Summary Zundel Holocaust
Thought Crime Trial
From Ingrid Rimland

As you will remember, applause for Ernst Zundel is verboten as part of Germanys strict enforcement of the Eleventh Commandment: Thou shalt not doubt the Holocaust or any single part of it. Therefore, when Ernst appeared in the courtroom, most of the audience rose, thus by their silence showing their respect.
On the agenda was the weighty question as to how the BKA, the equivalent of America's FBI, was alerted to a censorship problem of Ernst's "Germania" publications - a freebie letter sent to supporters each month for the past twenty-plus years. I don't think that the question was settled - because who would want to know?
Next, a BKA bureaucrat named Mandel - not known to me - was announced as a witness against Ernst, to appear to give testimony in September. Before he takes the witness stand, it will be someone by the name of Hoelsch's turn - a name I well remember for his eager beaver willingness to railroad a Canadian/American based dissident right into prison to please the Bundesrepublik's ruling elite - so they can please their handlers. The evidence sits snugly in my file cabinet - literally hundreds of faxes!
Also scheduled to appear before the summer's gone will be the now-retired German head honcho bureaucrat Hans-Heiko Klein, a particularly nasty fellow whose specialty has been for years and years to run down Holocaust Deniers. He brags about it in the papers. Not too surprisingly, Klein was the one who led the Telekom calvary charge against the Zundelsite in 1996, thus triggering the first ever war in cyberspace - which he lost utterly, I am so pleased to say!
Next, the court visitors were treated to some judicial palaver about some documents parked on the Zundelsite for some 12 years already, deemed harmful to Germany's youth. These documents, not written by me or by my husband, are classic ABC-type documents to introduce revisionism to the unwashed, unwary masses. I have never had a single readership complaint about these documents, not even a peep, not even from our enemies. However, the BRD censors, in their inscrutable wisdom, had "indexed" them already in 1996 and have recently renewed this procedure - a procedure for which the Catholic Church in the Dark Ages was known.
Some pace picked up when a part of my Zundel DVD was played that I had sent to the judge in my own eagerness to let him know that Ernst was not that fire-breathing demon the world has come to believe. As most of you know, this DVD is long and comprehensive, and I had produced it explicitly to be played in Ernst's hearings to offset some of that demonization. It covers 20 years of Zundel activism - and it shows scenes of escalating violence cause BY his Jewish detractors - AGAINST him!
These parts were not played, nor was the story of the Auschwitz expedition that led to the Leuchter Report.
What was played were two segments - translated competently, I am told. I must say I am not altogether that unhappy about this peculiar selection. Judge Meinerzhagen's choice was a segment of an interview that Ernst did with a Jewish radio host, Max Lipson, and his first two interviews with me. I believe that if censor he must, Judge Meinerzhagen censored wisely.
These segments show what matters to Ernst and to me. They show us as civilized, caring human beings under siege by a viciously aggressive cabal cloaking itself in so-called "human rights." We, too, have a story to tell.
I am eager to read how Ernst judged the showing of those clips. To my knowledge, he has not yet been permitted to view the entire DVD, as I had fervently hoped - and pleaded!
(I should mention also that a full German translation of this video now exists, done by my volunteers, and we are working furiously on the dialogue dubbing part, which will be an expensive but necessary undertaking. More about that at the right time...)
Parts of a letter written by our immigration attorney, Bruce Leichty, dated May 5, 2006, were also read into the record. In it, Bruce gives a his cogent reasons why a German court that sits in judgment of my husband has no jurisdiction whatsoever compelling me, a U.S. citizen, to testify.
Thereupon it was announced that the court will not seek what they had formerly threatened to seek - namely international and/or FBI and/or consular "assistance" to compel me. I was pleased to know that this request has been dropped. It should never have been made of a U.S. citizen in the first place by a German-based Stalinist court!
However, parts of my ("voluntary") deposition in Canada at the beginning of the Human Rights Tribunal Hearings in 1996-97 is going to be read into the records shortly. I don't mind in the least. I said then what I say now - that Ernst never ever had any direct say or hands-on part of what was posted on the Zundelsite! He gave advice when I asked. He couldn't make me do what I refused to do.
