war to Israel's enemies. This trend rested on a mistaken, indeed willfully tendentious, analysis of the attacks that the United States had suffered--not just the body blow of 9/11 but also the numerous earlier wake-up calls such as the bombing of two US embassies in East Africa and the attack on the USS Cole in Aden harbor. The basic neocon argument was that terrorist attacks should not in any way be read as the response of angry, desperate men to what America and Israel were doing to the Arab and Muslim world, and especially to the Palestinians. Quite the contrary; America was attacked because the terrorists envied the American way of life. America was virtuous, America was "good." The real problem, the neocons argued, lay not with American policies but with the "sick" and "failed" Islamic societies from which the terrorists sprang, with their hate-driven educational system, with their inherently "violent" and "fanatical" religion. So, rather than correcting or changing its misguided policies, the United States was urged to "reform" and "democratize" Arab and Muslim societies--by force if necessary--so as to insure its own security and that of its allies. Wars of choice became official American policy. Concerned to insure Israel's continued regional supremacy, and at odds with what they saw as distasteful opponents, such as Islamic militancy, Arab nationalism and Palestinian radicalism, the neocons argued that the aim of US policy in the Middle East should be the thorough political and ideological "restructuring" of the region. Exporting "democracy" would serve the interests of defending both the United States and Israel. A "reformed" Middle East could be made pro-American and pro-Israeli. All this seems to have amounted to an ambitious--perhaps over-reaching--program for Israeli regional dominance, driven by Israel's far right and its way-out American friends. Iraq was the first candidate for a "democratic" cure, but the need for this doubtful medicine could just as well justify an assault on Iran, Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia or wherever a "threat" is detected or America's reforming zeal directed. Immediately after 9/11, Wolfowitz clamored for the destruction of Saddam Hussein's Iraq. This was a cause he had advocated unsuccessfully throughout much of the 1990s. But the accession of the neocons to positions of power, the fear of more terrorist attacks and the President's combative instincts now made what had been a Dr. Strangelove scenario appear quite doable. No scrap of evidence, however, could be found linking Saddam Hussein to Osama bin Laden. Nor did Iraq pose an imminent threat to anyone, least of all to the United States or Britain. Exhausted by two wars, it had been starved by a dozen years of the most punitive sanctions in modern history. Hans Blix's UN arms inspectors had roamed all over the country and acquired a good grasp of its entire industrial capability. They had found no evidence that Saddam had rebuilt his WMD programs. They would have certainly liked more time to look further and make quite sure. This was the view of most European experts. Meanwhile, Arab leaders had buried the hatchet with Iraq at the Arab summit in Beirut in March 2002. All Iraq's neighbors wanted to trade with it, not make war on it. In the atmosphere of reconciliation that then prevailed, even Kuwait did not think it seemly to admit that it still longed for revenge for Saddam's 1990 invasion. There were, however, plenty of reasons why Israel and its friends in Washington wanted Iraq "restructured." Saddam had dared fire Scuds at Israel during the 1991 war and, more recently, he had been bold enough to send money to the bereaved families of Palestinian suicide bombers, whose homes had been flattened by Israeli reprisals. These "crimes" had gone unpunished. Moreover, in spite of its evident weakness, Saddam's Iraq was the only Arab country that might in the long run pose a strategic challenge to Israel. Egypt's government had been neutralized and corrupted by American subsidies and by its peace treaty with Israel, while Syria was enfeebled by internal security squabbles, a faltering economy and a fossilized political system. The Iraqi leader had to be brought down. His fall, the neocons calculated, would change the political dynamics of the entire region. It would intimidate Teheran and Damascus, even Riyadh and Cairo, and tilt the balance of power decisively in Israel's favor, allowing it to impose on the hapless Palestinians the harsh terms of its choice. Some neocons were already envisioning an Israel-Iraq peace treaty as a bonus byproduct of the war. These concerns, in addition to control of Iraq's oil resources, rather than Saddam's alleged WMDs, were the real aims of the war against Iraq. They were embraced by the United States to assuage its own fears and restore its sense of absolute power. But what made the attack possible--the motor behind it--was one overriding fact of American political life: the US-Israel alliance, as close a relationship between two states as any in the world today. The Iraq war was in fact the high-water mark of that alliance. Warren Bass seeks to establish that the foundations of the US-Israel alliance were laid by the Kennedy Administration. He even gives a precise date--August 19, 1962--for the start of the military relationship as we know it. On that day in Tel Aviv, Mike Feldman, the deputy White House counsel and Kennedy's indefatigable contact man with Israel and American Jews, met secretly with David Ben-Gurion and Golda Meir and told them that "the President had determined that the Hawk missile should be made available to Israel." The Israelis were ecstatic. The Kennedy decision destroyed the Eisenhower embargo on the sale of major weapons systems to Israel. "What began with the Hawk in 1962," Bass writes, "has become one of the most expensive and extensive military relationships of the postwar era, with a price tag in the billions of dollars and diplomatic consequences to match." The Hawk sale is therefore the first pillar of Bass's case for saying that Kennedy was the father of the US-Israel alliance. The second is what he describes as Kennedy's "fudge" over America's inspections of Israel's secret nuclear weapons plant at Dimona in the Negev. Although ingeniously and entertainingly argued with a wealth of detail, the thesis is not conclusively proven. As a matter of fact, the Kennedy team, with the exception of Feldman and his friends, did not want a special military relationship with Israel, fearing that it would trigger a regional arms race. Kennedy was not taken in by Ben-Gurion's histrionic description of Nasser, the Egyptian leader, as a cruel aggressor bent on Hitlerian genocide. He knew Israel was strong enough to deal with any Arab threat. He didn't believe it needed the advanced weapons and the formal American security guarantee Ben-Gurion requested. He told Ben-Gurion firmly that he did not want to be the US President who brought the Middle East into the missile age. Kennedy was in fact attempting to reach out to Nasser, whom he recognized as a nationalist, not a Communist. He feared that giving Israel preferential treatment might push the Arabs into the arms of the Soviets. In turn, the State Department's Middle East experts saw no good reason for the United States to change its arms policy toward Israel. As an internal memo put it, "To undertake, in effect, a military alliance with Israel would destroy the delicate balance we seek to maintain in our Near East relations." Nevertheless, Kennedy finally approved the Hawk sale, which Eisenhower had rejected two years earlier. But he seems to have done so against his better judgment. He was eventually worn down by Israel's persistent and systematic exaggeration of the Egyptian menace, and more particularly by Shimon Peres's ability, based on chillingly detailed knowledge of internal Administration debates, to play off the Pentagon and the NSC against the State Department. Bass's case is also arguable regarding Dimona. Far from turning a blind eye to what was evidently going on there, JFK was totally opposed to Israel's getting the bomb and was prepared to disregard the views of the American Jewish community on the matter. In the spring of 1963 he warned Ben-Gurion that (in Bass's words) "an Israeli refusal to permit real Dimona inspections would have the gravest consequences for the budding US-Israel friendship." He wrote Ben-Gurion two scorching letters, on May 18 and June 15, threatening that "this Government's commitment to and support of Israel would be seriously jeopardized" if Israel did not permit thorough inspections to all areas of the Dimona site. Ben-Gurion and his successor, Levi Eshkol, lied through their teeth to Kennedy about Dimona but, as Bass writes, Kennedy was preparing to force a showdown. Had he not been assassinated on November 22, 1963, he was on course for a confrontation with Israel. The fudge came later, with Lyndon Johnson, who was far less concerned than Kennedy with nuclear proliferation. Skirting the issue of Israel's nuclear ambitions, Johnson approved the sale to Israel of large numbers of American tanks and warplanes even before the 1967 war, which propelled the Jewish state to stardom, pumping a large segment of the American Jewish community full of confidence, ambition and even arrogance. Johnson was the true father of the US-Israel alliance. It was he, rather than Kennedy, who "set the precedent that ultimately created the US-Israel strategic relationship: a multimillion-dollar annual business in cutting-edge weaponry, supplemented by extensive military-to-military dialogues, security consultations, extensive joint training exercises, and cooperative research-and-development ventures." Bass raises the intriguing possibility that the Hawks were never really intended, as Ben-Gurion pleaded, to defend Israel's air bases from a knockout blow by Nasser's MIGs, but rather as a perimeter defense to protect the Dimona nuclear weapons plant. Some indirect corroboration of this thesis was later to emerge. In delivering its own knockout blow to Egypt's air force on the first day of the 1967 war, Israel lost eight jets in the first wave of attack. One wounded plane came limping back to base in radio silence. It wandered into Dimona's air space, and was promptly shot down by an Israeli Hawk missile. From 1967 onward there was no stopping the extravagant blossoming of the US-Israel relationship. If Johnson had been the father of the alliance, Henry Kissinger was to be its sugar daddy. In 1970, he invited Israel to intervene in Jordan when a beleaguered King Hussein asked for US protection. Syrian troops had entered the country in support of militant Palestinians then engaged in a trial of strength with the little King. Israel was only too happy to comply with this most irregular request. It made some much-publicized military deployments in the direction of Jordan. Emboldened by this support, Hussein's own forces then engaged the Syrians, who quickly withdrew. Hussein's army was thus left free to slaughter the Palestinians. Rather than seeing Black September as the local tiff that it actually was, Kissinger blew it up into an "East-West" contest in which Israel had successfully faced down not just the Syrians but the Russians as well. This was the real launch of the US-Israel "strategic relationship," in which Israel was entrusted with "keeping the peace" in the Middle East on America's behalf--and was lavishly rewarded with arms, aid and a cupboard-full of secret commitments directed against Arab interests. Kissinger adopted as America's own the main theses of Israeli policy: that Israel had to be stronger than any possible combination of Arab states; that the Arabs' aspiration to recover territories lost in 1967 was "unrealistic"; that the PLO should never be considered a peace partner. His step-by-step machinations after the October war of 1973 were directed at removing Egypt from the Arab lineup, exposing Palestinians and other Arabs to the full brunt of Israeli military power. Ariel Sharon's invasion of Lebanon in 1982--in which some 17,000 Palestinians and Lebanese were killed, triggering the birth of the Hezbollah resistance movement--was a direct consequence of Kissinger's scheming. In 1970 Israel received $30 million in US aid; in 1971, after the Jordan crisis, the aid rose to $545 million. During the October war Kissinger called for a $3 billion aid bill, and it has remained in the several billions ever since. In due course Congress was captured by AIPAC--in Bass's phrase, "the purring, powerful lobbying machine of the 1980s and 1990s"--while the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, founded in 1985 by Martin Indyk, an Australian-born lobbyist for Israel, set about carefully shaping opinion and placing its men inside the Administration. Dennis Ross, Indyk's colleague at WINEP and a high-level negotiator for Bush I, became Clinton's long-serving coordinator of the Arab-Israeli peace process; he rarely failed to defer to Israel's interests, which is one reason the peace process got nowhere. He has now returned to WINEP as its director and continued advocate. But nothing in the history of the US-Israel alliance has equaled the accession by "friends of Israel" to key posts in the current Bush Administration, and their determined and successful struggle to shape America's foreign policy, especially in the Middle East--including the destruction of Iraq. The nagging question remains as to what the special friendship has achieved. Have the wars, security intrigues and political showdowns of the past decades really served Israel's interest? A student of the region cannot but ponder these questions: What if the dovish Moshe Sharett had prevailed over the hawkish Ben-Gurion in the 1950s? Sharett sought coexistence with the Arabs, whereas Ben-Gurion's policy was to dominate them by naked military force, with the aid of a great-power patron--ideas that have shaped Israeli thinking ever since. What if the occupied territories had truly been traded for peace after 1967 (as Ben-Gurion himself advised, with rare prescience), or after 1973, or after the Madrid conference of 1991, or even after the Oslo Accords of 1993? Would it not have spared Israelis and Palestinians the pain of the intifada, with its miserable legacy of hatred and broken lives? Has the triumphalist dream of a "Greater Israel" (which James Baker, for one, warned Israel against) proved anything other than a hideous nightmare, infecting Israeli society with a poisonous dose of fascism? The US-Israel alliance is officially and routinely celebrated in both countries, but its legacy is troubling. Without it, Israel might not have succumbed to the madness of invading Lebanon and staying there twenty-two years; or to the senseless brutality of its treatment of the Palestinians; or to the shortsighted folly of settling 400,000 Jews in Jerusalem and the West Bank, who are now able to hold successive Israeli governments to ransom. An inescapable conclusion is that the intimate alliance, and the policies that flowed from it, have caused America and Israel to be reviled and detested in a large part of the world--and to be exposed as never before to terrorist attack. [END] From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Thu Jul 3 05:25:33 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Thu Jul 3 07:31:03 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/3/2003 - "CSIS's sickening secrecy tactics" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever! July 3, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: Canada is displaying still more of its dictatorship trends. In the courts is a case against CSIS, Canada's civilian spy agency, about its foreknowledge - if that is all! - of an airline crash caused by a suitcase bomb that killed more than 300 people some 20 years ago. And yet SECRECY is written all over this trial! This trial is of significance to Ernst Zundel since, as we have stated many times, CSIS knew of a parcel bomb in transit on a passenger plane, to be delivered to the Zundel-Haus, and yet did nothing to prevent delivery or even warn the Zundel-Haus inhabitants. Zundel-Friends are watching this trial closely. From Paul Fromm, Director of the CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION: [START] Subject: SICKENING SECRECY SHROUDS AIR INDIA TRIAL Dear Free Speech Supporter: Part of a functioning democracy is openness or "transparency" to use the currrent jargon. How can citizens participate knowledgeably if they're given the mushroom treatment: kept in the dark and fed manure? Canada's political elite is obsessed with secrecy -- usually to cover their graft, incompetence or criminality. Thus, it is a disturbing sign that the VANCOUVER SUN's lawyer couldn't even gain access to a courtroom to make a motion for release of warrants relating to the Air India case. The warrants involve a man alleged to be a CSIS agent at the very top of the Sikh extremist conspiracy that led to the bombing of Air India. There's a serious issue here. Did the informant tell his CSIS masters of the plot? If not, he was a double-agent and should be pursued, but has not been. He's living unbothered in England. If he DID tell CSIS, then why was the plot not stopped before more than 300 travellers were killed? Was it CSIS incompetence? Was it ...? The mind boggles. We do know from Andrew Mitrovica's book COVERT ENTRY that CSIS knew an anarchist bomb had been sent to Ernst Zundel in May, 1995. While they warned their mail snoops, they didn't warn Mr. Zundel or the postal employees who handled the parcel. The public has a right to know and, as all too often happens, the courts merrily play along and impose information bans. The current Zundel case is a prime example. Both his several detention hearings and his current hearing in federal Court have heard secret testimony from CSIS, to which Mr. Zundel was denied all access. Paul Fromm Director CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION B.C. judge dismisses application for information in Air India case CAMILLE BAINS Canadian Press Friday, June 27, 2003 VANCOUVER (CP) - A B.C. Supreme Court judge has dismissed an application to release edited information from two search warrants involving a man who may have played a role in the Air India bombings. Surjan Singh Gill was identified in court documents released last month as a possible informant for the Canadian Security Intelligence Service. CSIS has denied an agent infiltrated a network of Sikh extremists believed to be involved in the Air India disaster. The CBC had filed the application for the search warrants and information used to obtain them in relation to Gill, whose home and the vehicle of one of his relatives was searched by the RCMP in November 1996. The documents were sealed until last week and were released with the contents of 10 paragraphs obliterated. The released information showed that police were ready to charge Gill, along with five other men, with four counts including first-degree murder and conspiracy in the Air India bombings. But Gill, who now lives in England, has never been charged. Justice Ian Josephson said in his written decision released Friday that informer privilege, involving two other individuals, is of such importance that it cannot be balanced against the public interest. Josephson also denied the release of information obtained through wiretaps involving Ajaib Singh Bagri and Ripudaman Singh Malik. Both men are accused in the deaths of 331 people in two separate bombings targeting Air India planes on June 23, 1985. Their trial resumes in the fall. Court heard last week that the Crown is also against the release of the information based on the affidavit of an RCMP officer who said it would put the safety of the informants and their families at risk. Josephson agreed with the Mountie. Malik and Bagri's lawyers also opposed the release of such information, saying it is speculative, unreliable and prejudicial to their clients. "In addition, Mr. Malik submits that the information contained in those paragraphs is inconsistent with the proposed evidence and theory of the Crown," Josephson said in his ruling. A lawyer for Bagri said in court last week that he was aware of the identity of the source in one paragraph of the information to obtain the search warrants. Josephson said the information has also been disclosed to the defence, increasing the safety risk. "I am . . . of the opinion that due to the extraordinary nature of this case, the release of this information into the public domain would result in a significant and unwarranted increase in that risk," he wrote. The Crown was also against the release of wiretaps because the Criminal Code makes it an offence to disclose such evidence without the consent of one of the participants in the private conversation. The other men listed in the four counts include Malik and Bagri, who now face eight counts of first-degree murder, conspiracy and other charges. Inderjit Singh Reyat, Hardial Singh Johal and Talwinder Singh Parmar are also named in the four counts. Reyat was convicted in February of manslaughter for his part in the bombing of Air India Flight 182, and is serving a controversial five-year sentence. All 329 crew and passengers - mostly Canadian - died when the aircraft plunged into the Atlantic Ocean off the coast of Ireland on June 23, 1985, after a suitcase bomb exploded. Reyat has already served a 10-year sentence for his role in another suitcase bomb blast less than an hour earlier at Tokyo's Narita airport, where two baggage handlers died. The luggage was destined for another Air India flight. Johal died in Vancouver last year after an illness, and Parmar, who was believed to be the mastermind of the bombing conspiracy, was killed by Indian police in 1992. Parmar was also chief of the Babbar Khalsa, a terrorist group banned earlier this month by the Canadian government. The group of Sikh separatists advocated violence in their quest to carve out an independent homeland from India's Punjab province. The search warrant documents released last week said Gill had suddenly resigned as a member of the Babbar Khalsa, days before the Air India disaster, which resulted in Canada's worst mass murder case. The Babbar Khalsa was one of the Sikh extremist organizations seeking revenge against the Indian government through its nationally owned airline. That was after the Indian government ordered the Indian Army to storm the Golden Temple in Amritsar, India, a year before the bombings. [END] From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Fri Jul 4 04:03:48 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Fri Jul 4 08:40:28 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/4/2003 - "A Wake-up Fourth of July" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny July 4th - Independence Day 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: This morning, as I was sipping my wonderful German coffee that friends send me from all over the world to keep my spirits up, I was asking myself: "What's going to be my Fourth of July message, now that we are supposed to celebrate Independence Day while we are rapidly losing what little independence there's still left to lose? I need a sign from heaven!" Well, nothing happened - for me, it never does until I roll up my own sleeves and tackle whatever Providence puts in my path as stumbling blocks. I went down to my office to turn on my computer, and what did I find? If this isn't funny, I don't know what is! [START] Lightning Strikes Preacher Who Asked For Sign Bolt Hits Steeple, Travels Through Guest Evangelist's Microphone FOREST, Ohio -- Damage to a church in Forest, Ohio, is estimated at $20,000 after a preacher asked God for a sign. A member of the First Baptist Church said a guest evangelist was preaching repentance and seeking a sign from God when lightning struck the steeple. Ronnie Cheney called the incident "awesome, just awesome!" Cheney said the lightning traveled through the microphone, blew out the sound system and enveloped the preacher, who wasn't hurt. Afterward, services resumed for about 20 minutes until the congregation realized the church was on fire. The building was evacuated. (Source: http://www.local6.com/news/2310988/detail.html ) [END] When I stopped laughing, I said to myself: There is my sign - and my lesson. I guess I was spared because I am no Baptist and no preacher, but the rest of it fits. Our "church" is on fire - no doubt about that. Our country is on fire. Our way of life is on fire. Our morals are on fire. And, sad to say, our own sound system has been ruined, and all the preaching and seeking repentance without purposeful action angers even the gods. "Do SOMETHING, fool!" comes the command. I guess we better get us a bucket brigade and head for the buckets while there's still time - as in the olden days when Independence still meant what it says. From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Sat Jul 5 06:59:09 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Sat Jul 5 09:08:38 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/5/2003 - "ZUNDEL IS VICTIM OF POLICE STATE TACTICS" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny July 5, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: Ignore the fig leaf - nobody gets published in Canada without the obligatory "Zundel is an obnoxious _______" You fill in the blanks. That aside, there you have it, in a nutshell: [START] Between a police state and an easy mark George Jonas National Post Wednesday, July 02, 2003 Not too many Canadians have heard of IRPA. The acronym stands for the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Needless to say, the Orwellian title doesn't protect immigrants or refugees. It only enables the Immigration Minister and the Solicitor-General to sign a document called a "security certificate" which declares a person "inadmissible" in Canada on security grounds. Security grounds are vaguely defined to let the authorities cast as wide a net as possible. They include simply being a "danger to the security of Canada." IRPA became law on June 28, 2002. It didn't come out of the blue. Bill C-11 had a complex legislative history going back to the 1970s. In essence, IRPA is a backlash. It's an effort to exempt Canada's security authorities from the consequences of certain ultra-liberal trends that prevailed in immigration laws and practices in the past 30 years. The law -- which in its current form affects only foreign visitors and permanent residents, but not Canadian citizens -- enables the authorities to arrest, hold without bail, and eventually deport a person by satisfying a single federal judge, on evidence that need not be revealed to the suspect and his lawyer, at a hearing that neither the suspect nor his lawyer are entitled to attend, that the detainee is a security risk. Such a person may be deported even to a place where there's a risk he may be tortured or killed. This legislation, which on the face of it appears not only Draconian but positively Kafkaesque, presents four easily identifiable dangers. One, since the accusation cannot be tested, the law may be used against totally innocent people, for reasons ranging from mistaken identity to a personal vendetta by some informer. Two, it may be used against people of objectionable views who pose no security threat even under the wide definitions of IRPA. Officials have a lousy record when it comes to telling evil-thinkers (or simply politically incorrect thinkers) from evil-doers. Three, IRPA can be invoked as a political tool to gain points with segments of the electorate. In my view, that's what happened recently in the case of Ernst Zundel, the obnoxious Holocaust denier, who may be a despicable nuisance but hardly a security threat under any reasonable definition of the term. Four, such a law may open the door to a general erosion of due process. If secret hearings are allowed against suspected terrorist aliens, soon they may be used against suspected terrorist citizens. There is such a thing as a slippery slope. In an article to be published in Maclean's magazine next week, the criminal lawyer Edward L. Greenspan points out that "in ordinary criminal cases, following a trial by judge and jury, after being given a full opportunity to cross-examine one's accusers and question all the government's evidence, mistakes are still made." It's an essential point. Earlier this year Illinois Governor George Ryan felt compelled to commute all death row sentences because newly available DNA evidence revealed an alarming number of mistaken convictions. Though this was grandstanding -- there was no evidence that any innocent person had ever been actually put to death in Illinois, and even Gov. Ryan conceded most of the 156 inmates whose lives he spared were guilty -- the outgoing governor's gesture underscored the fact that our legal system isn't sufficiently reliable. It's easy to see how unreliable the system would be under an IRPA-type regime, with most ordinary safeguards removed. As the late Mr. Justice Campbell Grant put it once: "We hold these trials to get at the truth." The plain-spoken Ontario jurist touched on the heart of the matter. The main purpose of the legal process is to separate the wheat from the chaff, the factual from the fanciful, the guilty from the innocent. Justice isn't an abstraction of liberal philosophy, but something purely practical: Canada's security won't be enhanced by the incarceration or deportation of people who did nothing to jeopardize it. Going on automatic pilot in defence of civil liberties isn't enough, though. Pretending that we're not at war, that the enemy isn't at the gates, and that special measures aren't required to combat an acute and mortal threat, is to continue languishing in ostrich-land. Sticking our heads in the sand won't protect us against the zealots of anti-globalism, rabid nationalism, religious fundamentalism, or extreme environmentalism. The self-righteous fanatics of the world, the masters and instigators of suicide bombers, self-immolators, rioters, and assassins -- in short, the terrorists -- have been making a concentrated effort to infiltrate and destroy the liberal democracies of the West. For years we've been turning Canada into a safe haven for foreign terrorists, terrorist recruiters, terrorist bankers, and terrorist fundraisers. The first thing we may have to do is to take a hard look at our idea of extending every constitutional protection to aliens. In the past few decades our tendency has been to reduce the unique status of citizenship, just as we have been diminishing the unique institution of marriage. By blurring the distinction between citizens and aliens, as we have between common-law unions and marriage, we've given an edge to the bad guys. For instance, when nasty fanatics fight each other, as they often do, they love setting up bases for themselves in liberal democracies. The Iranian mullahs did it when fighting the Shah in the 1970s, and these days the self-immolating terrorists of the Mujahedeen Khalq do it when fighting the mullahs. When an alien of this ilk is apprehended in Canada, he'll plead that deporting him to Iran (or Sri Lanka, or wherever) will expose him to torture or death -- as it well might. This makes us feel obliged, at least as often as not, to let him continue using Canada as a safe haven for his plotting. We shouldn't. We should be able to say to such alien terror-suspects: "If you'll be tortured, tough cheese. We won't put Canadians at risk by sheltering the likes of you." Or, if we balk at sending even a terrorist to his torture or death, we should be able to offer him a choice between deportation and a life-time tenure in a colony established for his type somewhere north of Frobisher Bay. Taking a hard look at ideas such as dual citizenship, reduced waiting periods, relaxed test requirements, and similar measures, would be a step in the right direction. It would help ensure that the privilege of citizenship is meaningful and is extended to people who are content to abide by the responsibilities that go with it. It would reverse the blurring of the distinction between aliens and citizens. If we reserved, as a matter of course, certain constitutional safeguards to citizens, the necessity for laws such as IRPA would be eliminated. Aliens would know that a suspicion of being security threats might result in their deportation, and that a suspicion of disloyalty might eliminate their chances of acquiring citizenship, along with its constitutional protection. These are tough questions. They go against the social and legal trends of the past few decades. But they need to be posed, discussed, and answered if Canada is not to become either a police state or a staging ground for international terror. [END] From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Sun Jul 6 04:11:55 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Sun Jul 6 06:46:08 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/6/2003 - "As the worm turns..." Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever! ? July 6, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: I double-checked with an attorney in Germany if it was really true what I had been told - and, yes! The struggle against the Holocaust Hoaxers has taken a different turn - and at least in Germany the Lobby seems on the defensive on at least the legal front. Here is what happened: Four German individuals accused THEMSELVES of Holocaust Denial, daring the courts to prosecute them, and FOUR DIFFERENT COURTS refused to pick up the glove that was thrown in the ring - ON GROUNDS OF INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE! What would happen if, let's say, hundreds if not thousands of Germans accused themselves of doubting the official Holocaust story and flooded the courts with a similar dare? Could such an informational campaign not be organized to get the facts out in the open and force a legitimate debate? Would that not stop the persecution and prosecution of individual revisionists, once and for all? It's worth a try, I say! Here is another story of a well-deserved victory and, hopefully, a precedent, coming to us out of Argentina where a couple ran a store selling World War II memorabilia and became the target of the Wiesenthalers: (I cleaned up the spelling a bit...) [START] The following press release contains up-dated news which I wish to share with comrades and friends all over, prior to the mass media receiving it. The importance of this Argentine court verdict will become clear to you, and you may very well imagine the future actions that we will be taking and pursuing on this matter. I understand that this is the first time ever and anywhere, that the SWC (Simon Wiesenthal Center) has lost a court case and must therefore pay an indemnity and undergo further legal proceedings. As far as we know, there is no precedent of this in any place. I hope that all those who are being persecuted - and at times convicted - the world over for their "opinion crimes", shall not only be comforted by this verdict, but that it will serve as a legal weapon for their own battles against those who wish to obliterate personal liberties and freedom of opinion. We wish to reach as many people as possible with this press release. It is therefore very important that you kindly help us by retransmitting this message extensively, and also have it translated this into as many languages as possible so that people the world over will know about this. This is particularly important in the Arab and Muslim countries. Your assistance would be very much appreciated, as there is only so much that we can do in this respect. Thank you very much. PRESS RELEASE In a faultless verdict supported by a 21 page writ served by the Federal Court of San Luis Province in the Republic of Argentina, our country's Federal Justice dictated the definitive stay of proceedings against Mr. Hector Buela and his wife Mrs. Erika Dago, who had been both falsely indicted by the SWC - Simon Wiesenthal Center - in Argentina, accused of conspiring to act against the Jewish Community, within the terms of Argentine Law No. 23.592 which condemns discrimination on account of race, religion, nationality or gender. In spite of the SWC's success in so many parts of the world, in this instance their local representation failed to achieve their goal, in spite of having carefully and thoroughly prepared their false indictment proceedings. It did not serve their purpose to exert undue pressure and aggression as they did at the beginning of this case when they had the local police arrest Mrs. Erika Dago in her kitchen whilst she was cooking lunch for her young children who had just arrived from school on a very cold day. They had her arrested and her underaged sons were left under the care of virtual strangers, part of their personal belongings were stolen and Mrs. Dago was taken by force to Buenos Aires City, the federal capital of Argentina, where she was indicted based on false testimony and slanders assembled with the specific intent of intimidating her, her husband and her family, as the acting Judge clearly states in his verdict throwing this case out: "..I must render priority to the fact that the criminal character of the accusation brought against the accused can in no case be proven, so that the actions and punishment thus elicited are totally untenable and uncalled for." And in order to set a precedent regarding any future legal actions of this sort: "Our public institutions shall not be shaken on account of a Judge expressing clear doubts regarding the bases for a lawsuit, so that he consequently issue a mere statement of probability regarding it. Citizens should, however, have grave cause for concern were a Judge to consider any such probability to constitute a certainty, as that would purport the collapse of the vital institutions of our Republican system." (Federal Criminal Court of Buenos Aires, Courthouse V, C7, 11.341). Once again, Attorney Miguel Kayat's brilliant defense resulted in concrete results, far removed from the uncertain verdicts which local courts often serve in this country, thus thwarting genuine Justice. We have in this case, a modest couple incriminated of running an "organization" devoted to carrying out business activities conforming acts of discrimination with the intent of inciting hate and discrimination against the powerful interests of the Jewish community. However, in this instance the SWC could not achieve their goal of silencing and generating fear among those who oppose their tactics, pressure and harrassment. As victims of their unjust rage and vengefulness, this Argentine couple suffered house searches, imprisonment in common jails, had their business and livelihood seriously hampered (and, for a while, destroyed), their community and public image discredited, the well-being of their underage children placed in grave jeopardy as they had to leave them in the hands of strangers during the time their mother, Mrs. Dago, was unjustly arrested, and had to suffer personal psychological abuse and harassment. Mr. and Mrs. Buela are now clearly in a position to sue the Simon Wiesenthal Center and all those who assisted them in bringing about their false actions, such as the television program "TELENOCHE INVESTIGA" produced and aired by Television Channel 13 in Buenos Aires, which will now be sued under a Civil Court of Law to pay due and legitimate compensation, and be convicted under Criminal Law for the crimes committed through their judicial and other acts, based on actions made and leveraged by an international organization - The Simon Wiesenthal Center - whose prime goal and obvious purpose is to persecute and harass individuals and organizations not accepting nor submissively abiding by their ideas and thinking, which they insist be accepted as dogma and revealed truth. In these troubling times in which powerful interests ... unleash murder and genocide upon selected targets the world over, whether through personal attack or "preventive wars", in spite of the overwhelming condemnation of world public opinion, we see world militarist genocide unleashed against defenseless people by the world's sole superpower (the United States) and one nation in the Middle East (the State of Israel), which have a virtual monopoly of military force over the entire planet. We thus feel that this case can and should be used as a legal precedent to initiate other such legal proceedings all over the world to revert and neutralize the discrimination, persecution and harassment of the Simon Wiesenthal Center. This should also encompass those interests promoting, financing and assisting the SWC from different sources, in their endeavors to use various countries' legal systems and courts to silence and punish those who do not agree with their ideas, goals and objectives. San Luis, Argentina - June 2003. H?ctor D. Buela DNI 8.550.050 buelahec@infovia.com.ar www.videoswalhalla.8m.com From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Mon Jul 7 07:44:00 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Tue Jul 8 18:45:45 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/7/2003 - "Anatoly Wolkow: The Writing on the Wall: A Grave Warning from Russia" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever! July 7, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: The essay by a Russian General, Anatoly Wolkow, I mentioned in my full-page Washington Times ad has been translated into English by a professional translator. I am very happy to be able to bring it to you, for it says so much in such few, careful words. I can't urge you enough to send it to all of your contacts and place it prominently on your website if you have one. General Wolkow is a veteran of the "Great Patriotic War". He was born in Leningrad in 1924. His education followed the guidelines set by the Communist Party for a career as a soldier and officer. After a time in the "All-Union Lenin Communist Union of Youth", serving in the front lines, being wounded twice, and then attending the Frunse Academy, he advanced to the rank of General after the War. A friend in Moscow gave Anatoly Wolkow a brochure about "The Unmasking of the Antisemitism Hoax" by Erich Glagau, a German patriot. Glagau writes: "[The brochure] has been published in Russian, with my full address, and so our paths crossed. Like many Russians today, [General Wolkow] suffers from political indigestion. And he had summarized his thoughts in a booklet. "This is what torments him: the world political developments since the October Revolution, the time under Stalin, the victory over Germany, the collapse of the Soviet Union and the American wars of conquest, with their goal of total globalization... [This] prompted Anatoly to rethink his convictions. "He calls upon the politically interested throughout the world to draw up a balance sheet, with no regard for past ideological principles. If the peoples of the world are not able to recognize the true enemy of mankind TODAY, it will be a long time before a reversal of our present destructive path is possible!" Here is the essay itself: [START] The Writing on the Wall: A Grave Warning from Russia A Letter from Anatoly Wolkow, Moscow, Russian Federation (Translation) Then comrades come rally! And the last fight let us face. The Internationale Unites the human race! What sincere Communist doesn't know this solidarity song of the working class? I have spoken with political veterans from various countries. All of them were convinced that the sooner the Soviet Union united all of working mankind in their rights, the better. And we Soviet citizens were inspired by this task, and proud to be its vanguard. If we turn back the pages of our history we find that even a Communist Revolution was dependent on money. In 1917 it was Trotzky who filled that need with many millions of dollars from the United States. Nobody had second thoughts about accepting that money! Nobody asked how it could be possible that the Capitalists we fought could support us; after all, they knew our objectives. How could that money be accepted? Lenin had said that we would sell the Capitalists the rope with which we would later hang them! We were all quite unconcerned. Too unconcerned! When the Fascists "attacked" us in 1941, the American Capitalists again bailed us out. Wasn't that proof of their honest helpfulness? Or had both sides perhaps concealed their secret plans under the political table? At that time we, the common folk were unsuspecting. Like everywhere in the world! As always! We only ever realize what game is being played when someone presents us with the bill. I served as soldier of the Occupation Forces in East Germany. I was always curious, and kept an ear to the ground more than many of my comrades. I went among the people, spoke with the Germans. Only rarely did I encounter someone who said more than what one was usually told. But many minor details allowed me to come to my own view of things. Even in those early days my misgivings about the integrity of the official political accounts became so great that I grew even more curious, and began to investigate. After the Soviet Union collapsed, when our soldiers were withdrawn from East Germany while by contrast the American occupation forces remained in West Germany, all the political propaganda barriers still remaining in my mind suddenly broke down. What had happened simply could not be coincidence! At the same time I read Russian writers, such as Suvorov, Solzhenitsyn and others. I also read "Mein Kampf" by the chief Fascist Hitler. Also "The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion", the Bible, and the Talmud! That sufficed to allow me to form a clear but dismaying view of historical events. The remainder of the monstrous revelations came through political events themselves, which were dominated by the United States in close alliance with Israel! The stance taken by the so-called "left wingers" contributed to my greatest disappointment. I had always believed they were on the side of the working class. Now I saw how they let themselves be used by our mortal enemies for their own purposes. For a pittance! These people did not object in the slightest to any of the clear and obvious incursions by the Capitalists. They were kept under control with American diversionary tactics consisting of surfeit offerings of sex, drugs and horror movies. And politically they were kept quiet by means of the combating of the world's permanent fundamental evil, Fascism. Breaking out of this fair-ground spread for them by the rulers from Wall Street was not possible for our former co-ideologists. Anyone who tried it was isolated or, for simplicity's sake, branded as a neo-Fascist. Our minds were completely made up for us. That's all well and good, one may say now; after all, in Nuremberg the Nazis had been pilloried as the world's criminals for all to see. Who should have doubted it? And who would have wanted to risk taking their part? I believed it too. The belated revision of the Katyn* story did not put any doubts in my mind. "Minor accidents" can happen anywhere! I didn't fully wake up until the American intervention in Afghanistan. The Yankees had supported the Afghans for years while the Soviet Union fought them. And once we were out, the Americans went in. Now their Afghan friends had become their enemies! One could practically smell the oil! In the course of my political discoveries I read reports by Americans who spoke openly about the double game the Yanks had played there too. For example, Bin Laden had been a "bosom buddy" of Bush's. But now he was transmogrified into his mortal enemy! And then, the criminal events making up the Gulf War! Americans wrote about that, too, and exposed incredible connections and interrelationships. The United States had supplied Saddam with the weapons used against Iran, and encouraged him to take action there. They had promised Saddam free rein in Kuwait, only then to visit war upon him on the pretext of the faked film about the murders of babies. And what was once again the real objective of these interventions? OIL! Only now had I begun to see many political matters with clarity. I looked into events that had their roots in the last century. Our great leader Lenin also helped me in this. He had said: He that controls Germany controls the heart of Europe. That shall be our goal! Then there will be nothing to stand in the way of the world revolution! "The Germans invented the Monkey" That is a Russian proverb. It means that the German people have a number of characteristics that enable them to accomplish what other peoples find difficult. During my time in East Germany I was able to witness first hand that this is in fact so, but I also realized it particularly during the war and from the facts of German-Russian history. There must be something to this proverb. I read about the time of the Prussian King Friedrich the Great and about that of Bismarck, and recognized the German people's able efficiency. But Russian rulers had already made these positive experiences in times gone by. I was most eager to see what I could find out about our arch-enemy, the chief Fascist Hitler. So as to begin my studies at the source, I obtained his book, "Mein Kampf". While I was busy with that, political current events continued to unfold for anyone to observe. And I can only advise all my former comrades from the international working class: open your eyes and your ears! Take off your blinkers so that you will not one day stand before the rubble and ashes of your own ignorance! My conclusion was that the Germans had indeed invented the monkey. The totally new ideas and activities in Germany were not to the liking of Germany's opponents, and so they tried to win the "inventor" of this turnabout for their own cause. Since their efforts did not produce the desired effect, they instead tried to eliminate him totally. If he were not gotten rid of, he just might inspire other peoples with the courage to also stand up and fight. Anyone can see from this that the grounds for starting a war don't always need to be oil. The Germans had invented many things that made them independent of the rich industrial nations. In doing so they had proven the German proverb that necessity is the mother of invention. In terms of land area and natural resources the United States are just about the richest country in the world. They can live in the lap of luxury. But instead of being satisfied with that, their Capitalists also lust for the assets of peoples much poorer than they. But that was exactly what the inventors of the monkey did not want to put up with. Their proverbial inventiveness came up with a form of artificial rubber, called buna. And since they could also build cars themselves, they invented the gasoline necessary to power them - from their own coal reserves. Anyone who wants anything from us, they said, can have it if we in return can have other things we need. And let us add that we shall not buy anything on credit! Because we won't pay interest. We believe that money can't multiply through interest, only through the creation of new things of value. So anyone who wants to can come and deal with us on the barter system! This new "monkey" was not at all welcome to the money sharks. And so war was declared on the clever inventor! We want interest, they said, or we'll start shooting like at a bank robbery! That's something we know all about! The sad end is known to all. Hitler's interest-free financial system gave up the ghost once and for all. We Russians had a parallel and no less bitter experience. Our Soviet Union collapsed. And who was the godfather of this catastrophe? The selfsame people who couldn't dispense with practicing their usury in Germany! And what have we learned from it? All previous actions were part of the strategy of world domination. Every citizen of Earth can observe the continuing process of GLOBALIZATION in every aspect of life. We in Russia already know that tune well. Except that we've been thoroughly cured of singing in the course of umpteens of years and especially recently. At best we still tinkle a bit on the last balalaika string. And how happy we would be if we had the inventors of the monkey standing by our side! Are there still any of my former comrades who say, the fate of the Germans does not concern us? Well, you may even be right, for many of my Russian friends say with resignation that we are so deep in the muck already that we hardly dare think of the future. But I am not addressing only my own fellow-countrymen, but also my comrades in other nations. I can only warn you: one day you will be in the same boat as we and the Germans. The only kind of people still desired by the powers-that-be today are beasts of burden, labor slaves like in an ant pile or a bee hive. But not so that you will be able to eat your honey yourselves; you will have to hand it over! GLOBALIZATION is the invention of those who want to rule the world - and with it, all of humanity! Every now and then I visit my German friends in Saxony. I also read German newspapers and watch television. Sometimes, strange groups and associations are mentioned: Rock against the Right-wing, Youth against Racism and Fascism and the like. All of them display the same tendencies. I did not succeed in getting into contact with any of these people. I suspect that they are only facades, shams intended to distract you from the real problems. Don't let the Yanks use you for their own purposes! Just as the Jews need "anti-Semitism", the USA need Al-Qaida and terrorism. They are artificial enemy constructs! Comrades, don't fall for them! But now I shall spoon-feed it to you so that you may see how this has been done successfully to the Germans. And once they are completely finished, it will be YOUR turn. So stand together and defend yourselves! The Magic Word: Democracy Already long before World War Two the Germans were told that what they needed was a true democracy. The American kind would be best. The fact that money alone determined the results of the elections there, and that the "right" people are "chosen" in advance, was information that was not shared with potential recruits. Some Germans fell for this bluff, and committed treason in favor of the USA. You too will be told that you need a better democratic system in your countries. Just take the example of Iraq! In the Federal Republic of Germany only such people came to power who had previously pledged in Washington to fulfill the Yankees' wishes. Just like in the USA, the "right politicians" were also for sale in the Federal Republic. Yes, you've heard me correctly: in the United States anything can be bought! Even the politicians! So why not also in Germany, and in your own country as well! Where you live is irrelevant. And anybody who refuses to play by these rules is denied access to the feeding trough. It is quite clear that there are always just a few people who are allowed to "play", because it's cheaper to let a few gorge themselves than to let the masses eat their fill! In Germany as well, it took only a handful of people to pull off this "democratic" show. The obstinate ones who refused to "buy in" were locked up, with or without a trial. I have heard that some were even bumped off. In Germany all the people were mistrusted. And so other methods were used. People were imported from other parts of the globe. These folks had to be supplied by the natives with houses and even hotel suites, fed, and showered with all the blessings of the social security network, such as health care, good jobs, care for family members remaining in their far-distant homeland, and much more. For you this means that you, too, would have to not only take in strangers but also to take care of them! Actually it should already be enough to wake you up when you hear the slogan "ONE WORLD". It's incomprehensible to me that there can be people among you who can be tempted to rant publicly against their former enemies, the Fascists. That's a diversionary tactic aimed right at you. You are not supposed to realize who exactly wants to get their hands on you! It's the old international Capitalists!! Your new "employers"! Don't let yourself be blinded by a few bought comrades who in turn buy you and misuse you to stage demonstrations against alleged "right-wingers" or "Fascists" or "racists" or "anti-Semites", all in exchange for bus fare and a small gratuity! In the end it is you who will be the dupes. Remember Saddam! How much "business" the Yanks did with him! They supplied him with weapons and used him for many a crooked deal. And now they want to grill him! The US Administrations are trigger-happy, as one may expect a criminal gang to be. And any American GI can play king in an occupied country. As soon as he's back home he is thrown back into the masses, to serve as slave to the financial sharks. You should take a look at what's happening in Russia! The people are poor as church mice. The rich grow ever richer. And what kind of people are these, these rich ones? They hold dual citizenship. When "minor accidents" result in the waters getting hot for them, they vanish faster than you can see. And allegedly nobody knows where they went. Every now and then, someone's new address in Tel Aviv slips out. Haven't you noticed that the Yanks always talk about weapons of mass destruction? That's the alleged reason for visiting war upon a country. And haven't you noticed that precisely the USA are the ones who have already used these terrible weapons? Surely you can't be that blind? And which country is it that has complied with none of the UN Resolutions to date? ISRAEL! You can't have missed that!! You should take a look at Russia! The situation is becoming ever more terrible. You should look at the industrial regions! Environmental pollution in the oil-rich regions is catastrophic! Our state has no money with which to put things right. The gangsters brought us McDonald's and Coca Cola, and skinned us financially in the process. Gangsters, mafia, pornography, drugs, the exchange of Russian culture for uniform American crap - those are the hallmarks of the new way of life. Anyone who is poor but has the courage to take the initiative in some way is cut down at the knees by the financial sharks. The gangsters who live on the interest paid by the poor are not our own people. They are at home internationally, but want to be buried in Israel. I can only warn you, and invite you to come to Russia! Here you would get visual instruction to open your eyes to realize what is in store for you if you do not defend yourselves! Talk to your comrades at home! Don't let yourselves continue to be hitched to the cart that is meant to drive you to