|
December 27, 2006
During the recent conference in Iran (Review of the
Holocaust: Global Vision) I was in prison in Mannheim, Germany interviewing
Ernst Zuendel. Labeled a "Holocaust denier," Ernst has been in
jail for almost four years without being charged with a violent crime or
without even being convicted of a non-violent one. He is 67 year old.
As a six-year old Ernst witnessed the Allied firebombing of
Pforzheim in which ten to twenty thousand German civilians were killed. As a
teenager he became a pacifist; at age 19 he moved to Canada to avoid serving
in the post-war German army. In Canada he worked as a graphic artist and
publisher specializing in 20th century German history. Many of the books he
republished questioned the Holocaust, such as the underground booklet Did
Six Million Really Die? by Richard Harwood. Others he merely
distributed, like The
Rudolf Report by Germar Rudolf, An
Eye for an Eye: The Untold Story of Jewish Revenge Against Germans in 1945
by John Sack, and Jewish
Supremacism: My Awakening to the Jewish Question by David Duke. He also
sold books on UFOs
and alternative
medicines.
Ernst's interest in history and revisionism led him to
dispute and challenge specific "facts" about the Holocaust. He
claimed
1. that Hitler's "Final Solution" was intended
to be ethnic cleansing, not extermination
2. that there were no homicidal gas chambers used by the
Third Reich. (He did not deny that there were gas chambers used for
disinfection.)
3. there were fewer than 6 million Jews killed of the
alleged 55 million who died in WWII
Over the years such firmly held beliefs expressed in writing
and later on his wife's Internet site (www.zundelsite.org <http://www.zundelsite.org/>
) caused him to be charged with incitement. He was tried twice in Canada. In
the middle of the second trial in 1988, Ernst sent the first forensic team
to Auschwitz. It was this "Leuchter
Expedition" and the subsequent Leuchter Report that he believed
revolutionized Holocaust revisionism, taking it beyond the "he said,
she said..." testimonies and into the realm of solid forensic science.
Such endeavors made him the target of those who protect the
standard Holocaust narrative. He survived three assassination attempts,
including by arson and pipe bomb, and although he lived in Canada for 42
years, he was never able to gain Canadian citizenship even though
immigration officials had described his application as "flawless."
While some consider his views to border on heresy, freedom
of speech in both the United States and Canada protected his right to
publish and distribute the truth as he sees it. But neither our Bill of
Rights nor the pleadings of his lawyers could prevent his being rendered by
the United States, forced back to Canada, and then on to Germany where
denying or revising certain aspects of the Holocaust is a crime.
The Latest Incarceration
On February 5, 2003, Ernst was arrested at his home in the
mountain region of eastern Tennessee. He was seized on the pretext that he
had violated immigration regulations, or had missed an interview date with
US immigration authorities, even though he had entered the US legally, was
married to an American citizen, had been checked out by the FBI, had been
given a health check, a work permit, and a social security number, had no
criminal record, and was trying to secure status as a permanent legal
resident.
After being held for two weeks, he was deported to Canada.
For the next two years -- from mid-February 2003 to March 1, 2005 -- he was
held in solitary confinement in the Toronto West Detention Centre, on the
charge that he was a threat to national security. Like others who suffer
rendition, there was no bail, no public trial, and no appeal. His mail was
censored and the lights in his cell were kept on day and night.
On March 1, 2005 Ernst was put in handcuffs and leg irons on
a private jet and deported from Canada to Germany where he has been held as
an Untersuchungsgefangener or a prisoner under investigation. As in Canada,
bail was again denied. On June 29, 2005, the state's prosecutor, Mr.
Grossman, formally charged him with inciting "hatred" by having
written or distributed texts that "approve, deny or play down"
genocidal actions carried out by Germany's wartime regime, and which
"denigrate the memory of the [Jewish] dead." The trial began on
November 8, 2005, eight months after he arrived in Germany.
Ernst is confined to his cell 22 ž hours per day. He has no
access to phone or Internet and he may not communicate anything about the
trial. He is able to receive two 30-minute visits per month, but all
conversations must be in German or must be conducted through a
prison-approved translator.
Still Ernst remains upbeat and convinced that he has made a
contribution to the truth surrounding WWII and the Holocaust. He does not
deny that millions of people suffered at the hands of the Nazis, including
millions of Jews, who were worked to death and suffered from disease
(especially typhus) and who were often deliberately murdered both inside and
outside of concentration camps. But he does not regard Jewish suffering as
unique. He considers his efforts to tell the truth about the Holocaust as
ground breaking and is satisfied to let others continue the research.
