In the year 2003 German-Canadian Ernst Zundel
was arrested in Canada and imprisoned on trumped up charges.
No-one in the public was allowed then — nor is allowed now — to know why but he was kept in solitary confinement and then extradited. The decision to do so was made in secret and the reasons remain a kept secret. But it is claimed the charges came under anti-terrorism laws and a Canadian judge ruled his activities a threat to national and international
Mr. Zündel's deportation was ordered under a rarely used security certificate, a process by which the Canadian Security Intelligence Service can provide information in secret sessions.
The Zündel defence team was not privy to the information, yet it was still required to convince Judge Blais that it was unreliable, otherwise Mr. Zündel would be deported to Germany to face a five-year prison term for the crime of denying the Holocaust.
In a response to Judge Blais' ruling, Peter Lindsay, Mr. Zündel's lawyer said in an interview:
“Is it justice to deny someone even a chance to question the intent or motive of politicians?
Is it justice to allow secret evidence and deny the person against whom the secret evidence is being used even an opportunity to challenge it in any real way?”
Readers of this post can ask themselves the same question: was that just? Was that even legal?
On February 24th 2005, Federal Court Justice Pierr Blais made the following judgement:
“Mr. Zündel's activities are not only a threat to Canada's national security
but also a threat to the international community of nations”.
Think about that for a moment. We don't know what those alleged activities were.
We are still NOT ALLOWED TO KNOW what those alleged activities were.
Yet we are expected to believe that somehow, a person famous for nothing more than successfully winning a five year long battle in the 1980's in Canadian courts for publishing details about WW2 history was “a threat to the international community of nations”
The question should be: 'what is really a threat to each individual's security and liberty worldwide'? Someone disseminating contrversial but fact-based historical information? Or governments and politicians bowing to pressure from Jewish organisations to treat individuals with draconian, quasi-legal and unjust judgements?
And thus it was that after more than a year in solitary confinement, Ernst Zündel was
extradited to Germany where he was immediately arrested and put on trial in a German court for the crime of questioning the details of ‘the Holocaust’ while living in Canada — in other words for daring to apply Historical revision to an ahistorical, legally protected, compulsory belief-system. And for doing so in his country of domicile where it is NOT a crime.
‘But how was that a crime committed in Germany’, a sane, reasonable person might ask.
Question: As it was not a crime to question that period of European history in Canada, how had he committed a crime in Germany?
: It was deemed a crime in Germany because Mr. Zündel had created a website in Canada containing details about his research that could be accessed
This is the state of international law now.
A website containing historical information that does not break the law in the country in which you live, can be considered a crime in some other country. And your government can arrest you and transport you there to face a trial based upon secret allegations that you can not defend yourself against!!
This is what this pseudo-historical, compulsory belief-system has reduced us to.
was his Defence-lawyer for his trial in Germany.
Zundel’s trial judge in the case was Dr. Ulrich Meinerzhagen
Ernst Zündel was accused and tried in still Allied-occupied Germany under post-war German laws laws forbidding “Incitement and the denigration of the memory of the deceased”.
(Volksverhetzung und die Verunglimpfung des Andenkens Verstorbener vorgeworfen.)
During the trial Judge Ulrich Meinerzhagen announced the following:
“It is completely irrelevant whether the Holocaust took place or not.
His DENIAL is a criminal offence in Germany and that is all that matters in this court.”
“Es ist völlig unerheblich, ob der Holocaust stattgefunden habe oder nicht! Seine LEUGNUNG steht in Deutschland unter Strafe. Und nur das zähle vor Gericht!”
Which is equivalent to a medieval judge saying:
“It is completely irrelevant whether witches exist or not, nor whether magical powers and witchcraft is even possible. Being a witch is a criminal offence in Baden-Württemberg and that is all that matters in this court.”
The trial result was inevitable. He was found 'guilty' and sentenced to five years imprisonment.
What is more — purely as a result of what in any other case would be regarded as just doing her job and defending her client — his defence lawyer Frau Stolz was also condemned to several years of imprisonment for the same crime as Ernst.
We can all now be accused of a thought-crime for stating unwelcome but factual truths that are considered offensive to some Jews. If we were born in a country that has laws outlawing publishing or discussing research regarding what has come to be called 'the Shoah', then we can be extradited there to face trial. We will not be permitted to conduct a robust defence, as that will be regarded as a further crime. And our conviction and imprisonment is a foregone conclusion. Therefore, if in your defence your lawyer demonstrates that your statements are factually true, they will also join you in prison.
Presumably if the judge does anything other than find you guilty, they will also have to be tried and imprisoned. They also are restricted because they can also not find that the accused statements are actually true and factually accurate, as that would be to commit the same crime as us the one being accused and our defence lawyer who is defending us!
And remember, the basis of these alleged thought crimes and all these imprisonments and prosecutions is this:
“inciting hatred against an identifiable group”.
Think about that for a moment.
This is deeply delusional behaviour.
Institutionalised deeply delusional behaviour.
For the vast majority of the manipulated masses it is symptomatically psychotic.
For an elite minority it was and still is deliberately manipulative and deceitful.