ruin! As slaves! I have seen modern Germany. Today Lenin might no longer think that the German people were still able to invent the monkey. I would be happy to be wrong in this. But many of the people I spoke to struck me as living in a different world. They do not understand the game their politicians are playing with them. If I were to live in Germany, I would not wish to be a German, I would wish to be a refugee. Or a Jew. Anything THEY want, they are begged to take. In summer 2002 in Berlin I chanced across a periodical in which a journalist wrote that the Nazis had gassed at most 450,000 Jews, and that he could document it! I thought, this fellow will be picked up and behind bars before the day is out. When I was back in Berlin again six months later, I heard that not a hair on this journalist's head had been harmed. People on the street to whom I spoke about this explosive article had never heard of it. When I managed to get hold of a politician outside the Reichstag building and mentioned this to him, he invited me to a cup of coffee. He had realized that I was a Russian. And then he told me that it would be better to forget all about this article by the journalist Meyer as quickly as possible. If, he said, a public inquiry were ever to result, the entire Holocaust edifice could be shaken to its foundations. The consequences would be unimaginable, he said. He also advised me to consider this in the interest of Russia. I asked him, why Russia, specifically? He turned very mysterious. "I can only urge you to take my advice!" he said, and took his leave. But what I think is a very different matter: the Germans have paid reparations for many "millions of gassed victims". And they're still paying today! If it were all to turn out now to have been a gigantic hoax, then indeed the consequences would be unimaginable. I emphasize: if what the journalist Meyer wrote is true! But in any case the matter is very odd. And I am reminded of Katyn... Dear friends and comrades in all the world, I can only urge you to wake up! Come visit us in Russia! Here you will see things first-hand! I greet you as comrades! And I'm counting on you! Anatoly Wolkow [END] *Zundelsite note: "Katyn" refers to the charge, floated for decades, that the "Nazis" had massacred thousands of the Polish intelligentsia and military officers in the forests of Katyn. Fairly recently it was admitted that, in fact, the mass executions at Katyn were committed by the Soviets, and the German army only discovered the mass graves. (If you want to know specifics and double-check, go to www.ihr.org or www.vho org and read up on what actually happened...) From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Tue Jul 8 16:11:12 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Tue Jul 8 18:45:53 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/8/2003 - "Holocaust Lobby failed in its attempt to stop the screening of a film by Holocaust revisionist David Irving" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever! July 8, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: David Irving calls this a "modest victory". We think that it is quite a smash! [START] Australian Associated Press - July 7 2003 Film festival wins reprieve to screen Irving film VICTORIA'S Jewish community has failed in its attempt to stop the screening of a film by Holocaust revisionist David Irving but may appeal the decision in the Supreme Court. An application for an interim injunction preventing the screening of The Search for the Truth in History at the Melbourne Underground film Festival (MUFF) on Thursday night was today dismissed by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT). Festival director Richard Wolstencroft said the decision was a victory for the freedom to express unpopular beliefs. "We don't support David Irving's ideas but we do support his right to freedom of speech," he told reporters. "Australians do have the right to hear his perspective." The Jewish Community Council of Victoria (JCCV) claims that the film and a planned live phone link from United States with the historian, promoted his assertion that the Holocaust is a 50-year myth perpetrated by Jews. The council's president, Michael Lipshutz, said he would fight "anti-Semitism wherever it is found" and would decide tomorrow morning whether to appeal. "It's incomprehensible that anyone can say that the denial of the Holocaust and the fact six million died isn't offensive and doesn't vilify Jews," Mr Lipshutz said outside the tribunal. An application before the Equal Opportunity Commission alleging the film - made in response to the refusal to allow the British historian entry to Australia in 1993 - breached the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act remains. Judge Michael Higgins said while some parts of the film were offensive to Jewish people, he did not find any grounds that would justify a breach of the Act. The film is generally available for sale or hire but Mr Lipshutz said the issue concerned was its public display. Counsel for the festival, PeterClarke, told the tribunal there was "no evidence MUFF was a stalking horse for David Irving" and had printed in its program that it did not support his views. He said the festival attracted film aficionados "who were tertiary-educated and keen to be challenged" and urged the Jewish community to attend the link-up and put forth their side. Mr Lipshutz said such a suggestion was offensive. "The issue of the Holocaust is not for debate, one can't say it never happened," he told reporters. [END] David Irving comments: [START] YES, I was awakened in a muggy, overcast Key West by this email coming round the globe this morning from an understandably jubilant festival chief, Richard Wolstencroft: "We just won our case. The screening and live phone hook up will go ahead. "We didn't turn up on Friday as we needed the weekend to prepare our case as the opposing lobby tried to railroad this through on Thurs - the day our fest opened (we received notice the day before that the case was even happening). Peter Clarke was our barrister and did a sterling job. "We 'went over the top' as you might say and we achieved Victory." I WONDER what went wrong. It is not usual for the Traditional Enemies of Free Speech to start a battle where they are not already sure of the outcome. I expect there are urgent investigations going on in Melbourne at this very moment, and some people are being asked to repay, the, ahem, considerations that had been advanced to them. It is incidentally nearly ten years to the day since I made the film, in a drawing room in George, South Africa. It is less well engineered than the German film I made a year later, Ich komme wieder, which I will post on the Internet next week. Search for Truth is filmed in one slice, with the camera rolling: I was standing next to a grand piano in a wealthy American supporter's Dutch-style ranch, orating into the camera. I do not recall having said anything offensive about the Jews -- although as a court-designated "anti-Semite" there is no reason why I should not. Maybe it is the title these ludicrous people found outrageous: The Search for Truth in History. The very idea of it. [END ] (Source: http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/03/07/AAP0707003.html ) From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Wed Jul 9 15:25:30 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Wed Jul 9 17:35:17 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/9/2003 - "Some Holocausts are more equal than others..." Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever! July 9, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: This National Journal essay does tend to get a bit repetitious, but it gives you a feel for the psychological "Holocaustterror" - German compound word that means exactly what it says - that still holds Germany at ransom. The moment anyone says "Holocaust" - a kneefall is the least you are to deliver to show you are, indeed, politically correct and eminently politically trustworthy. [START] The Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (German Daily, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 38), once again, produced an outstanding description of the Jewish Holocaust. Under the title "The Olympiad of Sufferings" it lists the many holocausts and sufferings of various nationalities very briefly, but, at the end, the paper makes it clear, that there is only one real holocaust-grief - Jewish suffering. (...) And what is one allowed to say in Germany about the holocaust? Only one sentence of a religious type confession: "We Germans have committed the worst crime in the history of mankind and gassed 6 million Jews!" Any other opinion might bring the dangers of the accusation of "belittling" (what ever that means) the holocaust. Just think, there is no law in Germany that exactly defines what "belittling" means, but gives the authorities the power to persecute and prosecute. The arbitrarily used paragraph 130 of the German penal-code does not specify any "number of victims" one has to mention in order not to break the law. Paragraph 130 also does not specify which killing-method one has to believe in or speak about in discussions, in order not to run foul of the law. But anyone, who cannot believe for what ever reason, that 6 million Jews were gassed, goes to jail for up to five years. Jewish prophecies in the Torah requires that 6 million Jews must "vanish" before the state of Israel can be formed. "You shall return minus 6 million." [1] That's why Tom Segev, an Israeli historian, declared that the "6 million" is an attempt to transform the holocaust story into state religion. Those six million, according to prophesy, had to disappear in "burning ovens", which the judicial version of the holocaust now authenticates. As a matter of fact, Robert B. Goldmann writes: ". . . without the Holocaust, there would be no Jewish State." [2] A simple consequence: Six million Jews gassed at Auschwitz who ended up in the "burning ovens" (the Greek word holocaust means burned offerings), therefore, the prophesies have now been "fulfilled" and Israel can become a "legitimate state". Today, nobody in Germany is allowed to talk about the easy recognisable trend to turn the holocaust-story into a world wide religion. Let's assume that the typical German "Good Holocauster" reads in a newspaper: "The annihilation of Jews in gas chambers was part of the 'final solution' at the Wannsee-Conference in January 1942." [3] and later he learns from the holocaust museum-director in Israel, professor Yehuda Bauer, that this was just a "silly story, which everyone keeps repeating". [4] However, no German citizen is allowed to quote the professor, instead has to repeat religiously: "Six million Jews were gassed by we (sic) Germans, committing the worst crime since the beginning of the world." Let's assume that the typical German "Good Holocauster", whose brain is filled with official government "holocaust-formulae" and is convinced that massive gassings of Jews DID take place in the Auschwitz main camp according to the Frankfurt court verdict (The Great Auschwitz Trial, 50/4 Ks 2/63), now reads in a newspaper article by holocaust-expert Linda Grant, that "this Auschwitz had no such facilities." [5] Here too, we see that the politically correct German citizen is not permitted, by law, to quote holocaust-expert Linda Grant, but he is required to believe: "Six million Jews were gassed by we (sic) Germans, committing the worst crime since the beginning of the world." Let's assume that the typical German "Good Holocauster", by some strange coincidence, gets hold of two court-verdicts from trials against so-called holocaust-murderers. The evidence in one trial makes the point that "Maidanek had no homicidal gassing facilities" [6], while the other "proves" that "mass gassings" took place in the same camp. [7] Here too, the politically correct holocaust-citizen in Germany is not allowed to inquire about the obvious discrepancy arising from the above contradiction. The poor Holocauster risks, once again, a five year jail term. Let's assume that the typical German "Good Holocauster" studies the Nuremberg Tribunal proceedings against German "war-criminals" and has reassured himself, through reading document 3311-PS, that hundreds of thousands of Jews were "steamed to death in Treblinka". But some years later, the baffled Good Holocauster gets hold of the great D?sseldorf Treblinka verdict (KI Ks 2/64) in which it clearly states; that the victims in the Treblinka camp were never steamed to death but "gassed to death". The now totally confused politically correct Holocauster is not permitted to question this oddity: Gassing or steaming? that is the question (apology to William Shakespeare). Perhaps for Hamlet, but it is certainly not permitted for our Good Holocauster. Off he goes to jail! Let's assume that the typical German "Good Holocauster" studies the Nuremberg Tribunal proceedings against German "war-criminals" and has reassured himself, once again, by reading document 3249-PS, that an "eyewitness, by the name of Franz Blaha, has actually seen "mass gassings" in Dachau. But since 1961, our Good Holocauster was told that: "Nobody was gassed in Dachau". According to the local museum director and a sign mounted in the corner of a fictitious gas chamber, printed in five different languages: "Gas chamber - never used". Franz Blaha committed perjury about the "gassings of Dachau", hence his eye-witness accounts are no longer valid. If our really confused poor Good Holocauster dares to ask, why then are "eye-witness" accounts on the "mass gassings" in Auschwitz considered fundamental proof that this atrocity took place, he will be rewarded with five years in the clink for his trouble. Let's assume that the typical German "Good Holocauster" would read Germany's Supreme Court verdict against G?nter Deckert (1 StR 179/94), where the high-court firmly established that 6 million Jews were killed, "almost all of them in gas chambers", but later he learns from Daniel J. Goldhagen's book 'Hitler's Willing Executioners' that the "gassing of Jews by Germans was only a sideline of the holocaust." [8] Here also, the good German Holocauster has to adhere to the courts statement and believe in the mass-gassings. Nevertheless, Goldhagen was awarded US$ 6.000 together with "The German Democracy-Prize" by the Kohl-regime on March 10, 1998, where as our Good Holocauster now almost pulling his hair out with confusion. Asking questions will be rewarded with up to five years in prison. Let's assume that the typical German "Good Holocauster" reads in the newspaper that the chief-rabbi of Poland has stated that "6 million Jews were murdered in Auschwitz" [9], but knew from ?Heinz Galinski, former leader of the Jews in Germany, "4 million were murdered in Auschwitz" [10], only to be told by Galinski, again, two years later, that the "correct" number is more like "1.5 million" [11]. On top of that, our obedient German Good Holocauster has to endure the pain of being told by J.C. Pressac, a French Holocaust-Expert, commissioned by the Jewish Beate Klarsfeld Foundation, that in Auschwitz approximately "470 000" [12] Jews were gassed. The international missing persons division of the Red Cross in Arolsen, Germany, came up with "66.206" [13] fatalities, of all causes, for Auschwitz (all nationalities combined). To top it all, the good Holocauster, having been lent a book of Jewish scholar Norman Finkelstein, reads that "... some Jewish leaders are exploiting the Holocaust and peddling deliberate lies about Nazi atrocities. ... The majority of people who claim to have survived the concentration camps are fakes". [14] (...) ALL holocausts can be scrutinised, investigated, researched and questioned. Whether it is the 15 million German Holocaust victims or the 54 million Russian Holocaust victims in the ex-Soviet-Union, ordered by mostly Jewish commissioners. Regardless which Holocaust we want to study, the Armenian-Holocaust, the Cossack-Holocaust, the Negro-Holocaust caused by Jewish slave traders, the Cambodian-Holocaust, the Chinese-Holocaust, all Holocausts can be questioned - except the Jewish-holocaust. No investigations or scientific researches are allowed! The "Central Council of Jews in Germany" scream immediately, to bring holocaust-heretics "to justice", if anyone dares to question certain holocaust stories. The German judicial system goes into action at once to perform orgies of the most vile persecutions. Looking at all these un-atoned Holocausts that have taken place in our lifetimes history, Horst Mahler, a lawyer and former RAF (Red Army Faction) sympathiser stated: "The holocaust is neither incomprehensible nor unique." The "Council of Jews in Germany" reacted immediately, telling the German justice system: "Denying the singularity of the shoa is historically wrong and conceivably punishable by law." [15] ===== "THE RIGHT TO KNOW IS LIKE THE RIGHT TO LIVE. IT IS FUNDAMENTAL AND UNCONDITIONAL." (Bernard Shaw, Nobel Prize 1925) 1- Ben Weintraub, The Holocaut-Dogma, Cosmo Publishing, Washington 1995, p. 3) 2- Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Dec. 19, 1997, p. 9 3- WELT am SONNTAG, Jan. 22, 1995, p.21 4- The Canadian Jewish News, Jan. 30, 1992, p.8 5- The Guardian (London), April 5, 1997 6- Verdict: District Court (Landgericht) Berlin (May 8, 1950, PKs 3/50) 7- Verdict District Court (Landgericht) D?sseldorf, June 30, 1981, XVII-1/75 (S) 8- Der Spiegel 21/1996, p. 77 9- S?ddeutsche Zeitung, Aug. 19, 1998, p.6 10- Jewish leader ?Galinski, Allgem. J?dische Wo. Ztg. July 26, 1990, p. 1 11- Jewish leader ?Galinski, Allgem. J?dische Wo. Ztg. June 11, 1992, p. 1 12- J. C. Pressacs, Expert report on Auchwitz, commissioned by the Jewish Beate Klarsfeld Faundation, The Crematories of Auschwitz, Piper Publishing House, Munich 1994, page 202. 13- International Red Cross missing persons search service, Arolsen, file no. 10824, Aug. 17, 1994 14- The Evening Standard, London, July 11, 2000 15- Allgemeine J?dische Wochenzeitung (Bonn) Jan. 7, 1999 [END] http://globalfire.tv/nj/03en/history/holympics.htm From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Thu Jul 10 05:44:32 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Thu Jul 10 07:58:33 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/10/2003 - "NO PILLOW, NO CHAIR, NO PENS -- ERNST ZUNDEL SPEAKS FROM A CANADIAN PRISON" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever! July 10, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: In response to queries sent to me: I WILL NEITHER CONFIRM NOR DENY that Zundel supporters are planning a dramatic demonstration in front of the Washington, DC Holocaust Museum! It strongly appears, however, that the real (German? Canadian?) instigators behind the "legal" kidnapping of Ernst Zundel in broad daylight on American soil was accomplished by shamelessly using American law enforcement, probably unwittingly, to act as hit squad for nefarious political interests - who, chances are, enjoy tax benefits and public protection as allegedly non-profit, non-political organizations! Such a brutal kidnapping leading to months of maximum detention incarceration in Gulag-like conditions should never have happened! It is unworthy of countries purporting to be democracies and living by the rule of law, and it will be exposed to the American public for the disgraceful, illegal act that it was! And to think that it all could have been avoided, had Ernst's detractors left him alone to enjoy the rest of his life in the peace and quiet of the hills of Tennessee! But no - their own Talmudic hate never knows when to leave well enough alone! Now they will have a major international scandal on their hands before long! Below I am running a summary of a recent assessment by Ernst's legal representative on location in Canada, Paul Fromm, Director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression: START: Dear Free Speech Supporter: Political prisoner Ernst Zundel is now in his sixth month in a Canadian jail. He's committed no crime, but Canada's vindictive Canadian Security and Intelligence Service, which knowingly permitted terrorists to send him a pipebomb in 1995, insist he's a terrorist and threat to national security. I'm summarizing some of our conversations from my last three visits to Mr. Zundel as his legal representative. What's prison like for this 64-year old pacifist, artist and publisher? Ernst Zundel is being held in "segregation" -- solitary confinement -- or maximum security for his own protection in the Metro West Detention Centre. His toiletries -- soap, toothbrush, towel -- are kept in the hall outside his cell. He must humiliate himself and ask a guard each time he wishes these necessities. Mr. Zundel has no pillow and no chair in his cell. He smiles and tells me that he uses one of the heavy volumes of legal papers as a makeshift pillow. He has also piled the three-inch thick volumes in a stack to make a chair of sorts. Ernst only writing materials are stubs of pencils. I've repeatedly asked the security officers to let him have the use of a pen, colour highlighters and post-it notes to mark up the legal papers. He has also asked that he be permitted water colours and artists brushes for painting. On July 2, I was informed by Security chief Mike Richard that these items had been ruled "contraband" by his superiors. Incredible! Strangely, in a reply just nine weeks (that's right, 9!) after my letter on Ernst's behalf Gary Commeford, Assistant Deputy Minister Adult Institutional Services, told me: "Activities that are permitted [to prisoners] include ... access to correspondence ... and the opportunity to buy items including correspondence materials from the institutional canteen." Why, then, is Mr. Zundel reduced to writing with stubs of pencils? In a July 1 letter, Mr. Zundel explained: "The coloured pencils are cheap, very cheap as far as coloured pencils go. They're Chinese-made things, really meant for kids. They get dull very quickly and often break in the pencil sharpener, three times before I can get a point on them." Mr. Zundel is an artist. He does miniature drawings that are thank you notes to donors. These are nature studies -- usually flowers. He explains the sparseness of colour in his drawings. "I have to ration the use of my colours, as I don't know when I'll get the pencils sharpened again." While the security men are helpful in sharpening his pencils, he finds they run out very quickly. What is the purpose of such callous, mean-spirited and inhumane treatment? Mr. Zundel is not some violent, young crackhead. A guard in another prison told us: "They're trying ro break him" But Ernst Zundel is an amazingly strong man, dedicated to a long struggle and, if needs be, a long time in the Canadian Gulag. "My inspiration is Rudolf Hess, the Prisoner of Peace," he told me in a hushed, quiet voice, his grey eyes gleaming. "I am this decade's Rudolf Hess." Mr. Zundel is quite hopeful that his kidnapping and deportation from the U.S. can be reversed. His U.S. legal team has filed an appeal against his deportation in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati. Shortly after his arrest in the U.S., a writ of habeas corpus was filed. This was ignored. However, FRAP 23 -- the federal appeals court rules set down by the U.S. Supreme Court -- forbids the removal of a prisoner from a prison, once a habeas corpus motion has been filed. Not only was Mr. Zundel moved to another prison, he was deported from the country. In late June, a 45-page brief was filed on his behalf. Those who violated the Supreme Court rules and moved him from prison to prison and then deported him could face prison, fines or discharge, Mr. Zundel believes. The Appeals Court gave the U.S. government just 8 days to respond; they'd asked for 30. "The remedy I seek is an order that I be returned to prison in the U.S." He could then apply for bail and appeal his deportation from within the U.S. Paul Fromm Director CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXRESSION _______________________________________________________________________ ************************************ **************************************** ********************************* Friends of free thought, Ernst Zundel really needs your help. 1. If you live abroad, write to the Canadian Embassy in your country and demand Zundel's release and humane treatment. 2. If you live in southern Ontario and wish to visit, call ahead to Security: 416-675-1806 Ext. 4220. You must be on Zundel's approved list. He didn't know he was supposed to submit a list of visitors he'd like to see. You can also get directions, when you call. The SARS quarantine which lasted from May 27 to July 6, has now been lifted. 3. No matter where you live, why not send a card or letter to encourage Ernst Zundel. Write Prisoner Ernst Zundel, c/o Metro West Detention Centre, Box 4950, 111 Disco Road, Rexdale, ON., M9W 1M3. [Don't stick a return address sticker or other stickers on your envelope. They are removed by prison authorities. You might be hiding drugs under the sticker! No kidding! Write your return address on the envelope.] 4. We also need your financial support for Mr. Zundel's defence. We have a number of delicate colour-pencil sketches by Ernst Zundel done in prison. Each is dated and signed. Each is a nature study. Mr. Zundel has long been a paint and sketch artist. He had returned to his love of art before the U.S. I.N.S picked him up and deported him. . If you send us a cheque for $100 or more, we'll send you one of these collector's items, a thank you sketch by political prisoner Ernst Zundel. Mail your donation today to CAFE Box 332, Rexdale, ON., M9W 5L3, Canada or e-mail us your VISA number and expiry date. On your cheque or an accompanying piece of paper, note: "For Zundel Defence Fund." From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Fri Jul 11 15:56:25 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Fri Jul 11 17:22:55 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/11/2003 - "Kudos for the Washington Post!" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever! July 11, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: All I can say: Enjoy! Harry Truman's Forgotten Diary 1947 Writings Offer Fresh Insight on the President The president's diary, written in the back of a book donated to the Truman Library in 1965, was discovered by a librarian reshelving books. (Hyosub Shin -- The Washington Post) _____Transcript_____ * Excerpts From Truman's Newly Discovered Diary By Rebecca Dana and Peter Carlson Washington Post Staff Writers Friday, July 11, 2003; Page A01 "The Jews, I find are very, very selfish," President Harry S. Truman wrote in a 1947 diary that was recently discovered on the shelves of the Truman Library in Independence, Mo., and released by the National Archives yesterday. Written sporadically during a turbulent year of Truman's presidency, the diary contains about 5,500 words on topics ranging from the death of his mother to comic banter with a British aristocrat. But the most surprising comments were Truman's remarks on Jews, written on July 21, 1947, after the president had a conversation with Henry Morgenthau, the Jewish former treasury secretary. Morgenthau called to talk about a Jewish ship in Palestine -- possibly the Exodus, the legendary ship carrying 4,500 Jewish refugees who were refused entry into Palestine by the British, then rulers of that land. "He'd no business, whatever to call me," Truman wrote. "The Jews have no sense of proportion nor do they have any judgement [sic] on world affairs. Henry brought a thousand Jews to New York on a supposedly temporary basis and they stayed." Truman then went into a rant about Jews: "The Jews, I find, are very, very selfish. They care not how many Estonians, Latvians, Finns, Poles, Yugoslavs or Greeks get murdered or mistreated as D[isplaced] P[ersons] as long as the Jews get special treatment. Yet when they have power, physical, financial or political neither Hitler nor Stalin has anything on them for cruelty or mistreatment to the under dog. Put an underdog on top and it makes no difference whether his name is Russian, Jewish, Negro, Management, Labor, Mormon, Baptist he goes haywire. I've found very, very few who remember their past condition when prosperity comes." Yesterday, those comments startled scholars because Truman is known as a president who acted to help Jews in postwar Europe and who supported recognition of Israel in 1948, when his State Department opposed it. "My reaction is: Wow! It did surprise me because of what I know about Truman's record," says Sara J. Bloomfield, director of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum. "Truman's sympathy for the plight of Jews was very apparent." But Truman's comments were, Bloomfield says, "typical of a sort of cultural anti-Semitism that was common at that time in all parts of American society. This was an acceptable way to talk." "Truman was often critical, sometimes hypercritical, of Jews in his diary entries and in his correspondences, but this doesn't make him an anti-Semite," says John Lewis Gaddis, a professor of history at Yale University and a prominent Cold War scholar. "Anyone who played the role he did in creating the state of Israel can hardly be regarded in that way." Throughout his presidency, which lasted from 1945 to 1953, Truman was a prolific but sporadic diarist, jotting down his thoughts in diary books and on loose pieces of paper. This newly discovered diary appeared in a book titled "The Real Estate Board of New York, Inc., Diary and Manual 1947." The book, which begins with 160 printed pages of information about the Real Estate Board, was donated to the Truman Library in 1965, seven years before his death, and has sat on shelves there ever since. Apparently its tedious title scared scholars away and nobody noticed Truman's handwritten comments in the diary section in the back of the book until recently, when a librarian reshelving books happened to see them. "This is probably the most important document the Truman Library has opened in 20 years," Michael J. Devine, the library's director, said in a prepared statement. "Once again, in this diary, we are able to hear that strong personal voice that Truman almost always projected in his writings." In one memorable entry, Truman recounts a meeting at which he offered to yield the 1948 Democratic presidential nomination to Gen. Dwight Eisenhower if Gen. Douglas MacArthur campaigned for the Republican nomination. Truman's comments on Eisenhower and MacArthur came in an entry dated July 25, 1947, years before Truman's famous firing of Gen. MacArthur during the Korean War. In the entry, he wrote of a discussion that afternoon with Eisenhower, who was then Army chief of staff. "We discussed MacArthur and his superiority complex," Truman wrote. "Ike & I think MacArthur expects to make a Roman Triumphal return to the U.S. a short time before the Republican Convention meets in Philadelphia. I told Ike that if he did that that he (Ike) should announce for the nomination for President on the Democratic ticket and that I'd be glad to be in second place, or Vice President. I like the Senate anyway. Ike & I could be elected and my family & myself would be happy outside this great white jail known as the White House." Truman did not reveal how Eisenhower, who was elected president as a Republican in 1952, reacted to his suggestion. He did note that he and Ike agreed to keep quiet about it: "Ike won't quot [sic] me & I won't quote him." But Eisenhower did tell the story to confidants, and it leaked out and was recounted in "Eisenhower," a 1983 biography by Stephen E. Ambrose. "At the time, Truman's chances for reelection appeared to be nil," Ambrose wrote. "Eisenhower assumed that Truman wanted to use him to pull the Democrats out of an impossible situation. The general wanted nothing to do with the Democratic Party; his answer was a flat 'No.' " Eisenhower sat out the 1948 election, as did MacArthur. Truman ran against New York Gov. Thomas Dewey and won a stunning upset victory. The diary contains several other interesting Truman comments. He had praise for Gen. George C. Marshall, whom he appointed secretary of state: "Marshall is, I think the greatest man of the World War II. He managed to get along with Roosevelt, the Congress, Churchill, the Navy and the Joint Chiefs of Staff and he made a grand record in China." On Jan. 6, he wrote: "Read my annual message. It was good if I do say it myself. . . . Clark Clifford did most of the work. He's a nice boy and will go places." In that comment, Truman proved prescient. Clifford, then a 40-year-old Truman aide, later became an aide to President John F. Kennedy, secretary of defense under Lyndon Johnson and a major Washington power broker until his death in 1998. On March 7, he wrote: "Doc tell's [sic] me I have Cardiac Asthma! Aint that hell. Well it makes no diff, will go on as before. I've sworn him to secrecy! So What!" On July 28 -- "terrible day" -- Truman wrote about his mother's funeral. "Along the road cars, trucks and pedestrians stood with hats off. It made me want to weep -- but I couldn't in public. I've read through thousands of messages from all over the world in the White House study and I can shed tears as I please -- no one's looking." But Truman's famed plain-spoken wit is also evident in the diary. On July 4, after attending Independence Day festivities in Monticello, Va., he wrote a passage that can only be called Trumanesque: "Mrs. Astor -- Lady Astor came to the car just before we started from Monticello to say to me that she liked my policies as President but that she thought I had become rather too much 'Yankee.' I couldnt help telling her that my purported 'Yankee' tendencies were not half so bad as her ultra conservative British leanings. She almost had a stroke." ===== (Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40678-2003Jul10.html ) From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Sat Jul 12 16:39:25 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Sat Jul 12 19:04:34 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/12/2003 - "Sadism pure and raw" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny July 12, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: The ZGram below is one that probably few people ever forgot who read it on May 31, 1996 when I first sent it out. In the wake of what Truman said about the cruelties of certain people in power who care not at all about others, it certainly merits a repeat. Brace yourselves - it is not pleasant reading. Yet this is the kind of sadism I saw with my own eyes as a child, and this is why so many of the World War II generation so bitterly resent what is being claimed over and over about them.by their detractors. There was unbelievable, truly satanic suffering in Europe in those years - and much of it happened long after all shooting had stopped. Here is my ZGram I sent around the world more than seven years ago: [START] May 31, 1996 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Good Morning from the Zundelsite: Some months ago Ernst asked me to do a report on Allied atrocities during and after World War II, and toward that end, he sent me some information, among them a book in German title, "Alliierte Kriegsverbrechen" - Allied War Crimes. I started reading it and underlining certain passages, but not for long-because I realized that I was getting nauseated. It was a compilation of first-person testimony as to what happened when the Allies (particularly the Red Army) started to carve up a prostrated and defeated Germany. I made several attempts to finish this assignment, but I couldn't do it. I simply couldn't do it. Even now, I feel a moral obligation to finish it, but even thinking about it makes my palms clammy and my heart race. People in the West have simply no idea what went on in Europe after the Allies began to push the Germans back - from 1943 on! I have given the material below a lot of thought as to whether or not I should send it to my ZGram readers. It isn't pretty reading. It was published recently in Der Freiwillige, June 1995, pages 10-11, under the title In Their Terror All Were Alike, written (or edited) by Hans Koppe. ". . . Since the same old stories of war crimes allegedly committed by the Germans are being parroted over and over again in prayer-wheel fashion, particularly by the younger generations who are too lazy (or deliberately unwilling) to obtain a real grasp of the subject through the study of documents from the archives of our former enemies' documents which are both accessible and irrefutable - we wish to call to mind the following report which first appeared 30 years ago in the Deutschland Journal of April 23, on p. 7 of issue 17. It is supplemented with the eyewitness report of an armoured infantryman who recorded his impressions on March 7, 1995. P. 7, issue 17, April 23, 1965 (Deutschland-Journal). Report of the German-Brazilian citizen Leonora Geier, nee Cavoa, born on October 22, 1925 in Sao Paulo, Brazil. Before the expulsion she lived in Hirschberg, Bahnstrasse 8. Present at the writing of this report: Bernhard Wassmann, born on May 10, 1901, Bautzen, Senftenberger Strasse 15; Reiner Halhammer, born on February 3, 1910, Bautzen, Sterngasse 2; Manfred Haer, born on April 9, 1929, Gorlitz, A.Bebel-Strasse 1; Kyrill Wratilavo, born on March 3, 1918, Bautzen, Karl-Marx-Strasse 25. The witnesses present confirm that the aforementioned, Leonora Geier, made this report without any coercion, threats or other outside influence, motivated solely by the need to make the terrible events of the time of the German Reich's collapse known to posterity since she has received permission to emigrate to Brazil. The report was drawn up on October 6, 1955 and discusses the events of February 16, 17 and 18 1945, which are already partially known. At that time the witness was employed as typist in Camp "Vilmsee" ofthe RAD), the Women's Labour Service. Being a Brazilian. she was considered by the Russian Army to be an ally put to forced labour in the .service of the National-Socialist state. These prerogatives were attested to by a document which she presented here and which bears the rubber stamp of the First White Russian Army. Since the present report disregards existing moral standards and sexual taboos, it must under no circumstances be made available to underage persons. All events are recounted in a plain, straight-forward manner in order to document historical accuracy. Nothing has been added, nothing was withheld. Bernhard Wassmann and Manfred Haer were members of the Infantry Artillery and Training Company I. G. 81 and were assigned to rescue operations in the aforementioned camp when the city of Neustettin was occupied following the temporary retreat of the First White Russian Army: "On the morning of February 16 [19451 a Russian division occupied the Reich Labour Service camp of Vilmsee in Neustettin. The Commissar, who spoke German well, informed me that the camp was dissolved and that, as we were a uniformed unit, we were to be transported immediately to a collecting camp. Since 1, being a Brazilian, belonged to a nation on friendly terms with the Allies, he entrusted me with the leadership of the transport which went to Neustettin, into the yard of what used to be an iron foundry. We were some 500 girls from the Women's Reich Labour Service. The Commissar was very polite to us and assigned us to the foreign workers' barracks of the factory. But the allocated space was too small for 11 of us, and so I went to speak to the Commissar about it. He said that it was, after all, only a temporary arrangement, and offered that I could come to the typists' office if it was too crowded for me, which I gladly accepted. He immediately warned me to avoid any further contact with the others, as those were members of an illegal army. My protests that this was not true were cut off with the remark that if I ever said anything like that ever again, I would be shot. Suddenly I heard loud screams, and immediately two Red Army soldiers brought in five girls. The commissar ordered them to undress. When they refused out of modesty, he ordered me to do it to them, and for all of us to follow him. We crossed the yard to the former works kitchen, which had been completely cleared out except for a few tables on the window side. It was terribly cold, and the poor girls shivered. In the large, tiled room some Russians were waiting for us, making remarks that must have been very obscene, judging from how everything they said drew gales of laughter. The Commissar told me to watch and learn how to turn the Master Race into whimpering bits of misery. Now two Poles came in, dressed only in trousers, and the girls cried out at their sight. They quickly grabbed the first of the girls, and bent her backwards over the edge of the table until her joints cracked. I was close to passing out as one of them took his knife and, before the very eyes of the other girls, cut off her right breast. He paused for a moment, then cut off the other side. I have never-heard anyone scream as desperately as that girl. After this operation he drove his knife into her abdomen several times, which again was accompanied by the cheers of the Russians. The next girl cried for mercy, but in vain, it even seemed that the gruesome deed was done particularly slowly because she was especially pretty. The other three had collapsed, they cried for their mothers and begged for a quick death, but the same fate awaited them as well. The last of them was still almost a child, with barely developed breasts. They literally tore the flesh off her ribs until the white bones showed. Another five girls were brought in. They had been carefully chosen this time. All of them were well-developed and pretty. When they saw the bodies of their predecessors they began to cry and scream. Weakly, they tried desperately to defend themselves, but it did them no good as the Poles grew ever more cruel. They sliced the body of one of them open lengthwise and poured in a can of machine oil, which they tried to light. A Russian shot one of the other girls in the genitals before they cut off her breasts. Loud howls of approval began when someone brought a saw from a tool chest. This was used to tear off the breasts of the other girls, which soon caused the floor to be awash in blood. The Russians were in a blood frenzy. More girls were being brought in continually. I saw these grisly proceedings as through a red haze. Over and over again I heard the terrible screams when the breasts were tortured, and the loud groans at the mutilation of the genitals. When my knees buckled I was forced onto a chair. The Commissar always made sure that I was watching, and when I had to throw up they even paused in their tortures. One girl had not undressed completely, she may also have been a little older than the others, who were around seventeen years of age. They soaked her bra with oil and set it on fire, and while she screamed, a thin iron rod was shoved into her vagina until it came out her navel. In the yard entire groups of girls were clubbed to death after the prettiest of them had been selected for this torture. The air was filled with the death cries of many hundreds of girls. But compared to what happened in here, the beating to death outside was almost humane. It was a horrible fact that not one of the girls mutilated here ever fainted. Each of them suffered mutilation fully conscious. In their terror all of them were alike in their pleading; it was always the same, the begging for mercy, the high-pitched scream when the breasts were cut and the groans when the genitals were mutilated. The slaughter was interrupted several times to sweep the blood out of the room and to clear away the bodies. That evening I succumbed to a severe case of nervous fever. I do not remember anything from that point on until I came to in a field hospital. German troops had temporarily recaptured Neustettin, thus liberating us. As I learned later, some 2,000 girls who had been in RAD, BDM and other camps nearby were murdered in the first three days of Russian occupation." (signed) Mrs. Leonora Geier, nee Cavoa Copy of a handwritten report: "I read the account of an eyewitness, Mrs. Leonora Geier. The bestiality she experienced, and described in her account, is 100% true and a typical reflection of the fantasies and exhortations of the Soviet propagandist and chief ideologist Ilya Ehrenburg. This bestiality was a tactical measure intended to force the German population to flee from the Eastern regions en masse, and was the rule rather than the exception all the way over to the Oder River. What I myself witnessed: I was an armoured infantryman and had been trained on the most modern German tank of those days, the Panther. Survivors from tank crews were reassembled in the Reserves at Cottbus and kept ready for action. In mid January, 1945, we were transferred to Frankfurt on the Oder River, into a school building. One morning we were issued infantry weapons, guns, bazookas and submachine guns. The next day we were ordered to march to Neustettin. We traveled the first 60 miles or so by lorry, and after that some 90 miles per day in forced marches. We were to take over some tanks that were kept ready for us in a forest west of Neustettin. After a march lasting two days and nights, some ten crews reached the forest just before dawn. Two tanks were immediately readied for action and guarded the approach roads while the other comrades, bone-weary, got a little sleep. By noon all tanks, approximately 20, had been readied. Our orders were to set up a front-line and to recapture villages and towns from the Russians. My platoon of three tanks attacked a suburb that had a train station with a forecourt. After we destroyed several anti-tank guns the Russians surrendered. More and more of them emerged from the houses. They were gathered into the forecourt about 200 sat crowded closely together. Then something unexpected happened. Several German women ran towards the Russians and stabbed at them with cutlery forks and knives. It was our responsibility to protect prisoners, and we could not permit this. But it was not until I fired a submachine gun into the air that the women drew back, and cursed us for presuming to protect these animals. They urged us to go into the houses and take a look at what (the Russians) had done there. We did so, a few of us at a time, and we were totally devastated. We had never seen anything like it utterly, unbelievably monstrous! Naked, dead women lay in many of the rooms. Swastikas had been cut into their abdomens, in some the intestines bulged out, breasts were cut up, faces beaten to a pulp and swollen puffy. Others had been tied to the furniture by their hands and feet, and massacred. A broomstick protruded from the vagina of one, a besom from that of another, etc. To me, a young man of 24 years at that time, it was a devastating sight, simply incomprehensible! Then the women told their story: The mothers had had to witness how their teen and twelve-year-old daughters were raped by some 20 men; the daughters in turn saw their mothers being raped, even their grandmothers. Women who tried to resist were brutally tortured to death. There was no mercy. Many women were not local; they had come there from other towns, fleeing from the Russians. They also told us of the fate of the girls from the RAD whose barracks had been captured by the Russians. When the butchery of the girls began, a few of them had been able to crawl underneath the barracks and hide. At night they escaped, and told us what they knew. There were three of them. The women and girls saw parts of what Mrs. Leonora Geier described. The women we liberated were in a state almost impossible to describe. They were overfatigued and their faces had a confused, vacant look. Some were beyond speaking, ran up and down and moaned the same sentences over and over again. Having seen the consequences of these bestial atrocities, we were terribly agitated and determined to fight. We knew the war was past winning; but it was our obligation and sacred duty to fight to the last bullet . . ." Don't ask me why I do what I do for the Zundelsite. The bestiality of World War II, caused largely by the Jew named Ilja Ehrenburg, Stalin's main propagandist whose private papers and files were donated by him to Israel before he died, and who whipped the Russian Army into a frenzy of destruction, was worse than anything a sane mind can imagine - and it is coming our way unless courageous men and women stop it. Ingrid ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thought for the Day: "God cannot alter the past, but historians can." Samuel Butler [END] From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Sun Jul 13 17:11:18 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Sun Jul 13 18:58:39 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/13/2003 - "Federal Court Rules "Goy" Evidence Of Persecution" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever! July 13, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: A somewhat unusual story: [START] Federal Court Rules "Goy" Evidence Of Persecution The federal appeals court in San Francisco ruled Friday that the hate word "goy" is evidence of persecution in Israel, and a San Jose resident received political asylum. The facts are not as clean as we would like them (the victim was half Jewish and half Arab), and "goy" was determined to have "a derogatory meaning to Arabs." Nevertheless, this is a bold step into a future when European Americans will be able to bring civil and criminal charges against those who disparage and demean our children on sidewalks, in school buses, and in classrooms. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2003/07/12/MN37369.DTL Full story: Israeli Arab wins asylum in U.S. Court finds Jewish nation's navy persecuted man who now lives in San Jose. Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer Saturday, July 12, 2003 An Israeli Arab who lives in San Jose was found eligible for political asylum Friday by a federal appeals court, which said Israeli naval forces attacked and harassed him for a decade in his homeland as the child of a mixed marriage. The attacks on Abrahim Baballah in the Israeli town of Akko on the Mediterranean, where he worked as a fisherman, included firing shots over his fishing boat, destroying the boat in a purported rescue and wrecking his livelihood, said the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. The court said Baballah was persecuted because of his religion and ethnicity. The attacks on Abrahim Baballah in the Israeli town of Akko on the Mediterranean, where he worked as a fisherman, included firing shots over his fishing boat, destroying the boat in a purported rescue and wrecking his livelihood, said the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. The court said Baballah was persecuted because of his religion and ethnicity. "This decision shows that the fact that a country is a democratic country doesn't mean that is incapable of committing human rights violations that can rise to the level of persecution," said Musalo, who was a consultant to the U. N. High Commissioner for Refugees on the issue of religious persecution. The Israeli Consulate in San Francisco could not be reached for comment. Baballah was the child of a Jewish mother and a Muslim father, the only mixed marriage in Akko, the court said. He said employers refused to hire him when they learned about his parents, so he worked as a fisherman and became a target of daily harassment by the Israeli navy. Naval crews circled Baballah's boat, sprayed it with water hoses, fired bullets over it, pelted him and his crew with eggs and damaged his fishing nets with their propellers, the court said. On one occasion, a naval crew boarded the boat, tied Baballah's brother to a pole, sprayed him with water in freezing weather, then had the brother arrested and imprisoned for more than a year, the court said. Later, when Baballah's boat ran adrift, he accepted help from an Israeli naval crew, which pulled the boat in a way that split it apart and laughed as the boat broke up, the court said. Sailors also followed Baballah in town and called him "goy," which means non-Jew and has a derogatory meaning to Arabs, the court said. Unable to make a living in Israel, Baballah came to the United States with his family in 1992, and now owns a restaurant in San Jose. Immigration courts ruled him ineligible for asylum, citing the tension between Jews and Arabs and saying Baballah was not singled out for persecution. The appeals court disagreed "Baballah was the victim of terrifying attacks on a frequent basis over a 10-year period . . . and risked his life in frustrated attempts to earn a livelihood," said Judge Richard Paez in the 3-0 ruling. He said Baballah was also persecuted economically, by the destruction of his business. The constant taunt of "goy" showed that Baballah's tormentors were motivated by his ethnicity and religion, which are legal grounds for asylum, Paez said. author: begelko@sfchronicle.com -- (Source: http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/996398F506EE119C88256D5F00830B ) [END] From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Mon Jul 14 18:58:08 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Mon Jul 14 21:14:07 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/14/2003 - "It all began with the British Empire" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever! July 14, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: Charley Reese on "Middle East 101" [START] Might As Well Get To Know It Now that our president has embedded us in the Middle East for an indefinite future, you might as well start trying to educate yourself about the area and its conflicts. As one can say about so many problems in this world, it all began with the British Empire. When you look at a map of the Middle East, you are looking at a map drawn by two Europeans by the names of Sykes and Picot. This map represents the betrayal of the Arabs and the Kurds. Before this map was drawn, the area had been part of the Ottoman Empire. (That's Turkey, for those of you who hate history and geography.) The British, with their usual perfidy, had promised everything to everybody. Help us overthrow the Turks, they said to the Arabs, and you can have an independent Arab nation afterward. Help us overthrow the Turks, they said to the Kurds, and you will get an independent Kurdistan. And for some reason historians still argue about, they also promised European Zionists that they (the Brits) would establish a Jewish homeland in Palestine. They betrayed them, too, because what they did was establish the Palestine mandate - or, in plain language, British occupation of Palestine. Britain and France divided the Middle East between themselves, and this basic fact set off the conflicts we are still dealing with. The problem with establishing a Jewish state was that Arabs already occupied the area chosen. While they initially had no quarrel with Jews who wanted to immigrate to Palestine (the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has nothing to do with religion and never has), as soon as they figured out that European Jews were not coming to be Palestinians but to take their land away from them, the Arabs revolted. The British crushed this. It wasn't too long, however, before Jews became impatient with British occupation and so, to drive out the British, did what Palestinians are doing today - used terror. Two of the premier Jewish terrorists - Menachem Begin, who led the Irgun, and Yitzhak Shamir, who led the Stern Gang - would later become prime ministers of Israel. It is the political parties these terrorists started that rule Israel today. Begin is famous for blowing up the King David Hotel, Shamir for reputedly ordering the assassination of Swedish diplomat Count Folke Bernadotte, who had been sent on a peace mission by the United Nations. Both of their groups joined forces to commit one of the most infamous massacres in history at the little village of Deir Yassin, where more than 200 men, women and children were slaughtered. Much of modern terrorist methods were pioneered by Begin. You should read his book "The Revolt." Sometime in 1947, the British had had enough of Palestine and announced they were going to end the mandate the following year and dump the problem in the lap of the United Nations. The Zionists fiercely lobbied both Harry Truman and Joe Stalin. The deal was to get a vote to partition Palestine. The Jews would immediately proclaim the state of Israel, and, as preplanned, the United States and the Soviet Union would instantly recognize it. This was the first instance of the United States using a combination of threats and bribery to round up votes at the United Nations. Jews and Palestinians were already fighting, and in the course of that fighting, the better-organized Zionists decided to expand beyond the boundaries set by the partition resolution and to do a little ethnic cleansing, since Arabs still outnumbered Jewish residents 2-1. Despite some volunteers coming in from other Arab countries, the Zionists had accomplished both goals by the cease-fire in 1948. In a 1967 war, the Zionists took the rest of Palestine, and Palestinians, who stubbornly insist on self-determination (once, but no longer, an American value), are fighting them the best way they can. With the United States loading the Israelis down with both modern arms and billions of dollars, however, the Palestinians are having a hard time. This issue has made the United States hated in the region and the king of hypocrites because we have vetoed 35 U.N. resolutions to prevent the international community from giving any justice or help to the Palestinians. Now, our president has included Palestinian organizations that are not international terrorists (Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah) on our list of enemies. Originally, they were just aiming their attacks at Israel, but I suppose this might change since George Bush has become the puppet of the Israeli government. Hang on to your hats, folks. You're in for a violent next 50 years or so. [END] From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Tue Jul 15 17:42:24 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Tue Jul 15 20:02:46 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/15/2003 - "Sick!" Message-ID: ZGram- Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever! JULY 15, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: This is one ugly story! [START] USS Liberty - Israeli Pilot Speaks Up 7-14-3 "We had been surveilled all morning and part of the afternoon by Israeli forces. They knew who we were. We heard them reporting over radio who we were and how we were sailing and where we were sailing. They saw the flag and everything else. We were in international waters." Adlai Stevenson supported USS Liberty Senator Adlai Stevenson III in 1980, his last year as a United States Senator from Illinois, invited Jim Ennes to his Senate office for a private, two hour meeting to discuss the USS Liberty attack and coverup. Following the private meeting, Ennes was invited back the next day to discuss the attack with members of Stevenson's staff, along with members of the staff of Senator Barry Goldwater and members of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. In that meeting, staff members told Ennes that they found his story convincing, but that they would recommend to both senators that they not pursue an investigation because an investigation would only antagonize Israeli interests while "nothing good could come of it." Goldwater accepted that staff recommendation. Stevenson did not. Instead, Stevenson called a news conference in which he announced that he was convinced that the attack was deliberate and that the survivors deserved an investigation. He would, he said, spend the remaining few weeks of his Senate term attempting to arrange for an inquiry. Almost immediately, the government of Israel contacted the White House and offered to settle the outstanding $40million damage claims for $6million an amount equal to one dollar for each Jewish victim of the Holocaust. Vice President Walter Mondale quickly agreed to that offer just before Christmas while Congress and President Carter were on vacation. The Department of State followed immediately with a press release, reported on the front page of the New York Times, which announced, "The book is now closed on the USS Liberty." Indeed, from that point on, it was impossible to generate any congressional interest in the Liberty at all. Senator Stevenson's staff told me later that they felt the settlement was directly related to Senator Stevenson's announced plan to hold an inquiry, and was engineered to block forever any inquiry plans. Israel did subsequently pay $6million in three annual installments of $2million each. Secretary of State Dean Rusk said later that he considered the payments meaningless, as Congress merely increased the annual Israeli allotment by that amount. Adlai Stevenson later ran for Governor of Illinois. He was strongly opposed by Israeli and Jewish interests. He lost. Many feel it was his support for the Liberty that cost him the election. Many also feel it was Stevenson's experience with the Liberty that has intimidated other Members of Congress who might otherwise support the survivors. [STOP] If you care to read on, there is more. http://www.rense.com/general39/pilot.htm From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Wed Jul 16 03:38:26 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Wed Jul 16 15:46:39 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/16/2003 - "Holocaust debate? Heavens, no! Too much is at stake. Millions. And millions, and millions..." Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever! July 16, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: Common sense would tell rational people that recycling lies does not prove them to be true. Debate would clarify who is the liar. Truth hurts the liar, which is why liars shy away from debate. For years, revisionists have argued for debate. Look who is shying away from debate. Below is one Australian who is shying away from debate by recycling lies. Every one of his lies have been disproven. Yet with typical chutzpah he recycles them again, hoping it will keep the sheeple confused. Here is Point (Andrew Markus) / Counterpoint (David Irving): START] Why Holocaust deniers are beyond Debate Andrew Markus THERE are two reasons why we should not engage in debates with Holocaust deniers. The first parallels the reason for not debating with those who believe that the position of the planets at the moment of our birth determines our destiny or that the earth is flat. And they know it. We do not argue with people who reject rationality -- just as we do not attempt to teach the laws of quantum physics in kindergartens. The second reason is the one that leads us to wash in the morning, wear decent clothes and seek to pass on our values and beliefs to our children: we have self-respect. We have no need to validate our sense of self by seeking the approval of those who would destroy us, nor of their fellow travellers. The likes of David Irving question whether there were gas chambers in the hell that went by the name of Auschwitz. There is not one historian holding a position at a recognised university who questions the existence of gas chambers. Not in Germany, not in Poland, not in the United Kingdom, not in the United States of America, not in Australia. Not one -- for a simple reason. It is called evidence. Hitler publicly announced in January 1939, and on many earlier occasions, his manic determination to destroy the Jewish people. Historians have the records of the Wannsee conference held in January 1942 at which details of mass extermination were discussed. They have the text of Heinrich Himmler's secret speech of October 1943 at which he justified mass murder. The commandant of Auschwitz, Rudolf H?ss, left a detailed testament of his crimes. What more evidence is required? The testimonies of Polish bystanders -- peasants, town dwellers, members of the underground and Catholic clergy? Detailed records of train movements, photographs, architectural plans, a patent application by the crematorium designers Topf and Sons, the physical remains of Auschwitz-Birkenau -- including warehouses of personal belongings? There is one other category of evidence -- survivors. Because Auschwitz-Birkenau -- unlike Treblinka, Belzec, Sobibor and Chelmno -- served, in addition to its extermination role, as a labour camp, and because it was the last of the centres to remain operational, thousands of witnesses survived. They include Primo Levi and Elie Wiesel. To debate with the likes of David Irving we thus have first to agree that this mass of evidence could possibly be fraudulent, perhaps the work of the Elders of Zion who secretly control the world. We have to assume that during the course of war, when the German armies were marching victorious over Europe and northern Africa, the agents of the Elders were secretly placing fraudulent documents in the archives of the Nazi Government. Or that after the war they were able to force hundreds of the innocent SS to confess to crimes that they had not committed. Or that they were hiding populations numbered in the millions. Or that they recruited and coached tens of thousands of witnesses, Jew and Gentile, to recite scripted tales of acts that never occurred -- and to continue reciting them to the present day. Those willing to make such assumptions should debate the deniers. The leading American expert on Holocaust denial, Professor Deborah Lipstadt, never engages in such debate. She writes that "deniers want to be thought of as the 'other side'. Simply appearing with them on the same stage accords them that status." Those concerned with ignorance of the Holocaust still in evidence in our society should engage in Holocaust education, without giving legitimacy to the assassins of memory. ===== David Irving comments: IT is amusing the way that Deborah Lipstadt's threadbare old arguments circle the globe, literally. No wonder she was too scared to step into the witness box in London, and expose her case to cross examination, even by a novice in legal matters like myself. There is the "flat earth" argument -- Lipstadt added to this her own argument that we should not argue with child-molesters, something she seemed obsessed with, as though she was trying to tell us something about her own childhood. There is the "not-one-recognized- historian" argument, nobody of merit who questions the existence of gas chambers -- not in Poland, nor in Germany, nor France, nor elsewhere. I challenged this "overwhelming consensus" argument when it was used by a young German historian, Peter Longerich, called as a witness for Lipstadt, in cross examination. I asked him if he would tell the Court the length of the prison terms imposed on historians in Germany, Poland, France or elsewhere who did dare to question these facts, and what his "consensus" was actually worth in the light of that? But this writer even trots out the old story that "mass extermination" was discussed at the Wannsee conference. Unless he has obtained a transcript of that conference of which other historians are unaware, then he is lying here too. There is not a word about extermination in the Wannsee conference: it is a discussion between mid-level civil servants on the logistics of getting rid of, as in booting-out, the Jews from the Reich territory. He relies on the Italian suicide Primo Levi, who wrote one novel about Auschwitz, and the notorious liar and fantasizer Elie Wiesel, who wrote another, though Wiesel sometimes gets confused about whether he was actually in Buchenwald or Auschwitz. He quotes Rudolf H?ss, although even Raul Hilberg says that the testimony of H?ss is worthless. More quixoticalloy, he also refers to the thousands of survivors of Auschwitz; but under my cross-examination Professor Robert Jan Van Pelt admitted that some 7,500 were in the camp when it was liberated in January 1945, and he had to agree that we never heard from them -- history only ever gets to hear from the same seven or eight professional Auschwitz survivors -- Henryk Tauber, Ada Bimko, and the rest. The sheer paucity of the arguments offered by this opinionated Australian writer just reveals the actual lack of evidence in support of the general case he seeks to make. No wonder he and his ilk don't want a debate, and use violence at every level in order to avoid it. Too much is at stake. Millions. And millions, and millions. [END] From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Thu Jul 17 16:24:04 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Fri Jul 18 18:29:04 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/17/2003 - "A shocking document!" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever! July 17, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: I just received this write-up from Paul Fromm, a personal friend and on-location advisor of my husbands. Paul titled it "THE JUDICIAL KIDNAPPING OF ERNST ZUNDEL IN TENNESSEE". Some of the information is new even to me. It is a shocking document! I will correct some misspellings but otherwise leave the write-up intact. I urge all of you who have websites or access to publications to spread it as far as you can! [START] ERNST ZUNDEL - PRISON MEMOIRS, FEBRUARY 5 - FEBRUARY 19, 2003 Dear Paul, You asked me to write something about what happened to me. I find it difficult because I am in a state of denial about it all. It simply has been one grotesquely unfair and very emotionally disturbing, highly unpleasant experience from the word "go", especially since we were living in the belief that we had done everything by the book, everything we could have possibly been doing and, and in our lawyer's opinion, the overwhelmed immigration service checking into thousands, tens of thousands in fact, of terrorists in the United States simply had not come around to look at the file of two pension-aged Whites setting up residence. All this came to an abrupt end when a virtual posse of police cruisers, paddy wagons, etc., materialized in my driveway in Tennessee at about 11:00 a.m., February 5, 2003. One of my handymen was helping me frame some of my water colors, oils and line drawings which I intended to hang on the walls of our soon-to-be opened Art Gallery that very afternoon. We were to open in two weeks. I was dressed in my work outfit, blue jeans, mountain hiking boots, colorful carpenter's suspenders, casual flannel shirt, etc. I inquired what brought them there as they surrounded me menacingly. They told me to put my hands on the hood on a truck in the driveway and said that they were Immigration Service Enforcement officers there to address me and take me into custody because I had failed to keep a hearing date. I was stunned as was Ingrid (Rimland, my wife). They had no arrest warrant. I asked to call my attorney. The request was denied. Ingrid joined us. She, too, was told no calls to the attorney were allowed. I asked Ingrid to go into the house for my passport and jacket. I took no papers or identification like driver's license, social security number, etc. and absolutely no addresses with me, not to compromise my friends, because by then I knew I was being deported - I thought to Germany. Within minutes, I was in handcuffs and leg irons in a prison van, escorted in a police convoy down our mountain road, past our art gallery, into our little town where we did our shopping, onto highway I-40 to Knoxville, where I was processed, finger printed, photographed and where one Immigration officer, not directly involved in my case, had his wall decorated with a 2 x 4-foot large Israeli flag. Needless to say, I found this somewhat of an odd wall decoration in a U.S. Immigration Office! I wondered to myself if they had Nazi swastika flags on the walls of the INS in the 1930s or 1940s. I was given some documents to sign which were lying on the table of one of the bureaucrats when I came in. They had yellow post-it notes and one clearly said in someone's handwriting "add today's date here". A Polaroid photo was taken of me against the wall of some garage, part of a hollow block-type building with a very noisy, malfunctioning air conditioner being checked by a technician. This photo was then trimmed and later on stapled onto a document of which I was given, I believe, a copy. The photo clearly shows the outfit I wore the moment I was arrested. I was then put again into a prison van in handcuffs and leg irons and driven for approximately 1 1/4 to 1 ? hours through heavy traffic from Knoxville via Maryville past the airport to the Blount County Jail, a building I had pointed out to Ingrid several times in the previous two years saying, "This is where they will take me when they come to arrest me", prophetic words! How did I know? I don't know. I was unloaded at the Blount County Jail, a cold unfriendly place whose staff had a nasty attitude, the likes of which I had never encountered in any other prison facility in Canada or in Europe before. The processing took over four hours. Then I finally was allowed a brief call to Ingrid which did not go through right away as it was 9:45 p.m. I was kept in an ice-cold, all concrete holding cell - even the seats and floors were concrete - until well after midnight. I had had nothing to eat or drink since about 12:30 at the INS office in Knoxville. The medication I was on which I brought with me to jail was denied to me. The doctor, I was told, was to decide if I was allowed it or not. Since [the pills] were all non-chemical based, they were denied me. As a result, my blood pressure began to act up. I was told by the nurses to whom I was taken in handcuffs and ankle irons, that it was dangerously high. I was housed in a two-man cell, 24-hour lockup, only allowed a brief shower after two to three days and a short call to Ingrid, I don't remember when. My cell mate was a chemical engineer, a manic depressive who hallucinated, talked to unseen people all day and jumped up and down and out of bed all night long, hollering orders to persons unseen, thinking he was in charge of the CIA and talking loudly to "the president" on his make-believe telephone. He annoyed the guards repeatedly in the middle of the night by frequently using the in-cell intercom. He smelled something awful, obviously not having showered in weeks. Finally, the guards came en force, six or seven of them, and told me to get off my top bunk, grab my mattress and sheets and get out of the cell, motioning me out into the hallway. The next thing I heard was hollering, screaming and kicking and punching and blood squirting against the wall as my crazy cell mate was dragged on one leg across the floor into a different area of the prison. I saw him a few days later on my way to sick bay with bruises, all black and blue over his eyes and head as they led him past me from the doctor's office. Later on, I was told by my U.S. attorney that he had engaged a well-known Knoxville attorney (Public Defender) who had filed a $6 million lawsuit against the Blount County Jail and the sheriffs and guards. I was put into a two-man cell with a gentle, soft-spoken 65-year-old barber who had tried to shoot his mother. He was kind and helpful to me and taught me the ropes of U.S. prison life. I was now briefly with the general population, half Black, Mexican and Indian, the rest being Whites mainly from the Smoky Mountain area. There was hardly a blond person amongst them, all were dark-haired to jet black. Most were hardened criminals, murderers, bank robbers, car thieves. Most were repeat offenders. Many had 25- to 30-year sentences. There was anger, rage and frustration in that place that was palpable. Guards were cold, abrupt and unfriendly. Contact with Ingrid [my wife] was very unpredictable because one of the phones was broken and the young Black inmates were hogging the phones for calls of 45 minutes to an hour. One Sunday, I heard dogs barking. The next thing I saw, we were all ordered into our cells while black-uniformed SWAT teams went systematically from cell to cell, threw us on the floor face down, hand cuffed, arms twisted behind our back. They searched our pockets, beds and plastic bins. They dragged us outside the cells like sacks of potatoes while helmeted, visored, New World Order-type cops hollered commands at us. The dogs dripping saliva from their snapping jaws were mainly Dobermans and German Shepherds and were kept on chain leashes two feet away from our bodies and faces. Young, pretty women in skin-tight uniforms and tightly-fitting flak jackets, all black in color, kept climbing over the men who were curled up, face down, shaking, crying, tears streaming down some of their faces, frightened out of their wits. The women filmed these hapless prisoners with mini camcorders close up, laughing and joking, having themselves a ball. For whom were these videos taken? During this amazing performance, the water in the toilets was turned off and after we were ordered back into our cells, many felt the urge to poop and soon, and the place stank to high Heaven! After about two hours, the water was turned on and everything returned to normal. I was there on two weekends, and this terrorizing of the prisoners happened on both weekends. I was lucky to miss it the last weekend because my American attorney had come to see me and I was in the visitor meeting area of the prison. He had found out by the grapevine that I was going to be deported from the USA, even though we had a habeas corpus motion filed with the court and it was already before the Cincinnati Sixth Circuit Court at that time. A few nights later, I was awakened by pounding on my cell door at 2:30 a.m. and told to get ready. By 4:30 a.m., the guards finally came to get me for "processing" out. I was given a shower, ice cold, and changed back into my civilian clothing. It was a national holiday, "President's Day" [Monday, February 17]. They could not let me have the U.S. $400 I had brought with me to prison because of the holiday. Thus, I was taken to the Knoxville Airport without a single cent in my pocket. We boarded a plane to Atlanta [Georgia] shortly after 7:00 a.m., landing there after 9:00 a.m. I was not told where they were deporting me to but saw the airline counter we went to, and it said, "Buffalo, New York". Then, I realized they were shipping me to Canada, not to Germany. I had had no opportunity to let Ingrid know where I was and what was happening to me. We arrived in Buffalo at 11:30 a.m. in a bad snowstorm. There I was told I was banned from the U.S. two times ten years, which meant Ingrid would be 87, and I would be 84 years-old before I might have my first chance to see her again. I was taken across the Canadian border, kept in a locked room, at Canadian Immigration offices at the Peace Bridge. There was lots of gesticulation and loud talking. The end result was I was taken back across the U.S. border, still in a snowstorm. We seemed to slide and slither for hours until I finally spotted a sign saying Attica, New York, Maximum Security Prison. Luckily, the van turned into Batavia and we finally arrived there at dusk. It was way out in a wind-blown farming area. It was a flat-roofed facility, surrounded by high barbed-wire fences and search lights with a small guard hut and a barrier like in the Dr. Zhivago film. A huge six-foot guard, dressed in a Russian-type fur hat and a dark green greatcoat, came to check papers and cargo, and soon I was processed into the Batavia Detention Center. It was a seemingly new, very clean, well-organized facility. Especially the Immigration Detention area I was kept in was state of the art, efficient and clean. The guards were friendly. There were a dozen phones on the wall, a pencil sharpener which worked and paper and envelopes cheerfully handed to me by a big, blond guard who could have stepped out of an SS recruiting poster a few moments before. Unfortunately, I was only there for not quite two days before I was taken back to Canada, this time for good. Again, I was deported via the Peace Bridge at Fort Erie on February 19, 2003. I was interrogated for about seven or eight hours off and on. I was allowed to call Ingrid, my lawyer, friends, and within two hours, some Scottish friends [from Hamilton, Ontario] had come to see me, and brought me some much-needed money. They left. I was arrested and taken to Thorold, the Niagara Region Detention Center. It was an old facility and primitive in comparison to Batavia. This was to be my home away from home for the next three months, interrupted by numerous detention hearings... [END] From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Fri Jul 18 16:06:43 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Fri Jul 18 18:29:18 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/17/2003 - "The Guardian: The Spies Who Pushed for War" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever! July 17, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: Is this the beginning of the end? Is this the break we've all been waiting for? Is this the unraveling of not-so-hidden, unelected power of what is euphemistically still called a "foreign government"? [START] Julian Borger reports on the shadow rightwing intelligence network set up in Washington to second-guess the CIA and deliver a justification for toppling Saddam Hussein by force. The Spies Who Pushed for War By Julian Borger The Guardian Thursday 17 July 2003 As the CIA director, George Tenet, arrived at the Senate yesterday to give secret testimony on the Niger uranium affair, it was becoming increasingly clear in Washington that the scandal was only a small, well-documented symptom of a complete breakdown in US intelligence that helped steer America into war. It represents the Bush administration's second catastrophic intelligence failure. But the CIA and FBI's inability to prevent the September 11 attacks was largely due to internal institutional weaknesses. This time the implications are far more damaging for the White House, which stands accused of politicising and contaminating its own source of intelligence. According to former Bush officials, all defence and intelligence sources, senior administration figures created a shadow agency of Pentagon analysts staffed mainly by ideological amateurs to compete with the CIA and its military counterpart, the Defence Intelligence Agency. The agency, called the Office of Special Plans (OSP), was set up by the defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, to second-guess CIA information and operated under the patronage of hardline conservatives in the top rungs of the administration, the Pentagon and at the White House, including Vice-President Dick Cheney. The ideologically driven network functioned like a shadow government, much of it off the official payroll and beyond congressional oversight. But it proved powerful enough to prevail in a struggle with the State Department and the CIA by establishing a justification for war. Mr Tenet has officially taken responsibility for the president's unsubstantiated claim in January that Saddam Hussein's regime had been trying to buy uranium in Africa, but he also said his agency was under pressure to justify a war that the administration had already decided on. How much Mr Tenet reveals of where that pressure was coming from could have lasting political fallout for Mr Bush and his re-election prospects, which only a few weeks ago seemed impregnable. As more Americans die in Iraq and the reasons for the war are revealed, his victory in 2004 no longer looks like a foregone conclusion. The White House counter-attacked yesterday when new chief spokesman, Scott McClellan, accused critics of "politicising the war" and trying to "rewrite history". But the Democratic leadership kept up its questions over the White House role. The president's most trusted adviser, Mr Cheney, was at the shadow network's sharp end. He made several trips to the CIA in Langley, Virginia, to demand a more "forward-leaning" interpretation of the threat posed by Saddam. When he was not there to make his influence felt, his chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, was. Such hands-on involvement in the processing of intelligence data was unprecedented for a vice-president in recent times, and it put pressure on CIA officials to come up with the appropriate results. Another frequent visitor was Newt Gingrich, the former Republican party leader who resurfaced after September 11 as a Pentagon "consultant" and a member of its unpaid defence advisory board, with influence far beyond his official title. An intelligence official confirmed Mr Gingrich made "a couple of visits" but said there was nothing unusual about that. Rick Tyler, Mr Gingrich's spokesman, said: "If he was at the CIA he was there to listen and learn, not to persuade or influence." Mr Gingrich visited Langley three times before the war, and according to accounts, the political veteran sought to browbeat analysts into toughening up their assessments of Saddam's menace. Mr Gingrich gained access to the CIA headquarters and was listened to because he was seen as a personal emissary of the Pentagon and, in particular, of the OSP. In the days after September 11, Mr Rumsfeld and his deputy, Paul Wolfowitz, mounted an attempt to include Iraq in the war against terror. When the established agencies came up with nothing concrete to link Iraq and al-Qaida, the OSP was given the task of looking more carefully. William Luti, a former navy officer and ex-aide to Mr Cheney, runs the day-to-day operations, answering to Douglas Feith, a defence undersecretary and a former Reagan official. The OSP had access to a huge amount of raw intelligence. It came in part from "report officers" in the CIA's directorate of operations whose job is to sift through reports from agents around the world, filtering out the unsubstantiated and the incredible. Under pressure from the hawks such as Mr Cheney and Mr Gingrich, those officers became reluctant to discard anything, no matter how far-fetched. The OSP also sucked in countless tips from the Iraqi National Congress and other opposition groups, which were viewed with far more scepticism by the CIA and the state department. There was a mountain of documentation to look through and not much time. The administration wanted to use the momentum gained in Afghanistan to deal with Iraq once and for all. The OSP itself had less than 10 full-time staff, so to help deal with the load, the office hired scores of temporary "consultants". They included lawyers, congressional staffers, and policy wonks from the numerous rightwing thinktanks in Washington. Few had experience in intelligence. "Most of the people they had in that office were off the books, on personal services contracts. At one time, there were over 100 of them," said an intelligence source. The contracts allow a department to hire individuals, without specifying a job description. As John Pike, a defence analyst at the thinktank GlobalSecurity.org, put it, the contracts "are basically a way they could pack the room with their little friends". "They surveyed data and picked out what they liked," said Gregory Thielmann, a senior official in the state department's intelligence bureau until his retirement in September. "The whole thing was bizarre. The secretary of defence had this huge defence intelligence agency, and he went around it." In fact, the OSP's activities were a com plete mystery to the DIA and the Pentagon. "The iceberg analogy is a good one," said a senior officer who left the Pentagon during the planning of the Iraq war. "No one from the military staff heard, saw or discussed anything with them." The civilian agencies had the same impression of the OSP sleuths. "They were a pretty shadowy presence," Mr Thielmann said. "Normally when you compile an intelligence document, all the agencies get together to discuss it. The OSP was never present at any of the meetings I attended." Democratic congressman David Obey, who is investigating the OSP, said: "That office was charged with collecting, vetting and disseminating intelligence completely outside of the normal intelligence apparatus. In fact, it appears that information collected by this office was in some instances not even shared with established intelligence agencies and in numerous instances was passed on to the national security council and the president without having been vetted with anyone other than political appointees." The OSP was an open and largely unfiltered conduit to the White House not only for the Iraqi opposition. It also forged close ties to a parallel, ad hoc intelligence operation inside Ariel Sharon's office in Israel specifically to bypass Mossad and provide the Bush administration with more alarmist reports on Saddam's Iraq than Mossad was prepared to authorise. "None of the Israelis who came were cleared into the Pentagon through normal channels," said one source familiar with the visits. Instead, they were waved in on Mr Feith's authority without having to fill in the usual forms. The exchange of information continued a long-standing relationship Mr Feith and other Washington neo-conservatives had with Israel's Likud party. In 1996, he and Richard Perle - now an influential Pentagon figure - served as advisers to the then Likud leader, Binyamin Netanyahu. In a policy paper they wrote, entitled A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm, the two advisers said that Saddam would have to be destroyed, and Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Iran would have to be overthrown or destabilised, for Israel to be truly safe. The Israeli influence was revealed most clearly by a story floated by unnamed senior US officials in the American press, suggesting the reason that no banned weapons had been found in Iraq was that they had been smuggled into Syria. Intelligence sources say that the story came from the office of the Israeli prime minister. The OSP absorbed this heady brew of raw intelligence, rumour and plain disinformation and made it a "product", a prodigious stream of reports with a guaranteed readership in the White House. The primary customers were Mr Cheney, Mr Libby and their closest ideological ally on the national security council, Stephen Hadley, Condoleezza Rice's deputy. In turn, they leaked some of the claims to the press, and used others as a stick with which to beat the CIA and the state department analysts, demanding they investigate the OSP leads. The big question looming over Congress as Mr Tenet walked into his closed-door session yesterday was whether this shadow intelligence operation would survive national scrutiny and who would pay the price for allowing it to help steer the country into war. A former senior CIA official insisted yesterday that Mr Feith, at least, was "finished" - but that may be wishful thinking by a rival organisation. As he prepares for re-election, Mr Bush may opt to tough it out, rather than acknowledge the severity of the problem by firing loyalists. But in that case, it will inevitably be harder to re-establish confidence in the intelligence on which the White House is basing its decisions, and the world's sole superpower risks stumbling onwards half-blind, unable to distinguish real threats from phantoms. [END] From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Sat Jul 19 19:41:50 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Sat Jul 19 21:56:20 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/19/2003 - "A billion here, a billion there...who's counting?" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever! July 19, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: The title of this summary, "How much does America pay for supporting the Israelis?" ought to be re-stated: "WHY does America support the Israelis?" Can anybody guess? [START] The DailyStar - 03/07/2003 Alfred Lilienthal posed the question of what the cost of supporting Israel was to the US 40 years ago, when the price tag for Americans was low. Today the answer is knowable and daunting - the figure comes to at least $1.6 trillion through the end of 2002. That is some three times the much-publicized cost of the Vietnam War (all figures are expressed in current dollars, corrected for inflation). The overall cost to the US of all aspects of conflicts in the Middle East is even higher - more than $2.6 trillion. But the multi-dimensioned costs of supporting and protecting Israel make up nearly two-thirds of the total. Direct aid to Israel, as reported in the US budget, is but the tip of a very much larger iceberg. Since 1978 the annual figure has hovered around $3 billion per year, partly military "loans" and partly economic or budgetary support. It has added up. That cumulative cost, even though it is only part of the whole story, is $250 billion. Theoretically Israel was to have repaid much of the money, but the loans were forgiven when Israel could not pay, so that technically Israel has never defaulted, even though the monies were never repaid. Increasingly, however, official US aid has been hidden or redefined. Camouflage has been necessary. The budgeted aid loomed embarrassingly large as part of total US foreign aid. Increasing the figure would have made it even more conspicuous. There were already adverse comments and criticism, from Congressmen and also from black leaders who contrasted US largesse to high-income Israelis with skimpier programs for US blacks. Thus, more and more of the aid was concealed in other accounts. For example, Kissinger arranged that the US build and fill a strategic oil stockpile for Israel - this cost about $3 billion - but the appropriation was classified as a "prepositioning" project for the US Department of Defense, and thus buried in its budget. "Loan guarantees" are a new device for hiding aid. Israel borrows from third parties - the first tranche was $10 billion - and the US guarantees the loan. Even before the intifada undermined Israel's economy, there was little prospect that it could repay the loans, but the burden on the US taxpayer was deferred for years and therefore never recognized. An additional $9 billion in such guarantees is now in process. Other devices evolved. Israel was permitted to "purchase" US weaponry which was deemed to be surplus at very large discounts, some of which the Israelis sold on to Iran at much higher prices. US companies have been forced to buy Israeli goods - thanks to the activities of close collaborators such as Douglas Feith and Richard Perle, who controlled the key offices in the Defense Department. US firms resent these obligations - US jobs are lost - but are cowed into silence. The annual burden may well exceed $3 billion - details are very sensitive and thus kept secret. Under the Free Trade Agreement Israel is allowed to export to the US freely, even though US exports to Israel are very much constrained. That trade-aid deficit, a loss to the US, now hovers around $9 billion per year. Private Jewish aid from the US has contributed another $50-plus billion to the burden. Much of this is a "tax expenditure," because the donations are tax deductible in the US, but the whole amount is a deadweight cost to the US economy, since Israel tends to use aid money not to purchase from the US, but, instead, buys from the EU. The donations stem overwhelmingly from the loyal diaspora in the US, but many of the Israel bonds are held by public and union pension funds, who were pressured into buying the bonds in spite of the fiduciary restrictions against such low-grade investments. Indirect "official" aid is also large, in the sense that US aid to Egypt and Jordan is the price the US pays for both countries' peace treaties with Israel. This is protection money. The US Congress justifies that budgeted aid in terms of their compliance with the agreements, and both Egypt and Jordan have been given to understand that the flow of US aid can and will be terminated if they are not sufficiently docile. Turkey, too, now comes under this category, although the US has forced other donors to share - unwillingly - by using its political influence in the International Monetary Fund and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development to grant large loans. Other items are the US' share in peacekeeping operations or conditional support for regimes in Central Asia or Latin America, which is tied to their backing Israel in the UN or their contracting with Israeli firms - a form of export subsidy by the US for Israel. There is a long and elusive history of this form of aid. A bizarre instance was the $3 billion-$5 billion in US aid to the Romanian dictator Ceausescu in the 1980s, which financed emigration of Romanian Jews to Israel. Ceausescu's appalling despotism was discovered in the US media only after the bargain was complete and most of the Jews had left. Two further large elements in the cost are "consequential" - i.e., they were incurred because of US support for Israel, but are not support to Israel as such. Together they cost the US more than $1 trillion. The first component is the high cost of the 1973 Arab-Israeli war. The second is the very expensive program which the US undertook in order to protect Israel from a second use of the "Arab oil weapon." Both started in October of 1973 Israel was in danger of losing the war with its neighbors. President Nixon rescued the Israelis with a massive airlift of US equipment and materiel. However, the Arab riposte cost the US dearly. Arab oil producers countered with an oil embargo. Oil imports into the US dropped precipitately - the resulting sharp recession cost the US over $500 billion in lost GDP and another $500 billion or so in the form of higher oil prices. That double whammy was unleashed by the crisis and the embargo. Lastly, "Project Independence" was launched. Terrified by the success of the Arab embargo, Israelis and American Jews embarked upon a nearly hysterical campaign to subsidize almost every conceivable form of energy or conservation in order to reduce US oil imports and to reduce Israel's vulnerability to Arab pressure upon the US. Cost - borne by the US - was no object. The project was spectacularly expensive, but not otherwise strategically fruitful. Massive, hidden subsidies were contrived, but little effect resulted from at least $500 billion in extra costs. Today the US imports more than twice as much oil as it did in 1973, and the economy, in spite of those outlays, is more vulnerable. Only the $150 billion spent for the strategic petroleum reserve offers such protection for the Israelis against another Arab oil weapon. The price tag for US support of Israel has already been high - in terms of direct, indirect, and consequential costs, as well as hundreds of thousands of lost US jobs. The newest bill for post-Sept. 11 costs may dwarf those to date - depending on the real cause of the new terrorism. Is anti-American terrorism the consequence of US support for Israel? Americans are left to wonder. But if one recognizes that correlation, then the costs to the US of the latest Arab counterattacks will prove to be even greater than those of the oil embargo 30 years ago. Conflict in the Middle East and protecting Israel has become very expensive for the US - and indeed for all concerned. ===== Tom Stauffer is a former nuclear engineer and a specialist in Middle Eastern energy economics. He wrote this commentary for The Daily Star [END] From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Sun Jul 20 06:25:54 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Sun Jul 20 08:43:04 2003 Subject: ZGram - July 20, 2003 - "Sharks at work" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever! July 20, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: I hate to spoil your Sunday - but take a look at this. [START] Shipwrecked Swimming with sharks in a sea of arts funding by Steven Leigh Morris The Art of a Sweetheart deal (Photo by Ted Soqui) I've never seen the economic climate worse in 35 years of managing nonprofit arts organizations. In terms of arts funding, we're entering the perfect storm. -Charles Dillingham general manager of the Mark Taper Forum Dark clouds loomed over the Arts Alive rally, staged on behalf of the California Arts Council (CAC) last Wednesday afternoon at Santa Monica's 18th Street Arts Complex. As part of an attempt to redress a state deficit estimated at $38 billion, Governor Gray Davis has proposed dismembering the arts council with a 73 percent funding cut. Davis' proposal is the latest in a series of surgical strikes on the CAC budget, which, at $19 million earlier this year, would be slashed to $5 million under the new proposal, according to CAC's Adam Gottlieb. As an illustration of the climate change in arts funding, the entire proposed $5 million arts council budget equals the amount given to a single grant recipient in 1995: the Simon Wiesenthal Center's Museum of Tolerance. Furthermore, in what's become a growing scandal, funds allocated for the museum's "Tools for Tolerance" program (which trains educators and police on "diversity issues") are a budget "line item," meaning that it's pre-allocated every year by the governor (with legislative approval) - bypassing the peer-review process of other grants. And though the museum's CAC grant has dwindled over the years, its portion of the state arts budget stands to be 30 percent ($1.5 million) of the entire CAC allocation currently proposed by Davis. Besides the issue of fairness, this proposal begs the question of what a program educating kids and cops about diversity, however meritorious, is doing in an arts budget. (The governor has gone on record defending the museum's line item as an imperative after 9/11.) The museum's good fortune is as much a testament to the lobbying power of the Wiesenthal Center's dean, Rabbi Marvin Hier, as to the much larger social agenda of privatizing public services. For more than a decade and a half, Hier has had powerful backers among both Democratic and Republican lawmakers, from former Governor Pete Wilson and former Democratic leader Willie Brown, to President Bush and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who invited Hier to briefings on the war in Iraq. That one private museum should continue to receive such disproportionate public funding is particularly troubling in an era when federal tax cuts are driving many states toward bankruptcy and the public services they provide into oblivion. Meanwhile, according to 2001's Federal 990 Forms, filed on the center and its related activities, Hier draws an annual salary of more than $400,000 (not including pension benefits) - up from $225,000 in 1994. His wife, Marlene, serving as membership director, receives $244,000, while a son, Alan Heir, is paid $107,365 for fund-raising activities and another son, Rabbi Aron Hier, associate director, makes $76,018. Obviously, a private institution can pay its staff what it pleases, but since the center can afford such extravagant revenues for its administrators, detractors question the need of the museum to singularly gobble up 30 percent of the state's already gutted arts budget when, last week across town, money problems compelled the county Natural History Museum to fire 23 full-time and part-time specialists and employees. An ideological line was drawn in the asphalt of the 18th Street Arts Complex, amid towering papier-m?ch? puppets, sari-clad dancers, and children holding an emblematically endangered "goose that laid the golden egg." Blase Bonpane, director of the Office of the Americas, told a handful of supporters that the arts was one of the few remaining answers to our society's "corporate-sponsored militarism" and that "militarism and the arts are incompatible" - referring not only to the militarism of war but to the prison industries of standardized testing and of private incarceration facilities, often built with public funds. Expanding on that theme, Santa Monica arts commissioner Jan Williamson connected the proposed slashing of the arts budget to the attempted repeal of the federal estate tax (benefiting the wealthiest 2 percent of the population while stripping hundreds of millions of dollars from public coffers) as interrelated examples of a neoconservative agenda, starting in Washington, to weaken local governments and privatize public services. This leaves three possible explanations for Davis' proposal: the attempt to placate a ravenous Republican opposition; short-term stupidity stemming from desperation; or long-term strategy stemming from conservative Washington think tanks. The stupidity is self-evident: Even at the pre-cut $19 million allocation, the arts budget is merely .025 percent of the state budget. So what, in the state economy, does the governor think he's remedying by slicing an almost invisible crumb with a razor blade? And what exactly is being sacrificed? Basket-weaving frivolities? Hardly. The Washington, D.C.-based arts-advocacy group Americans for the Arts points to Davis' proposal further damaging the state's already sputtering financial engine: An estimated 1.5 million Californians would not see live performances they might otherwise have attended. The average audience member for a live cultural event spends $22 on non-ticket-related expenses. You add up the lost business revenues. More than 50 percent of the CAC budget goes to arts outreach, social service and educational programs that have been proven to reduce crime, salvage at-risk youth and improve academic performance. So the proposed cut, taken from resources you'd need a Geiger counter to find in the state budget, removes resources that have been proven to spur local economies by supporting small businesses while sparing at-risk youth from prison. The long-term strategy is best explained by Bill Moyers at a recent speech given at a "Take Back America" conference sponsored by the Campaign for America's Future. "You have to respect the conservatives," Moyers said. "Their leading strategist, Grover Norquist, has famously said he wants to shrink the government down to the size that it could be drowned in a bathtub. But instead of shrinking down the government, [the White House is] filling the bathtub with so much debt that it floods the house, waterlogs the economy and washes away services for decades that have lifted millions of Americans out of destitution and into the middle class. And what happens once the public's property has been flooded? Privatize it. Sell it at a discounted rate to the corporations. It is the most radical assault on the notion of one nation, indivisible, that has occurred in our lifetime. I'll be frank with you: I simply don't understand it - or the malice in which it is steeped." [END] From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Tue Jul 22 17:02:41 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Tue Jul 22 19:24:07 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/21/2003 - "Wolf, Lamb and Ouroboros" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever: July 21, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: It always amazes me that Israel Shamir, who is Jewish but not a Zionist, is allowed to write the way he writes. Here is another Original Shamir - seeing what we see but from an unusual slant: [START] Avnery's Two States idea is fully applicable everywhere, if it applicable in Palestine. Wolf, Lamb and Ouroboros by Israel Shamir A perfect propaganda man could make cat lick mustard, at least by pushing mustard up under cat's tail, Bertolt Brecht wrote. Avnery's last essay called The Bi-National State[1] is a similar exercise: he wants us to love and accept the Jewish state, for (he claims) the fate of Palestinians would be worse without it. Why it is better for Palestinians to be locked up in their small enclaves than to be equal citizens of the whole of Palestine? In a mental somersault, Avnery breaks a new ground in public discourse and proclaims: Jews can't live with non-Jews. The Jew and the Goy are like wolf and lamb; if you want the Wolf dwell with the Lamb, please provide a fresh lamb every day. There was, I understand, a slight difference of opinion who of the twain is a wolf, (classic Zionists clamoured the lamb skin), but Avnery leaves us in no doubt: while sojourning together, the Goy will lose to the Jew. In his own words, "In a joint state, if it were to be set up, the Jews would dominate the economy and most other aspects of the state, and try very hard to preserve that situation." Well, this is the opinion of many men in many countries. They point up Jewish dominance in Hollywood and the media, as well as in banking and finance from Moscow with its oligarchs to New York and Washington and conclude as Avnery does: the Jews can not live in one state with non-Jews, for the Jews would dominate the economy and most other aspects of the state[2]. Usually they call for transfer of Jews, too. However, until the present publication of the Avnery's ground-breaking article, this opinion was effectively banned from majority of websites and printed media. Now, the Counterpunch presented the discerned reader with the opinion, and none of the ADL gang expressed shock or dissatisfaction. Indeed, if you support Zionism you may express any opinion including that "the Jews can not live in one state with non-Jews". Avnery made a great improvement upon the old line by presenting it as benevolent care for the weak goy: 'Let them have a separate state, for otherwise Jews will dominate them'. But there is no reason to distinguish between Palestine and other lands with sizeable Jewish communities. Here is Rhodes, as Greeks said to a man who claimed he can jump very high - on the isle of Rhodes. Avnery's idea is fully applicable everywhere, if it applicable in Palestine. It should be equally applicable in the US, where a Jewish state should be created soonest so that Jews wouldn't dominate the Goyim. The Jewish State of America (the JSA) does not have to be contiguous: it can use the pattern established by Jews for the Goyim in Palestine. However, the citizens of the JSA should not be allowed to vote in the USA, or influence its discourse, or hold property in the USA, in full compliance with Avnery's ideas on Palestine. Their property outside the boundaries can be dealt with the same way the Jewish state in Palestine dealt with Gentile property. It will solve the main problem on the way to democracy in Palestine presented by Avnery, namely: "American Jewry has immense political, economic and media might, and they will not lose it for many years to come". The might of American Jewry contained within the limits of the JSA would not matter much for the rest of the world. It will solve the second problem presented by Avnery: "the Arabs are becoming more and more the bogyman of the Western world", for with the Jews safely contained in the JSA, the USA will pay attention to its own interests and will become the best friend of the Arabs. If that doesn't suffice, Jewish states can be created elsewhere too: the Jewish state of France, the Jewish state of Russia, the Jewish state of Germany, for Avnery's approach to Palestine contains a universal message. (Germans actually tried to create a Jewish state in Poland, probably for the same altruistic reasons.) And then, we will be able to undo the Jewish state in Palestine. Extreme Jewish nationalists from the settlements will trek back home to Brooklyn (surely an integral part of the JSA), while millions of ordinary dwellers of Palestine, of Jewish or other origin, will be able to live together in peace. (Full version will be available on www.israelshamir.net soonest) [1] http://avnery-news.co.il/english/ [2] http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/ley3.htm [3] http://sm.org/exegesis [4] http://www.g0lem.net/PHP/phpnuke/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=15 Israel Shamir is an Israeli journalist based in Jaffa. His articles can be found on the site www.israelshamir.net In order to subscribe to this list or to be removed from it, please write to info@israelshamir.net You may freely display this article on the Web or forward it, but ask for permission in order to publish as hard copy. [END] From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Tue Jul 22 17:04:06 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Tue Jul 22 19:24:20 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/22/2003 - "Buchanan: Approaching imperial overstretch" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever! July 22, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: Another good one from Pat Buchanan: [START] Approaching imperial overstretch Patrick J. Buchanan Posted: July 21, 2003 1:00 a.m. Eastern 2003 Creators Syndicate, Inc. The news from Iraq is not good. Each day brings new attacks on U.S. troops. As many Americans have now died since Saddam's statue fell from its Baghdad pedestal as perished in the war. Gen. John Abizaid, who replaced Tommy Franks, has contradicted Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld to declare that Iraqis are now engaged in a "classical guerrilla-type campaign against us." Franks thought the U.S. Army would be in Iraq two to four years at least. Gen. Barry McCaffrey predicts five to 10 years to pacify and democratize the country. Rumsfeld says the cost of occupying and rebuilding Iraq is now $4 billion a month. Yet, it is hard to recall a 20th-century guerrilla war that did not last longer or cost more than projected. And lest we forget, most of these wars were lost. The French lost in Indochina and Algeria, the Americans in Vietnam, the Israelis in Lebanon. Western nations prevailed when they aligned themselves with nationalists and were able to deny guerrillas a privileged sanctuary in a neighboring country. Thus, the Brits prevailed in Malaya, and Americans aided the Greeks in defeating communist rebels and Filipinos in defeating the Huks. In Nicaragua, Angola and Afghanistan, Reagan turned the tables on Moscow by aligning the United States with nationalists fighting to dump over odious Marxist client regimes of the Soviet Empire. But the omens are not good in Iraq. The morale of U.S. troops, who were told "the road home lies through Baghdad," is sinking, as is support for the president, as Americans realize the fighting and dying have only just begun. The initiative has passed to the enemy. He chooses the time and place of attack, he has the element of surprise. And the presence of a U.S. army of 150,000 occupying an Arab country is a lure to every Muslim who hates us to slip over the border and kill Americans without having to face the firepower of U.S. fleets and planes. Another problem the president faces is that we are running out of army. With U.S. active duty forces down to half what Ronald Reagan left us in 1989, we have troop deployments and treaty commitments President Reagan never had to honor. Packets of U.S. forces are now not only in Germany, South Korea and Japan, but Colombia, the Philippines, Eastern Europe, Bosnia, Kosovo, the former Soviet republics of Central Asia, Afghanistan, Iraq and the Gulf. U.S. troops are being requested for Liberia. And with a guerrilla war now being waged in Iraq, two other axis-of-evil nations, Iran and North Korea, are driving for nuclear weapons. Confrontation, even conflict, with either cannot be ruled out of Pentagon plans. America is now approaching the imperial overstretch toward which we have been lunging and stumbling since the Cold War. For 10 years, the "jodpurs-and-pith-helmets" jingo crowd at the little magazines has been beating the drum to drive us toward this cataract. Now, we are there, the United States is facing what Walter Lippmann called "foreign-policy bankruptcy." A foreign policy is bankrupt when a nation's strategic assets ? its forces and alliances ? are insufficient to cover its liabilities, what it has committed to defend. U.S. foreign-policy bankruptcy was reached before Pearl Harbor, when Franklin Roosevelt was issuing ultimata to Japan without the naval power to defend the Philippines and any other island possessions in the far Pacific. So, our notes were called, we had insufficient funds to cover them, and the war came. Foreign policy bankruptcy is a condition that invites a run on the bank by a nation's enemies and adversaries. So today, we see axis-of-evil nations defying the Bush Doctrine and driving toward nuclear weapons, Iraqis rising up to expel us, Muslim fanatics slipping into Iraq to attack our soldiers, and alienated allies sitting back and relishing watching the "American hyper-power" thrash about. As our reserves are being called up, not only is our active duty U.S. military stretched thin. Our budget deficit is $455 billion and rising, our trade deficit is $500 billion and rising, our dollar has fallen 25 percent against the euro. In ruthless candor, President Bush does not have the surplus of resources ? military, strategic, financial, political ? to hold the empire. As some of us predicted a decade ago, the compulsive interventionism of the Bushites must lead to imperial overstretch. Something has to give. It is going to be the empire. We are at or close to high tide now. From here on, it begins to recede. Either President Bush starts discarding imperial responsibilities we cannot carry, and bringing the troops home, or his successor will. [END] From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Wed Jul 23 17:32:48 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Wed Jul 23 19:50:01 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/23/2003 - "Back to the ghetto again?" