- The following was written by a US attorney who has been
studying the outrageous proceedings in Canada...
-
-
- I read carefully the parts of the Blais opinion.
-
- Needless to say, it reeks with bias and is offensive
to anyone familiar with the traditions of British or American law. I only
hope American lawyers not familiar with Ernst's case read this thing.
-
- It, of course, stands the burden of proof on its head.
I need not list all the comments showing this. It constantly states that
Ernst had to prove this and that to satisfy Judge Blais and when testimony
supports Ernst's position the Judge is "far from being convinced"
etc. The whole thing is "guilt by association de luxe"!
-
- A particularly ludicrous example: confronted with testimony
that Zundel disagreed with the behaviour of a person associated with a
white supremacist group and Zundel's testimony that he never discussed
such matters with that person, the Judge finds that since the person was
in Zundel's home for some time he MUST have discussed such matters with
him. What a legal farce! If this case was appealable in a normal judicial
system any Judge making such a finding would be subject removal from the
case and perhaps the bench.
-
- The claims that the secret evidence cannot be disclosed
"for national security reasons" need hardly be commented upon.
This is Stalinism at its best. Judge Blais cites the opinion of a Canadian
Court of Appeal supposedly approving this deviation from centuries of Common
Law principles and saying, "It is well to remember that freedom as
we know it has been suppressed in many countries." I wonder if the
judge who wrote that realized that he was condemning Canada as one of those
countries in the decision?
-
- A few general comments:
-
- * I found it quite significant that this Star Chamber
found Ernst's offense to be that he was the mastermind of the Canadian
or perhaps world-wide "White Supremacist Movement" [note capitals],
an obviously ludicrous charge on the basis of the evidence, and specifically
NOT because of his views on the Holocaust. This is clearly an attempt to
protect Bernie Faber and the Jewish groups who as the world knows are behind
the deportation case. It also shows that they don't really want to get
into a serious discussion of "Holocaust denial" for obvious reasons.
I wonder if the Germans are going to accept this?
-
- * I found it interesting that in discussing the supposed
need to keep the evidence against Ernst secret for "national security"
reasons (PAR. 107) the Judge (or whoever wrote the opinion) says that some
of the intelligence sources could have been "outside the country."
A Middle East source perhaps?
-
- * The FBI report exonerating Zundel of illegal activity
is denigrated by this Canadian Judge and worse, he attributes the fact
to an intent by Zundel to "lay low" for a time in the Tennessee
hills, a motive for which there is utterly no evidence in the record. Maybe
it's in the secret papers from the Canadian version of the KGB but he doesn't
even claim that!
|