Ernst believes that Zionists treat the Holocaust as a sword
and a shield to deflect criticism of their racist quest to build a Jewish
state in Palestine, a state in which over half the people today are not
Jewish, "the state" being defined as all the land currently
controlled by Israel, including West Bank, Gaza, and the Golan Heights. He
regards himself as a political prisoner of Zionists who try to erase his
contributions and punish him with defamation and imprisonment.
A Day in Court
An admirer once described Ernst Zuendel as "an
outgoing, good-humored man who is blessed with a rare combination of
unflagging optimism and practical ability. He maintains this infectious
spirit even under very trying conditions. He is an unusually alert and
sensitive individual with a keen understanding of human nature. He inspires
confidence, loyalty and affection." On December 7, 2006 I witnessed his
trial in Mannheim and found this description to be uncannily accurate.
On that particular day those in the courtroom included
Ernst, three judges, three jurors, a court reporter, three defense
attorneys, four armed guards, twenty-four spectators, and one prosecutor,
Mr. Grossman. Ernst wore an old blue suit with a red tie; he was attentive;
he often smiled approvingly when something was said with which he agreed.
The guards were friendly but disinterested. Facing the court, all the
participants sat on the left hand side, except the state prosecutor who sat
all by himself at a table on the right side. The jurors and the court
reporter sat in line with the judges on an elevated platform along the front
and the spectators sat in rows along the back wall. No media were present.
The spectators were clearly there for Ernst. Most were
German men in their late 60s or 70s; there were also a couple of younger
women. Several men commented that they were proud of having been to every
court session with Ernst over the past 21 months. Although they had not met
him personally, they were following his trial closely and were supportive of
him. They were helpful to my American Jewish colleague and me and guided us
through the security outside the courtroom and made sure we got front row
seats so that we could fully appreciate the courtroom experience. Many spoke
English and had sons and daughters in America. Most were retired but one
younger man had taken time off from work to witness this day of the trial.
Ernst and his attorneys have not been allowed to discuss or
challenge the veracity of the facts about the Holocaust, including facts
that Ernst disputes and about which he would like to submit scientific
evidence and expert-witness testimony. Offenkundigkeit, the German version
of judicial notice, precludes it. The court is only allowed to consider if
Ernst denied these particular facts and if so, when and where and how.
During our visit, one of Ernst's attorneys, 84-year old Dr. Herbert
Schaller[1], read a lengthy and impassioned statement saying that he
believed in the same facts of the Holocaust as does Ernst and by so stating
this he too is guilty. He ended by saying that in over 53 years of
practicing law he had until now never been guilty of the same crime as the
man he was charged to defend. The head judge, Ulrich Meinerzhagen, appeared
tired, agitated, and ready to explode.
Visiting Ernst in prison
It is not easy to visit Ernst Zuendel. He is allowed only
two 30-minute visits per month, one hour if the visitor travels more than
100 km. Though I wrote and faxed the prison a dozen times beginning in
February 2006, the answer was always the same, no answer. But through his
wife, Ingrid, Ernst knew that a colleague and I wished to visit him and he
asked the judge to grant us permission to do so. Finally on September 23rd
Judge Meinerzhagen told Ernst to tell his wife to tell me to fax him and
formally request a visit. We were to each include a copy of our résumés
and a copy of our passports.
Another month passed before we received the visitation
permission. Once we had that document, stamped and signed by the judge, we
were able to make an appointment at the prison in Mannheim.
On arrival the guards filled out a long form on each of us.
They took our passports and had us put everything else in a locker. Then we
were searched, warned against speaking English, and told to cross the
courtyard to the visitation rooms. There we sat on one side of a table with
a plastic shield in the middle; they brought Ernst from the other side and
allowed him to sit across from us while a guard sat at the end to monitor
both parties. We asked if it was permissible to shake hands and the guard
smiled and said that would be all right.
Ernst began by asking us to contact his wife and tell her
that he looked well and that he missed her. He had not been in contact with
her for several weeks and he was worried that she would be worried about
him. Then he asked if my colleague's family had discouraged him from making
this trip. My friend understood what Ernst was asking, but he was unable to
answer in German, so I had to tell Ernst that indeed pressure had been put
on us both not to have anything to do with a Holocaust "denier."