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever! July 23, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: Pictures speak louder than words: [START] Sharon Defies Bush Over Massive Separation Fence By Christian Chaise 7-23-3 JERUSALEM (AFP) - Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is continuing to defy Washington over the ongoing project for a massive fence dividing Israel from the West Bank, which is strongly opposed by the Palestinians and not fully accepted even within his own camp. A vote slated to take place Tuesday in the Israeli parliament to decide on extra funding to complete the structure was postponed until further notice, a Knesset spokesman told AFP. Public radio said the delay was caused by members of Sharon's Likud party, who defied their leader's call Monday to approve the 750-million-shekel (170-million-dollar) package and demanded the route of the fence be further discussed. On Monday, Defence Minister Shaul Mofaz confirmed the 350-kilometre (215-mile) fence -- aimed at preventing infiltrations by Palestinian militants -- would penetrate some 15 kilometres (10 miles) into the West Bank to take in Ariel, one of the largest Jewish settlements in the West Bank. According to public radio, Mofaz argued that the fence -- which he said would cost 2.2 million dollars a kilometre (1,100 yards) -- was "vital" for Israel's security. If it was not completed, the deployment of extra army reservists would be even more costly, he warned. The fence loosely follows the 1967 Green Line division between Israel and the West Bank, but it dips deep into occupied Palestinian territory at several points in order to protect settlements. It also leaves several Palestinian villages cut off from the rest of the West Bank. The Palestinians accuse Israel of using the fence to unilaterally determine the borders of a future Palestinian state -- scheduled under the US-backed peace roadmap to be in place in 2005 -- and of wanting to "ethnically cleanse" the West Bank with a de facto annexation of its most fertile regions. Construction of the fence was launched in June 2002. It is also expected to cut annexed east Jerusalem off from the rest of the West Bank and a first 145-kilometre (90-mile) section is due for completion in July. Even though prospects for peace are better than they have been for years, Sharon told his followers Monday that the best possible fence must be built as quickly as possible. Opinion polls show that a majority of Israelis are in favour of it, though paradoxically the religious right, including settlers, are opposed, saying that the biblical Israel includes the West Bank and should not be divided. US President George W. Bush's national security advisor Condoleezza Rice, on a visit to Jerusalem at the end of June, asked Sharon to revise the line of the fence. Sharon refused to compromise but assured Rice that it was not a frontier. A second section, of some 60-70 kilometres (36-42 miles), is under construction in the northeast of the West Bank, to prevent infiltrations in the north of the Jordan Velley. "We envisage that this barrier will run along the length of the Palestinian territories," government spokesman Avi Pazner told AFP. The Israeli daily Maariv, for its part, said that the various meanderings of the fence, which in one part near Jenin consists of a high concrete wall, would bring its total length to between 800 and 900 kilometres (490 and 550 miles). At the price per kilometre given by Mofaz this would cost a staggering 1.8 billion dollars, at a time when Israel is in severe economic straits. Palestinian prime minister Mahmud Abbas will raise the question of the fence when he has his first White House meeting with Bush on Friday. And Bush is almost certain to raise it with Sharon at their talks four days later. A foreign diplomat, however, said that Sharon still appeared to be ambivalent. "Sharon was elected at the beginning of 2001. So he has been around two and a half years and he hasn't built the wall. So I think he is delaying it as much as possible ... hoping he can push it to the back burner." [END] (Source: http://www.rense.com/general39/sep.htm ) From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Thu Jul 24 11:11:08 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Thu Jul 24 16:38:55 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/24/2003 - "Is this the movie that will break the big taboo?" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever! July 24, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: Now here is a movie I cannot wait to see! [START] Mel Gibson's Washington Power Play By Lloyd Grove Tuesday, July 22, 2003; Page C03 Movie star Mel Gibson -- under fire from Jewish groups and religious scholars for his still-unreleased film that graphically portrays the crucifixion of Jesus -- yesterday screened a two-hour rough cut of "The Passion" for a select group of Washington pundits, clergymen, cybergossip Matt Drudge and Hollywood lobbyist Jack Valenti, and at least one White House staffer. "I've heard people talking about how I can't get a distributor," the casually dressed Gibson -- sporting sweat pants, sandals and white socks -- told the four dozen audience members. "Believe me, I can get a distributor." A vocal conservative and devout Catholic, the 47-year-old Academy Award winner has weathered accusations of anti-Semitism for the movie, which is being produced by his company, Icon Productions. The influential Anti-Defamation League, which monitors incidents of anti-Semitism, has been especially critical, pointing out on its Web site the long historical relationship between passion plays and attacks on Jews: "ADL has serious concerns regarding Mr. Gibson's 'The Passion' and asks: Will the final version of 'The Passion' continue to portray Jews as blood-thirsty, sadistic and money-hungry enemies of Jesus? Will it correct the unambiguous depiction of Jews as the ones responsible for the suffering and crucifixion of Jesus?" Yesterday's secret screening at the Motion Picture Association of America included columnists Peggy Noonan, Cal Thomas and Kate O'Beirne; conservative essayist Michael Novak; President Bush's abortive nominee for labor secretary, Linda Chavez; staff director Mark Rodgers of the Senate Republican conference chaired by Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.); former Republican House member Mark Siljander of Michigan; and White House staffer David Kuo, deputy director of the Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives. "I find this sad," said ADL National Director Abraham Foxman, who hasn't been permitted to see the movie. "Here's a man who appeals to the mass audience, but he feels he has to surround himself with a cordon sanitaire of people who back him theologically and maybe ideologically and will stand up and be supportive when the time comes. My request still stands: I would like to see the movie, and if it turns out I was wrong, I'll be the first to say so." Yesterday when the lights came up, many in the audience -- who were required to sign a confidentiality agreement before being admitted to the screening room -- were in tears. Some were sobbing, we hear. "Heartbreaking," Michael Novak told Gibson. " [END] (Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A26264-2003Jul22?language=printer washingtonpost.com ) From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Fri Jul 25 11:03:14 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Fri Jul 25 13:18:55 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/25/2003 - "German Community Swells with Jewish Refugees from Russia" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever! July 25, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: An article that's packed with food for thought: [START] Immigrant Policy Eyed as German Community Swells By NATHANIEL POPPER FORWARD CORRESPONDENT BERLIN - Barely two generations after the Holocaust, Germany may be edging Israel aside as the world's most sought-after refuge for Jews fleeing persecution. That, at least, is the impression created by figures released this month showing that Germany had outpaced Israel last year for the first time ever as the main destination of Jewish emigrants from the former Soviet Union. Germany took in 19,262 Jewish immigrants from the former Soviet republics in 2002, while Israel took in 18,878. Observers here were careful to note that last year's numbers did not represent a sudden surge in Jewish immigration to Germany but rather a sharp drop in immigration to Israel, due mainly to the security situation in the Middle East. The numbers speak for themselves, however. As many as 100,000 Jews have come here since 1991, when Germany modified its refugee policies to welcome Jews fleeing antisemitism and economic chaos in the former Soviet Union. In little more than a decade, the newcomers have more than tripled Germany's Jewish population, which numbered some 30,000 before the current wave began. The numbers have touched off a quiet but tense debate among Israeli and American Jewish communal leaders over the emergence of Germany, the birthplace of Nazism, as a magnet for Jewish immigrants. Some Israeli officials, speaking privately, were sharply critical of a German policy that they said is deliberately luring Jews to Germany with financial benefits. But few were willing to criticize Germany openly, cautioning - in the words of one official - that "nobody here wants to be the first to attack Germany for treating Jews well." German officials say the benefits offered to Jewish refugees under the 1991 Contingent Refugee Act - including language courses, unemployment benefits, health coverage, pensions and even rent - reflect this nation's "historic responsibility" to make amends for its Nazi past. "Germany has a historic responsibility to accept all Jews who could make a better life here, and we have a responsibility to ensure they are treated well once they arrive," said Isabel Schmitt-Falkenberg, a spokesperson for the Ministry of the Interior, which is responsible for the immigration program. Israeli and American Jewish leaders also complain that Germany's refugee policy is deliberately scattering the Jewish immigrants among more than 80 different towns across Germany, rather than allowing them to join major Jewish communities in cities such as Berlin, Frankfurt and Munich. The German goal, a senior Israeli official told the Forward, appears to be recreating the contours of the pre-World War II German Jewry. Germany makes no secret of its effort to distribute the refugees across the country. The policy results from a little-discussed feature in the 1991 refugee act, requiring that newcomers be spread among Germany's 12 federal states according to a numerical formula in order share the financial burden. Newcomers' financial benefits are contingent on their remaining where they are sent. But observers here dismiss the notion that Germany is trying to re-create its pre-war community. "It's absurd to think Germany has some hidden intention in spreading the immigrants," said Olaf Gl?ckner, who researches Russian Jewish immigration at the Moses Mendelssohn Center for European Jewish Studies in Potsdam. "Before World War II, most Jews were actually in the cities, and this is reversing that earlier trend." The distribution policy, he said, "arises from economic necessity." "If we all went to Berlin, Berlin would go bankrupt," said Valeriy Bunimov, Ukrainian-born leader of the Jewish communal organization in the small northeastern state of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, one of the new Jewish communities that raises eyebrows among observers. Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, in former East Germany, is famous primarily as the center of Germany's neo-Nazi movement and for its stagnating economy. Bunimov's own congregation, in out-of-the-way Schwerin, has gone from zero to 900 Jews in less than 10 years. Whatever the policy's intentions, its results have been mixed at best. In addition to undercutting the community's cohesion, the scattering of the immigrants could create security problems, several officials with Jewish organizations in America and Germany told the Forward. "There's no one there in these small towns to represent and defend these groups of immigrants, and the groups don't have the language and experience to defend themselves," said Dalia Moneta, director of social work for the Frankfurt Jewish community. She added, however, that "over time, that's becoming less of a problem as communities start to settle in a bit." In the years since the refugee program was adopted, Jewish immigration to Germany from the former Soviet Union has hovered consistently between 16,000 and 20,000 per year. During those same years, immigration to Israel from the former Soviet republics averaged about 61,000 per year. Immigration to Israel plummeted after the onset of the Palestinian intifada in September 2000. During the first half of 2003, just 5,500 former Soviet immigrants arrived in Israel, according to the Jewish Agency for Israel. America, which was the primary destination for Jews leaving the Soviet Union during the late 1970s and 1980s, received just 2,486 former Soviet Jewish refugees in 2002. Immigrants and observers offer various explanations for Germany's lure, including European culture, temperate climate and proximity to St. Petersburg and Kiev. For many, however, a key factor in choosing Germany over Israel is Germany's relatively relaxed attitude toward mixed-faith families. "Russians making the choice believe that it is easier in Germany for mixed families and children of these families," said Bunimov, the communal leader in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. "In Israel, if a Jew does not have a Jewish mother, they will not be treated equally, and in Russia there are many mixed families." Bunimov said the newer members of his congregation are mostly mixed-faith families. "In Germany, religion is much less central and so people don't have to worry as much about it," said Gl?ckner, the Mendelssohn Center researcher. Not everyone approves. Last year the Central Council of Jews in Germany complained to the government that its rules for accepting immigrants were too relaxed. Only 70,000 of the newcomers have registered with a religious community in Germany, the council noted. As in Israel, the German immigration authorities grant rights to newcomers based on broad definitions of Jewish ancestry, while those who define identity - the Jewish council in Germany, the rabbinate in Israel - use narrower definitions. In Israel, the growing Jewish influx to Germany has helped reignite the debate over easing rules for conversion to Judaism. During a meeting of the Israeli Cabinet this week the minister of immigrant absorption, Tzipi Livni, cited "obstacles" placed by the Chief Rabbinate in the path of newcomers seeking to become Jewish as one reason Germany had outstripped Israel last year as a destination for former Soviet refugees. Livni's view was endorsed by Prime Minister Sharon, who declared that "demands should not be made of the immigrants that none of us could meet," according to the Israeli daily Ha'aretz. Israelis also cite Germany's financial generosity to immigrants as a factor in the shift. The chair of the Knesset immigration absorption committee, Colette Avital, declared during a debate in April that Germany was providing "three times more benefits to former Soviet Union immigrants than Israel." She predicted that Germany's advantage over Israel would continue, estimating that 195,000 former Soviet Jews were "on the verge" of emigrating to Germany. German experts counter that the economic lure is limited at best. According to a study underway at the Mendelssohn Center, new Jewish immigrants to Germany have a harder time finding work in Germany than those who go to Israel or the United States. Unemployment among the immigrants in Germany runs at a steady 40%, even among those here for several years. In Israel, by contrast, unemployment among newcomers drops within two or three years of arrival to a rate roughly reflecting the larger population, according to the Mendelssohn Center. Currently unemployment among former Soviets in Israel is 12%, compared to 10% for the population at large. "It is not easy for us to find jobs here," said Bunimov, noting that nearly 60% of newcomers in his own community are unemployed. "Many of us are highly educated and our qualifications are not recognized in Germany." Bunimov himself was trained in Ukraine as an engineer but now works as a communal administrator. Several observers cited the unusually high proportion of academic degrees among working-age Jewish immigrants - nearly 70% are graduates - as one of the main causes of the high unemployment. "There is so much brain power that it creates a glut on the labor market wherever they go," said the Mendelssohn Center's Gl?ckner. The problem is compounded, observers said, by the government's policy of settling Jews in small communities where jobs are scarce. Employment among newcomers in Berlin is said to be far higher than among those in outlying areas. For most immigrants, however, the promise of Germany is in their families' future, not their own present. Bunimov said his two sons, both in their 20s, are receiving top-level university educations, and right now that is what matters most. In accepting the youngsters into its society, it is widely agreed that Germany has so far been successful. "We came for our children. Our hope is in them," said Bunimov. With reporting by Chemi Shalev in Jerusalem and Ami Eden in New York. [END] (Source: http://www.forward.com/issues/2003/03.07.25/news6.html) From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Sun Jul 27 04:15:29 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Sun Jul 27 06:36:21 2003 Subject: ZGram - July 26, 2003 - "PACIFIST PUBLISHER ROTS IN JAIL, WHILE JAMAICAN RAPIST RUNS FREE" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now More than ever! July 26, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: I have two ZGrams today for you from Paul Fromm, on-location representative of Ernst Zundel and Director of CANADA FIRST IMMIGRATION REFORM COMMITTEE, one of several organizations he heads: [START} PACIFIST PUBLISHER ROTS IN JAIL, WHILE JAMAICAN RAPIST RUNS FREE Dear Immigration Reformer: Nothing illustrates Canada's disfunctional immigration system better than the contrast between German-born Revisionist publisher Ernst Zundel and Jamaican rapist and incest practitioner Kenneth Eudenzie Jomnes. Zundel has published material critical of the Hollywood version of World War II. He's a pacifist and has never been charged, much less convicted, for any crimes of violence. Yet, he's offended Canada's powerful Zionist thought control lobby and now languishes in prison, detained, prior to deportation, on a bogus Canadian Intelligence and Security Service warrant alleging that he's a terrorist and a threat to national security. He's only a threat to those so insecure that they refuse to debate history. Then, there's Jamaican Kenneth Eudenzie Jones. He's done seven years in prison for rape and incest. He's been fighting to stay here in his new sexual predation grounds for 8 years. Typical of Absurdistan where lunacy rules in the courts, Jones is a free man, let loose in this sexual happy hunting grounds, while a gentle artist and publisher Ernst Zundel sits in solitary confinement in the Metro West Detention Centre in Rexdale. Paul Fromm Director CANADA FIRST IMMIGRATION REFORM COMMITTEE _________________________________ A Toronto rapist has won a last-ditch bid to remain in Canada using a technicality in federal immigration laws. Kenneth Eudenzie Jones has been fighting deportation to his native Jamaica since 1995. Jones was convicted in 1996 of sex offences including sexual assault and incest, according to Federal Court of Canada documents. He was sentenced to seven years in prison and has since been released on parole. Mr. Justice Douglas Campbell said Jones can remain here under applicable federal immigration laws. Immigration officials argued Jones should be deported because under a new immigration law that passed in June last year, offenders convicted of serious crimes are not allowed a deportation appeal. Jones' lawyer told the court an appeal filed in November 1998 should be heard under the old immigration law, which allows offenders to remain in the country while their appeal is heard. The decision has angered police and child-welfare workers who say Jones is free to reoffend again. Police officers, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said they hadn't been notified of Jones' status or where he will be staying in the city. Since the Holly Jones slaying, police have been trying to monitor the movements of known sexual predators. Officers said they'll try to have Jones listed in a registry of sex offenders. Toronto Sun July 26, 2003 [END] From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Sun Jul 27 04:18:03 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Sun Jul 27 06:36:37 2003 Subject: ZGram - July 27, 2003 - "Important: Zundel Hearings resume tomorrow" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever! July 27, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: Today's ZGram is partly meant as a media alert - again sent as a press release by Paul Fromm, Ernst Zundel's on-location legal representative Director of the CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION: [START] Subject: ZUNDEL HEARINGS RESUME JULY 28; CUSTOMS HARASS DEFENCE TEAM July 27, 2003 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE ZUNDEL HEARINGS RESUME IN TORONTO, JULY 28: CUSTOMS HARASSES DEFENCE TEAM Hearings resume Monday, July 28, in Federal Court in Toronto (361 University Avenue) in the case of German born publisher Ernst Zundel. The purpose hearings before Mr. Justice Blais is twofold: to consider application for Mr. Zundel's release from detention and to consider the reasonableness of a CSIS certificate branding the German pacifist and Revisionist publisher a "terrorist" and a threat to national security. The defence team, led by Victoria lawyer and noted free speech defender Douglas H. Christie, will be pressing for Mr. Zundel's release. Zundel, who has been under attack for his unorthodox historical ideas since 1980, has been the object of continued harassment by the anti-free speech lobby in Canada. The defence team will point to Mr. Zundel's long history of compliance with more than a dozen bails and court orders over the years. Prior to the hearing before Mr. Justice Blais, Mr. Christie will file a motion of habeas corpus in Ontario Superior Court in an effort to affect Mr. Zundel's release. "Ernst Zundel is prevented by the mediaeval prison conditions from preparing an adequate defence for his several Canadian and American legal cases," says Paul Fromm of the Canadian Association for Free Expression. "Despite repeated representations to prison authorities and to the Minister, Mr. Zundel is denied pens, post-it notes, highlighters and even a chair. His sole means of marking up volumes of legal documents are stubs of pencils, like the ones you'd use on your scorecard in a bowling alley," Fromm explains. "Despite assurances from the Ministry of Public Safety and Security that stationery materials are permitted to prisoners, I've been told by prison authorities that these items are 'contraband,'" Fromm charges. Three days, July 28-30, are scheduled for this round in the Zundel case, which began May 9. Mr. Zundel came to Canada as a landed immigrant in 1958. He was a highly successful graphic artist. In 2000, he moved to the U.S. and married a U.S. citizen, author Ingrid Rimland, [Ed.D.] an education psychologist. Mr. Zundel was deported to Canada, February 19, on alleged immigration violations. He vigorously rejects these charges and is pursuing redress in the American courts before the Sixth Circuit in Cincinnati. "There is clear evidence of a murderous hostility on the part of the Canadian Security and Intelligence Service toward Mr. Zundel," Fromm charges. He points to the book COVERT ENTRY by journalist Andrew Mitrovica. In it, former CSIS operative John Farrell reveals that CSIS operated widespread opening of the mail of rightwing activists, including Mr. Zundel. Farrell charged that he was twice warned in 1995 not to open packages from B.C. addressed to Zundel. Later that month, a powerful pipebomb sent from a Vancouver address arrived at Ernst Zundel's Toronto house. "Apparently, CSIS knew a bomb was headed for Mr. Zundel and did nothing to warn or protect him or the postal workers who might handle this lethal weapon," says Fromm. One of the witnesses being brought by Mr. Zundel's defence is [California] lawyer Bruce Leichty. Mr. Justice Blais, in considering Mr. Zundel's application for bail, wanted more information on his U.S. immigration situation. Crown lawyer Donald MacIntosh had alleged that Mr. Zundel had failed to attend U.S. immigration hearings and was, therefore, a poor risk for bail. Mr. Leichty is a U.S. immigration expert and is now in charge of [Ingrid] Zundel's U.S. legal efforts [to free her husband]. He will testify that Mr. Zundel was scrupulous in his compliance with U.S. authorities. Mr. Leichty FEDEXed ahead a file of legal documents supporting his case to defence team member Barbara Kulaszka. These legal documents have been detained by Canadian Customs and will not be available Monday when they are needed, laywer Kulaszka was told. This is not the first time Canada's Customs censors have harassed Mr. Zundel's defence team. Despite requests to respect legal privilege, Paul Fromm's legal papers, including statements from a potential U.S. witness, were searched and temporarily seized by Customs officials at Pearson Airport on June 11. "The detention of Mr. Leichty's papers leaves the strong suspicion that the Crown will have advance and unfair access to the Defence case," says Mr. Fromm. --30-- Paul Fromm, CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION, P.O. Box 332, Rexdale, ON., M9W 5L3 PH: 905-897-722 _________________________________ _________________________________ Friends of free thought, Ernst Zundel really needs your ongoing help and support. 1. If you live abroad, write to the Canadian Embassy in your country and demand Zundel's release and humane treatment. 