Another witness who appeared to testify this time was someone by the name of Mohr. What triggered his involvement some years back was a woman who pressed charges over a small, two inch sticky that carried the heading "Did Gas Chambers in Auschwitz Exist?" Among three revisionist websites listed on that sticky was your venerable Zundelsite URL. I have never seen that sticky, nor was I (or for that matter, Ernst) advised of the existence of this offending tidbit exercise of Freedom of Speech on the Net!
The burning general question is, and remains, how much of the "guilt" to assign to Mr. Zundel about those postings on the Zundelsite - did he, or did he not, "control" Ingrid Rimland, at the time some 3000 miles away, living in another country, and jealously guarding her password! (Ernst asked for it once, and I refused to give it to him, meany that I am ...)
Some interesting questions now came forth by one of the co-judges, a stocky, feisty fellow named Hamm, described to me as the "Einpeitscher" - meaning the one who carries and uses the whip if the hearing should stray off of the beaten path. This man, I must confess, irks me a lot because, horror of horrors, his name is a Mennonite name! How's that for irony?
(When I enquired about him and his curious last name, I was told by my eagle-eyed inside sources that there is little doubt that he, in fact, belongs to the Tribe, as does the Prosecutor, Grossmann. Now who would say a thing like that? I don't know how Hamm came in the possession of a name that is as good as an apartheid trademark belonging to my very clannish, entirely Protestand Christian ancestry folk. Somebody ought to do a genealogy search on the name and see if there is something iffy...)
But let me not stray from my topic. The story continues this way, as it was told to me:
Co-Judge Hamm asks Witness Mohr: Have there ever been charges against either the Zundelsite or Germania, as posted on the Zundelsite?
Herr Mohr does not recall. The only thing that he remembers is that the then-recently privatized Deutsche Telekom, a communications giant [bought up by a Jewish concern] tried to block access to the Zundelsite - but was defeated. Utterly!
Had there ever been advertising on behalf of the Zundelsite in Germany?
Herr Mohr does not recall.
Defense Attorney Bock: Is it your opinion that gas chambers existed?
Herr Mohr: Ja.
Defense Attorney Bock: How do you know?
Herr Mohr: Because of my knowledge of history.
Defense Attorney Bock: Who was (Ernst Moritz von) Arndt?
(Clue: A very well known German dissident poet who lived during Napoleon's times. Every Junior High kid learns about him in his history class.)
Herr Mohr: No idea.
Defense Attorney Bock: What is the cut-off point for Holocaust Denial prosecution, numbers-wise?
Herr Mohr: I can't answer that. That is for the prosecutor's office to decide.
Defense Attorney Bock: What is meant by Extremism of the Right?
Herr Mohr: People who are part of the Right.
After further questioning:
"Those who run afoul of Paragraph 130...
[Clue: also known as the Holocaust Protection Paragraph]
Defense Attourney Bock: Is the Leuchter Report incorrect?
Herr Mohr: I don't know.
Defense Attorney Bock: What did you mean by "Terrorist Book" and "Big Book"?
Squirming. Avoidance. No definite reply.
Defense Attorney Bock points out to the court that this witness has opinions, not to be confused with facts. This leads to some verbal fireworks between various participants of the court and the defense, because Ernst's attorneys object to the sly introduction of alleged "ties" to violent groups, even though the witness himself had testified that there were no links on the Zundelsite to factions known to be engaged in violence.
That's all that I can tell you today. Again, I would like to point out that I am stitching this report together from various sources, the most important information of which was sent to me by Günther Deckert, who himself spent five years in a German prison for Holocaust Denial. The content of this report is not a transcript. It is an approximation of what I understand occurred.
The next hearing will be July 28. Be there if at all possible!
Final arguments are scheduled to start on September 22 and are anticipated to spill over to September 29. It is anticipated that on that date the court will have decided on a verdict.
It's now been 17 months in German jail for Ernst - for what?! The world now knows that in the current system, he has not been allowed a defense based on facts. It was more or less like "... what do you have to say for yourself before we shoot you?"
Ernst takes it for granted that the verdict against him will be brutal. Not me! Not for one minute will I surrender my hope that fairness must win over Talmudic vengeance. Our enemies should be so foolish - when all around them the system is crackling with tension, already throwing sparks.



This Site Served by TheHostPros