We asked Ernst about life in prison and his relationship
with guards and other prisoners. He described a typical day and told us that
he had only limited contact with other prisoners, but that they were
friendly towards him. So too were the guards, especially because he followed
the rules and was a threat to no one. He often asked the man monitoring our
visit to corroborate what he was saying, almost as if to include him in the
conversation.
He talked about history and philosophy and about recent
books he had read. He praised the prison library, which he said was markedly
better than the one in the US jail in Tennessee, which had "only Tom
Clancy novels and one old book on the US Presidents." I had been forced
to leave my notes outside and though I had many questions, I was not allowed
to ask him anything about the trial, not even the names of his attorneys.
The hour passed quickly and the guard soon told us we would
have to go. When we stood we looked questioningly at the guard and he nodded
to us. We shook hands with Ernst, slowly, he taking each of our hands in
both of his. They were big, soft, and warm; although Ernst is only six years
older than I, he reminded me of my father saying goodbye when we last
parted.
Holocaust Denial
Contrary to the warning given to people who currently tour
Auschwitz, "Holocaust denial" is not infectious. In many ways the
term is used as an epithet to discredit and demean those who question facts
surrounding the Holocaust. Nor is Holocaust denial anti-Semitic; there are
many Jews who question facts about the Holocaust and many more who object to
its being used to elevate Jewish suffering above that of others.[2] Treating
those who question the Holocaust as heretics reveals the degree to which the
Holocaust itself has become a religion, a faith to be accepted and worshiped
with spectacular memorials, best-selling books, and mandatory curricula for
school children.
Ernst believes that Jewish groups have wanted him jailed for
promoting views that the Jewish-Zionist lobby considers harmful to its
interests. He claims that the only sustained and institutionalized efforts
to imprison him have come from this lobby, which includes the Simon
Wiesenthal Center, the Canadian Jewish Congress, the Canadian Holocaust
Remembrance Association, and the League for Human Rights of B'nai B'rith
(with the Anti-Defamation League, its counterpart in the US). It is
noteworthy that even the ACLU refused to defend his right of free speech.[3]
Ernst Zuendel is neither a monster nor a heretic. He is a
man with strong convictions and the courage to express them. He views
himself not as a Holocaust "denier," but rather as a Holocaust
revisionist. For that he has been rendered by the United States, which
otherwise professes to protect the right of free speech and the writ of
habeas corpus, and by Canada, both countries in which he broke no law. To
force him back to his birth country to be tried for a "crime"
which he never committed in Germany is unjust. Those who would incarcerate
revisionists like Ernst Zuendel and hold them, without bail, for years on
end to drain them of their resources and to silence them as "Prisoners
of Zion" could well be labeled as "justice deniers."
Daniel McGowan
Professor Emeritus
Hobart and William Smith Colleges
mcgowan@hws.edu <mailto:mcgowan@hws.edu>
December 28, 2006
________________________________
[1] Upon his release from prison in Austria on December 21,
2006, the English historian David Irving said, "I have the fine
oratory of my 84-year-old defense lawyer Dr. Herbert Schaller to thank for
the unexpected victory in the appeal court. I spent over 400 days in
solitary confinement in Austria's oldest prison, sentenced in February to
three years' jail for an opinion I expressed in two talks seventeen years
ago."
[2] Of the 63 participants at the recent conference in
Tehran, six were Orthodox rabbis.
[3] Perhaps Benjamin Ginsburg is correct when he infers that
the ACLU is an organization, which promotes Jewish interests. "In
the realm of lobbying and litigation, Jews ... play leadership roles in such
important public interest groups as the American Civil Liberties Union and
Common Cause.... Their role in American economic, social, and political
institutions has enabled Jews to wield considerable influence in the
nation's public life." ("The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the
State," p. 1)
|
|
Setting the Record Straight: Letters from Cell # 7
$10 - 180 Pages
Find out who this "premier thought criminal" really is -
how he thinks, how he writes, what he's really saying! You will
be astonished to learn why this man is so feared by the world's
manipulators of your thoughts!
Order form: HTML
format | PDF
Format |
Reminder:
Help free Ernst Zundel, Prisoner of Conscience. His
prison sketches - now on-line and highly popular - help pay for his defence.
Take a look - and tell a friend.
http://www.zundelsite.org/gallery/donations/index.html
|
Please write to Ernst Zündel, let him know that he is not
alone:
Ernst Zundel
JVA Mannheim
Justiz-Vollzugsanstalt
Herzogenried Strasse 111
D 68169 Mannheim
Germany
|
|