2. If you live in southern Ontario and wish to visit, call ahead to Security: 416-675-1806 Ext. 4220. You must be on Zundel's approved list. You can also get directions, when you call. 3. No matter where you live, why not send a card or letter to encourage Ernst Zundel. Write Prisoner Ernst Zundel, c/o Metro West Detention Centre, 111 Disco Road, Box 4950, Rexdale, ON., M9W 1M3. Ernst in overwhelmed by the hundreds of concerned and thoughtful people who have sent him letters and cards. A tip: don't use stick-on return address label or seals. They're ripped off by prison authorities searching for, who knows what. 4. We also need your financial support for Mr. Zundel's defence. We have a number of delicate colour-pencil sketches by Ernst Zundel done in prison. Each is dated and signed. Each is a nature study. Mr. Zundel has long been a paint and sketch artist. He had returned to his love of art before the U.S. I.N.S picked him up and deported him. . If you send us a cheque for $100 or more, we'll send you one of these collector's items, a thank you sketch by political prisoner Ernst Zundel. Mail your donation today to CAFE Box 332, Rexdale, ON., M9W 5L3, Canada or e-mail us your VISA number and expiry date. On your cheque or an accompanying piece of paper, note: "For Zundel Defence Fund." Paul Fromm Director CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION [END] From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Tue Jul 29 04:31:03 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Tue Jul 29 06:52:47 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/29/2003 - "Shocking News: First Day of Hearings" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever! July 29, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: For some time, I had noticed that Ernst had no longer the strength I once knew in his voice. When I pressed him for the reason, he said that "...days go by when I don't talk to anyone here. I hardly ever talk to anybody." I said that the weakness in his voice seemed to me to be more than stress and fatigue - that there must be a physical reason. I asked if he was being starved. I said it sounded to me like a muscular weakness. He denied that it was lack of food, although the quality of food was poor, he told me. He said that he was given "dead food" - that what he lacked were vitamins and enzymes. My husband is a health-and-vitamin/supplement fanatic - if I may use a somewhat misleading and value-loaded term. This past week, when Ernst called, I noticed he could barely whisper, and I worried about his having to speak up in court in the upcoming hearings. All day today, for instance, his second day in court, he will be under rigorous, highly stressful and - as we know his enemies! - insulting and demeaning cross-examination. His political enemies are like hyanas if they sense their prey has fallen down. Has anybody ever loved or even liked hyanas? Sometime in late afternoon yesterday, I received a call from Ernst's son who told me that he wanted me to know something before I would find out through the media: That his father a growth in his chest cavity, and that "...it seems to be growing rapidly." Barely had he hung up when Paul Fromm called and gave me the same grim information. Then I talked to my immigration attorney whom I had flown out to Toronto to give testimony at the hearing that Ernst had NOT "flouted" immigration law, as his enemies falsely allege to prevent him from getting bail, and that his brutal arrest on February 5 was UNLAWFUL - in more respects than one, as we will prove in US court. Finally I talked to Ernst, who confirmed what three others had told me. He also asked me not to mention this latest development in my ZGram. I asked him why not. He said softly: "There ought to be at least one small corner in one's life that is private." I replied: "There is nothing wrong in letting people know that one can get sick in the inhuman conditions of a prison." He said he knew how to get well, but it was impossible within the stress and lack of medical attention in maximum detention. If he could get bail, he could also get well. He said to brace myself - he did not think that he would be granted bail. He said the security arangements around him were awesome. All show! All shameful, blatant show in yet another political show trial! I would not have told you this - but the word is now out on the Internet and likely also in the papers. Therefore, I thought I should give you my slant - and tell you what will happen next. The paramount task now is to get him out of prison - and to get him back where he belongs: With his family who loves him and wants him to live. He needs to come back to his mountains he loves, and he needs to be back with me. He KNOWS how to get himself well. We have discussed it many, many times - what makes this entire society ill, and what could also make it well. He knows from personal experience. At age 32, Ernst was once diagnosed with "inoperable, terminal cancer." He was given six months to live. Now he is exactly twice as old, and he defied the deadly diagnosis in his youth with an extremely rigorous alternative health strategy. It took him two years, but he won! If we can get him released and back to Tennessee, his extremely strong will is going to prevail. If he is forced to stay in prison - or, worse, forced to submit to orthodox medicine - his enemies will kill him. It wouldn't be the first time they have tried. I wouldn't be at all surprised to find out that this new bout of illness is induced. Read what it says in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion how it is being done! I am planning two additional full page ads. Two major papers read by the world's most influential politicians have assured me they will run it. Tonight I will tell you more about my plans and the thrust of these ads and ask you - again! - for your financial support. We are going to pull out all the stops. Here is Paul Fromm's report of yesterday's hearing: [START] ERNST ZUNDEL HEARING - 07/28/03 SHOCKING REVELATION AT ZUNDEL HEARING: ZUNDEL'S LIFE IN DANGER, MEDICATION DENIED IN CANADIAN PRISON. In shocking testimony before Federal Court Judge Mr. Justice Pierre Blais, in courtroom 410 in Toronto yesterday, Canadian political prisoner, Ernst Zundel, revealed that denial of medication has resulted in the recurrence of cancer. Asked by his lawyer, Douglas H. Christie whether he had any medical concerns in prison, Mr. Zundel replied: "My blood pressure was 225/125 when I was in the Thorold" at the Niagara Region Detention Center. "Recently, I found I had tumors in my chest cavity. In 1972, I had duodenal cancer. I took herbs and it disappeared in two years. However, last week, the doctor examined me and found a growth." X-rays were taken but the results are not yet in. Mr. Zundel indicated that he had been taking herbal medicine for years as a cancer preventative. An obviously upset Mr. Justice Blais queried: "You're not allowed to get your alternative medicine?" "No," Mr. Zundel said. "Only doctor-prescribed medication is permitted. I asked at the Metro West Detention Center, but only one-a-day vitamins are allowed." Mr. Justice Blais demanded to know whether there was anyone present from the Metro West Detention Center. No one answered his call. "Before the end of the day, I want this clarified," Mr. Justice Blais insisted. "This troubles me. I will direct them to look at this, if necessary. Usually, they seem to be much more flexible in areas of medication. We have to discuss this. It has to be dealt with," he insisted. "If anything could be done to improve the situation of access to medication for Mr. Zundel within the parameters of the law, I want to do that," said Blais. On the first of three days of scheduled hearings this week, Ernst Zundel was seeking bail after more than five months of detention in solitary confinement after he was deported from the United States, February 19th. Mr. Zundel's first witness was California attorney, Bruce Leichty, an immigration lawyer . In crisp testimony, Mr. Leichty explained that Mr. Zundel had fully and carefully complied with U.S. laws in pursuing permanent resident status in the United States. "I have been practising immigration law for 15 years," Mr. Leichty said. "I have represented spouses of U.S. citizens 50 or 100 times who were seeking permanent resident status. Mr. Leichty testified about the records of pleadings he had researched and authored to be presented before the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeal in Cincinnati. "These pertained to the denial of habeas corpus to Mr. Zundel. Mr. Zundel has also filed a motion that he was taken out of the country contrary to the rules of the Supreme Court," Mr. Leichty testified. In a pregnant comment in response to cross examination by Crown Attorney, Donald MacIntosh, Mr. Leichty said: "Absent corruption, it is correct that civil litigation is unpredictable." [My comment here: should the term not have been "predictable"? This might be a misquote...] In extensive testimony, Ernst Zundel explained that he had always complied with numerous bail conditions over a period of 20 years before the Canadian courts. For instance, in two lengthy prosecutions, under the now discredited "false news" law, overturned in 1992 by the Supreme Court of Canada, Mr. Zundel was forbidden to discuss the substance of the pamphlet he published entitled Did Six Million Really Die? "The Globe and Mail called it 'the most sweeping gag order in Canadian history,'" Mr. Zundel testified. "I have always appeared respectful in my demeanor," Mr. Zundel explained to his lawyer, Doug Christie. "I have always had faith in the Canadian system as I have always advanced my views lawfully and peacefully." A seldom-used instrument, a Canadian Security and Intelligence Service (CSIS) national security certificate alleges that Ernst Zundel is a terrorist and backer of violence and threat to national security. A brief from CSIS uses guilt by association and innuendo to allege Mr. Zundel's violent connections. Mr. Christie took Mr. Zundel through a long list of allegedly unsavory characters such as National Alliance founder, Dr. William Pierce, Tom Metzger, and the alleged bomber of the Oklahoma City Federal Building, Timothy McVey. In every case, Mr. Zundel testified that he had never given these people money nor had they sought or been given advice. "I have always said: 'Don't take the law into your hands,'" Mr. Zundel explained. Mr. Christie referred him to a 1990 Martyr's Day Rally held by the Heritage Front in Toronto to commemorate the murder of an American dissident and bank robber by federal authorities. Mr. Zundel had been invited to speak. "I didn't attend. I told them I didn't support violence," Mr. Zundel explained. Mr. Zundel testified that he had always worked through the legal system. "In 1985, after my first holocaust trial, after an 11-minute hearing on April 29th, I was ordered deported," Mr. Zundel said. "Did you run away?" asked Mr. Christie. "No, I instructed you to appeal. On June 27, 1987, my deportation order was rescinded by the Immigration Appeal Board," Mr. Zundel explained. "I was on a special bail order and I obeyed it." "I was arrested and kept in jail for six days in 1989 in Germany. There is no bail in Germany. I decided to appeal the charges. I went back to Canada and then returned five or six times to Germany," Mr. Zundel related. "Why did you do that?" Mr. Christie asked. "It was the right thing to do. I fight for my rights," Mr. Zundel answered. Several times, Mr. Justice Blais urged the 64-year-old, German-born publisher to speak louder. "Why are you unable to speak very loudly," Mr. Christie asked the pale, balding, political prisoner. "I have been in solitary confinement for five months, and I don't get to speak to anyone, except, yes, no, and thank you to the guards," Mr. Zundel who grew hoarse through the afternoon proceedings replied. -- Paul Fromm _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ URGENT! -- ERNST ZUNDEL'S LIFE'S IN DANGER: HE NEEDS YOUR HELP Friends of free thought, Ernst Zundel really needs your ongoing help and support. 1. Write, FAX, or phone Hon. Robert Runciman, the Minister of Public Safety and Security. His ministry is in charge of the Metro West Detenmtion Centre, the prison which denies Mr. Zundel his anti-cancer medication and herbs. You can contact him thus: Hon. Robert Runciman, MPP, 16th Floor, 25 Grosvenor Street, Toronto, ON., M7A 1Y6, Canada; PH: 416-327-9911; FAX: 416-327-3849. 2. If you live abroad, write to the Canadian Embassy in your country and demand Zundel's release and humane treatment. 3. If you live in southern Ontario and wish to visit, call ahead to Security: 416-675-1806 Ext. 4220. You must be on Zundel's approved list. You can also get directions, when you call. 4. No matter where you live, why not send a card or letter to encourage Ernst Zundel. Write Prisoner Ernst Zundel, c/o Metro West Detention Centre, 111 Disco Road, Box 4950, Rexdale, ON., M9W 1M3. Ernst in overwhelmed by the hundreds of concerned and thoughtful people who have sent him letters and cards. A tip: don't use of stick-on return address label or seals. They're ripped off by prison authorities searching for, who knows what. 5. We also need your financial support for Mr. Zundel's defence. We have a number of delicate colour-pencil sketches by Ernst Zundel done in prison. Each is dated and signed. Each is a nature study. Mr. Zundel has long been a paint and sketch artist. He had returned to his love of art before the U.S. I.N.S picked him up and deported him. . If you send us a cheque for $100 or more, we'll send you one of these collector's items, a thank you sketch by political prisoner Ernst Zundel. Mail your donation today to CAFE Box 332, Rexdale, ON., M9W 5L3, Canada or e-mail us your VISA number and expiry date. On your cheque or an accompanying piece of paper, note: "For Zundel Defence Fund." Paul Fromm, CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION, P.O. Box 332, Rexdale, ON., M9W 5L3 PH: 905-897-7221 [END] From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Wed Jul 30 05:58:17 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Thu Jul 31 07:40:32 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/29/2003 - "Day Two of Zundel Hearings" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever! July 29, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: The second day of the Zundel Bail Hearings seems not to have gone well at all, but when I talked to Ernst last night, I found him in remarkably good spirits. He says that if, at least for a while, he needs to trade his freedom for publicity, so be it! He knows he is rapidly becoming an international symbol of Jewish censorship, brutality and oppression. It seems the biggest problem inside courtroom was that the focus was not kept on bail, as we had hoped and pleaded. The choice of enemy attack turned out to be more of the nasty, spiteful character assassination at which Ernst's political opponents excel. The hearing also, once again, ad nauseam, seems to have focused on the shopworn question of "... just who controls the Zundelsite?" Didn't our foes themselves deliver themselves of a legally threadbare administrative ruling - after five long years of Kommissar-style Kangaroo Court - based on the "Truth is no defense" obscenity? And didn't I ignore that ruling, since I, the owner of the Zundelsite, was never asked, much less informed, of anything? Must I remind them once again that I was there, in 1996, on the first day of Human Rights Tribunal Hearing, ready and willing to testify - and isn't it a fact that I was NOT ALLOWED to tell them that it was MY website? And didn't our enemies themselves admit in their summation write-up that, had they allowed my testimony, there WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ANY HEARINGS? Disgusting! What's going on is yet another political Stalinist Show Trial, with Prisoner Zundel Humiliation Writ Large thrown in for good measure. For instance, Ernst was not allowed a shower and a haircut before he was taken to court. He had to wear his old work clothes in which he was arrested 6 months ago, which haven't been washed even once. Also, since he lost some weight, he had asked for a belt or suspenders, both of which were denied. He warned them he would drop his pants - and to show that he meant it, he did! Thereupon somebody in the audience took off his tie, which served as a belt for the rest of the day. Can anybody fancy that petty tyrannies like that make our enemies look good? Another scene for my screenplay my future audience will relish, rooting for the underdog! The purpose is, of course, to break the Zundel Spirit. What our enemies have never really understood is that this prolonged spiritual battle - really a cosmic battle - plays out in the world's courtrooms these days, and that while it is exceedingly unpleasant for people victimized sadistically as Ernst is being victimized, the moral coin goes to the victim, not the victimizers. Good people notice. Everywhere. And more will notice, trust me, the longer this goes on. Last night I was reading a rather fascinating book, titled "Which Way Western Man" of which I had heard many times but somehow never found the time to study. I'll quote you a relevant passage: [START] A tradition of thousands of years' standing is not lightly to be dismissed. In writing the above, I have had intelligence chiefly in mind. But to my way of thinking the attribute "higher" is to be assigned to men less on the ground of superior intelligence - important as that is - than on the ground of superior character. What then are the essential features of the superior man's character? (...) He must cease to be content to float like a cork on the current of life. He must have come to a vision of life on ahead of where he stands, and must want ever to outgrow what he is that he may give his bones and his flesh to his vision. He must therefore be one whose very nature it is to risk himself, even unto exhaustion, for the sake of what he most loves and believes in. He must have recognized and accepted the necessity of a stern discipline imposed on himself under the will of his leading bent. The required qualities, therefore, are an unflagging aspiration, a dominant coordinating will, profound self-reliance, a capacity for boundless loyalty and devotion, utter integrity, and with it the strength and the courage to bear the burden that his integrity imposes. (...) Without a strong, well-knit, overflowing self there can be no greatness or beauty of life whatsoever, no towering beneficent personalities, lighting up all time and space and pointing out a path for mankind far down the centuries. Before anyone can ever know "the bestowing virtue" and find joy in spending himself for others, he must possess an inner wealth and fullness, and overfullness, out of which it is possible to be lavish of himself. Behind every great lover there stands a great self. Behind every great reformer there stands a great self. And likewise behind every great artist, composer, teacher, ruler, scientist, saint, or seer. Before there can ever be any great seeing, or saying, or doing, there must be the inner wealth, strength and masterfulness of a great personality." [END} I believe that this masterfulness of a well-rooted, well-grounded, sure-of-himself-and-his-role personality is what our enemies really fear in Ernst Zundel - and which they will try to destroy. It is this very personality, however, that brought him his supporters from every walk of life - and brings them even now. They sense it. They sense that there is character and strong will shining through the torment of his present incarceration - it is a "self" that has his enemies' number down pat! I know many things about Ernst - things not even he knows I know. I know he will not easily be broken, and I know that his role as "America's Refusenik", as an articulate political prisoner of substance, has been enhanced and magnified these past six months. Galore! I hate it to see Ernst in prison - but if it has to be, it has to be. We do not belong to the Yammering Tribe. We'll make his story known from sea to shining sea! Will you help me one more time? Will you help to underwrite this struggle? We on the outside have realizable strategies and plans. Right now I have the commitment of two additional important papers that people of influence are reading - not only here but abroad. And that is only the beginning. Full-page ads require money up-front, but they pay for themselves many, many times over. My first ad in the Washington Times has now been replicated, translated into several languages, talked about, commented on in the far corners of the world - and it has brought me additional, serious supporters. And mind you, not marginal folks - folks of strong minds, self-disciplined lifestyle, propelled by certainty of will that our children's future will be entirely up to us, not our enemies. I need to keep up the momentum. I need to know you are as serious as I am. I intend to carry on the fight, and I ask for your active support. By that I mean not just your deep commitment morally, but just as important, your wallet. I'm serious. There is this story I have long cherished as a guidepost of sorts. It tells of a choice given to man who undeservedly longed for the riches of life, who hoped that it would come to him right on the silver platter. This man was asked to make a choice: 1) Would he take $1 million dollars, up front, guaranteed, without any sweat on his part? Or 2) would he take a lowly penny and work to double it each day for an entire month? Multiply it out yourself. Day 2 = 2 pennies. Day 3 = 4 pennies. Day 5 = 8 pennies. Keep going. Day 30? I promise you will be amazed. Think what we could do in a year! What I am telling you is that there is potential in delaying one's rewards. There's merit in old-fashioned elbow grease. There's strength in hard work and in numbers. Think what we could do with our pennies if we had the numbers of people "out there" - who recognize we need the funds to ascertain we will not all go down like dinosaurs and leave this planet to the ones who think they can pocket the hand-outs - and run! I have printed up two "America's Refusenik" booklets which cost about 80 cents each - plus postage. They are a handy fundraising tool. Go get yourself a handful of those booklets and start handing them out to your friends. Send me your financial support, and send me additional warriors willing to fight and sacrifice! Money and numbers will do it. Right now, our enemies have got all the money. They do not have the numbers. And numbers will get us the clout! We need to get Ernst out of prison! My address is: Ingrid Zundel 3152 Parkway, Suite 13, PMB 109 Pigeon Forge, TN 37863 USA (If you write a check for the booklets or as a donation, PLEASE MAKE IT OUT IN MY NAME. It's easier and less costly to cash it that way, since my bank, as most banks in this country, seems to be Enemy Terra ...) From zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org Thu Jul 31 05:05:01 2003 From: zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org (zgrams@zgrams.zundelsite.org) Date: Thu Jul 31 07:40:47 2003 Subject: ZGram - 7/31 - "Zundel Bail Hearing: Day 3" Message-ID: ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever! July 30, 2003 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: I talked to Ernst last night. I quote from memory: "Today it was high drama. It was like in the olden days. [Defense attorney] Doug Christie was at his best. He asked the judge to recuse himself for bias. That took real courage - for a lawyer to tell a judge he is biased and should not continue hearing this case. Doug's performance today was awesome." When I asked if a decision regarding bail had been made, Ernst said: "Of course not. The government lawyer just keeps on smearing me. It's character assassination, as always." Here is a report from the Zundel Bail Hearings: Day 3 [START] CHRISTIE CALLS ON JUDGE TO QUIT FOR BIAS & CROWN GETS ANOTHER SECRET HEARING ERNST ZUNDEL HEARING - July 30, 2003 CHRISTIE CALLS ON JUDGE TO QUIT FOR BIAS AND CROWN GETS ANOTHER SECRET HEARING B.C. lawyer, Douglas H. Christie electrified a Toronto Federal Courtroom Wednesday when he rose and made a motion calling on Judge Pierre Blais to recuse himself for bias. Mr. Christie said that Blais' comments Tuesday where he said he did not believe Ernst Zundel did not control the Zundelsite showed a hostility to the German-born publisher that prejudiced the trial. On Tuesday, Judge Blais had said: "Do you think for a minute that I'm going to believe that you have no control over the web site. A web site is like a book." A visibly-upset Doug Christie had risen and objected, "I object. A web site is not like a book. It can change three times or more a day. It can change in a keystroke". As the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act is written, Christie said, "No right of judicial review exists. In normal trials, a judge's interruption of cross examination can be supervised by the Court of Appeals but not under this legislation." "Your Lordship has entered into the arena and displayed hostility to the accused on numerous occasions. You intervened in cross examination to demonstrate open hostility to Mr. Zundel," Mr. Christie said. "You said repeatedly you did not believe Mr. Zundel regarding the ownership of the Zundelsite, but this is a bail hearing," Mr. Christie argued. "You've not heard evidence of the owner of the web site. Before you have heard from Ingrid Rimland, the owner of the web site, you called Ernst Zundel a liar. To a reasonable [word missing], it would seem that the decision in this trial has already been made," Christie said. In the mind of a reasonable observer, this would create a apprehension of hostility and bias." "Your statement regarding disbelief in Mr. Zundel's word was far broader. You said: 'The more you talk, the less I believe you.'" "I point out until all the evidence is heard, judgment as to credibility must be suspended," said Christie. Referring to the book, The Hitler We Loved and Why, Judge Blais had interrupted and questioned Ernst Zundel, "Come on, Mr. Zundel, you put this book together." "However," Mr. Christie said, "Mr. Zundel had testified Mr. Eric Thompson had put this book together," and Mr. Zundel had simply supplied the photographs. "How does this book have anything to do with the security of Canada?" Mr. Christie demanded. "It is at worst opinion. Mr. Zundel should not be on trial for his opinion." Under the Immigration Act in there, where a person is the subject of a Canadian Security and Intelligence Service (CSIS) threat to national security certificate, a judge reviewing the reasonableness of this certificate is his one and only hearing. "You are the court of last resort, the court of appeal in this matter," Mr. Christie argued. "It must, therefore, be demonstrable to all people that there is no apprehension of bias. Mr. Zundel is faced with instant deportation. The consequences for him are very severe," Canada's Battling Barrister warned. Mr. Christie said that Judge Blais' bias "is contrary to fundamental justice. A reasonable observer would conclude your decision cannot be impartial. Your Lordship's interventions have been more aggressive than the Crown's cross examination," Mr. Christie charged. Later, Doug Christie commented privately that Judge Blais had called investigative journalist Andrew Mitrovica's book, Covert Entry, an expose of CSIS' spy tactics and opening of mail, a novel." This book will form an important part of Mr. Zundel's case. This book and its revelation that CSIS apparently knew that a May 1995 terrorist bomb was coming for Ernst Zundel and did nothing will form an important part of Mr. Zundel's case. Judge Blais noted that it would take until August 12 for the transcript to be prepared. He indicated that he wanted to study the exact words used. With the agreement of both parties, he said he would reserve judgment about recusing himself until some time in August. Crown prosecutor, Donald MacIntosh, used most of the rest of the day to question Mr. Zundel about a wide range of connections. Although Mr. Zundel had testified that he had turned down a speaking invitation to attend a December 1990 Martyrs' Day Rally sponsored by the Heritage Front which honored fallen dissident, Robert Mathews, he was questioned at length about the people who had attended that meeting. In CSIS's highly charged accusation against Mr. Zundel, the term White Supremacist is widely used. Ernst Zundel told McIntosh, "'White Supremacists' is not a term used by nationalists or the right wing. It is a propaganda term used by the enemy." Just before the lunch break, the judge dropped his own bombshell. "The Crown has asked for a new presentation in camera," he said, referring to another secret hearing where the defence will have no knowledge of who testifies or what is said. "Can your Lordship advise me when this request was made or is that secret too," Doug Christie asked. "Yesterday," Judge Blais informed him. Doug Christie demanded that the defence be provided with a summary of the evidence presented in the secret hearing. "I ask that your Lordship follow the same procedure laid down by the Supreme Court for SIRC (The Security and Intelligence Review Committee) in a national security case in Chiarelli". In this ruling, the Supreme Court upheld procedures by SIRC whereby in an immigration and national security hearing, secret evidence was heard. The Court ruled that the secret hearing did not violate Mr. Chiarelli's Charter rights because his lawyer had been given a summary of the evidence and the opportunity to submit questions to probe this evidence. Judge Blais said he rejected Mr. Christie's interpretation of the Chiarelli decision and would not promise any disclosure. "I will accept the request by the Crown to produce new evidence in camera and will see whether it is necessary to provide any more summary to Mr. Zundel." Before adjourning until September 23 and thus leaving revisionist publisher Ernst Zundel, now ailing, for another two months in solitary confinement at the Metro West Detention Center, the matter of Mr. Zundel's prison conditions was again [raised] by Douglas Christie. Mr. Christie reported his frustration at being unable to obtain complete documentary evidence of the results of Mr. Zundel's [medical] tests last week. Mr. Christie also pointed out that Ernst Zundel has been denied a chair, a pillow, pen, post-it-notes and highlighters. An angry Judge Blais said, "If there is any possibility within the parameters of the law, I want to improve his condition. "Is there anybody here from the Detention Center?" he demanded. As on Monday, there was no answer from the provincial prison authorities. "I will make a written direction that Mr. Zundel be treated with more flexibility," Judge Blais said. "Even in medieval times, prisoners were allowed to use pen and paper," Judge Blais asserted. "I also have respect for Mr. Zundel. He is not a criminal. I think he is entitled to a little bit of flexibility," the Judge said. It was decided that the Crown would send a letter to the Province of Ontario to seek more humane treatment for Mr. Zundel. However, if no results are achieved within a few days, there will be a conference call among Judge Blais, Crown attorney, Donald MacIntosh, defense lawyer, Doug Christie and provincial authorities. All three days of hearings saw the courtroom nearly filled, mostly with supporters of Ernst Zundel, some who had traveled from as far away as London. Angered at yet another secret hearing and frustrated by the Crown's seemingly endless delays and petty questioning about Mr. Zundel's obscure political acquaintances, the free speech supporters gave the German-born publisher a rousing cheer as he left the courtroom. Several were in tears as they thanked lawyer, Doug Christie, for fighting for improved health conditions for Mr. Zundel and embraced him as he left the University court building. -- Paul Fromm [END]