An excerpt from the Power Letter, May 2006, written by Ingrid Rimland
Zundel
=====
To our friends around the world:
We have entered a very interesting and, in some ways, scary stage
in our struggle to bring truth to the world via reporting on the
Mannheim Holocaust Heresy Trial. On April 26, there was yet another
scheduled hearing. From the few scattered reports I received, it was
an extraordinary day! Please take this as a partial summary because I
don't know what it means and can only speculate.
Here is what I was told:
Ernst was represented by Dr. Schaller and Attorney Bock. Jürgen
Rieger was not present. The two public defenders, who are on stand-by,
so to speak, were present, as were Sylvia Stolz and Horst Mahler - the
latter two in the audience. Again, many spectators filled the court
room, but the security forces had been reduced in numbers. Ernst was
described as "looking good, self-assured and vigorous." The
prosecutor, Mr. Grossmann, was not present; a substitute sat in for
him.
Dr. Meinerzhagen started by playing a brief ZDF video clip that had
been produced by a German television team sometime in 1999, as I
remember it. I lived at that time in San Diego; Ernst was still in
Canada. The reporters were a husband-wife couple, nice and very
open-minded, so I thought. After they filmed me, they went on to
interview Ernst at the Toronto Zundel-Haus, and Ernst told me
afterwards that the extended interview went very well indeed.
Apparently, when it was finally shown all over Germany, it was just a
sound byte and had become the usual tripe - the theme being "Neo-Nazis
on the Net" with voice-overs on just how "dangerously" the Zundelsite
was by hiding behind Freedom of Speech. Many of our supporters saw it
at the time, but it came and went, and there was absolutely no
fallout. I saw it as one of those "Let's scare the unwary..."
productions. I remember the reporters asking me about connections with
the "skinheads" and I told them that in my entire life I had never
personally met a skinhead. I told them skinhead were fabrications of a
compliant media.
This clip was now played in the courtroom by having it projected
against a white wall. One spectator called it "nasty", two others
thought it was the old, insignificant baloney meant to scare the
gullible.
This was followed in the courtroom by a broadcast that Ernst had
done several years ago via a Russian radio station from what used to
be Königsberg, now called Kaliningrad. I remember this story vaguely.
Ernst had negotiated broadcast time with the Russian owners and had
been assured that the contract would hold, but as it turned out, he
was only allowed to broadcast twice before the Holocaust Lobby
aficionados leaned on the Russkys, twisted some arms - and the
contract was canceled on the spot. Dr. Meinerzhagen now allowed to
play one of these broadcasts in full - apparently lasting almost an
hour. I have never heard it, but it was described to me by three
different people in the courtroom as "simply fabulous" and "Ernst as
his best." Ernst addressed himself to the German people and explained
to them that their government system that passed itself off as a
"democracy" was, in fact, still a post-war occupation force
brainwashing the public with a false history and controlling every
entity that mattered - including the judiciary. One of the spectators,
who had been in the courtroom said to me: "I have no explanation. It
was as though Judge Meinerzhagen wanted to exonerate Ernst, rather
than sentence him... Why else would he have played it?"
Next, without comment, Judge Meinerzhagen read my Open Letter,
dated February 8, 2006. Refresh your memory - I published it in a
previous Power Letter. We had had plans for Sylvia Stolz to read this
letter into the record, and we were prepared that the Judge would not
allow it to be read. Instead, to our great surprise, he read it
himself - and with emphasis and feeling!
I am very proud of that letter; I wrote and polished it for an
entire week. In it, I called a spade a spade. I feel I wrote
respectfully but clearly. Ernst thought that it was "very moving."
Judge Meinerzhagen read it now, and when he was through, he left
without further comments, and the hearing was over for the day.
- Judge Meinerzhagen
I have absolutely no idea what this means. Does Dr. Meinerz-hagen
want to juxtapose the distorted persona of Ernst Zundel in the
mainstream media with the real Ernst Zundel that we know? One of the
attorneys thought that I was too gullible to think that; that it was a
sinister ploy. According to his interpretation, the idea is to link
Ernst and myself as working in concert and in tandem, and thus, by
linking us, trying to criminalize not only Ernst but also the
Zundelsite and, indirectly, me that way. He thinks that the idea is to
not only have people but whole (EU?) countries gang up on my website!
In other words, censorship of an American website through the back
door!
(See German Embassy Press Release dated April 18, 2006 below.)
Meanwhile, I am still facing the question as to what to do with Dr.
Meinerzhagen's invitation to come to Germany to testify. Ernst always
chides me for being too trusting and for having difficulty seeing the
evil design of our political enemies' actions, and he may have a
point. At first, when I received that letter, I reacted predictably
and even joyfully, true to my nature - I thought this was a golden
opportunity to go to Germany and relieve some of the pressure on Ernst
by clarifying the facts of the ownership and operation of the website.
But when I put out the question on the Net and asked for input as to
what I should do, I received such a tsunami of horrified voices
telling me it was a trap and not to go, that I changed my mind and
began to distrust my own judgment. The consensus is firm that I
absolutely should not take the risk and walk into a prison situation!
And I know I will not do a video conference if I can help it - I have
done hundreds of video shows in the early years of my literary career,
and I hated every one of them with a passion! I get rattled and
nervous and fiery red in the face having a camera focused on me. I
dislike it intensely - I know I am much better in expressing my
thoughts if I can do so in contemplative writing.
What will happen in the end is still open, but I do have competent
legal counsel, and I have instructed one of my attorneys to draft a
response stressing that I am an American citizen protected by the
Constitution and the First Amendment, and that I consider the laws and
conventions of Germany of no relevance to me. But I must tell you that
I am between a rock and a hard place - I fear that if I refuse to
answer at all, it will be construed as some "guilt" on my part, and if
I testify, I yield jurisdiction to Germany which I don't need to do,
even according to Dr. Meinerzhagen's letter. It may well be that I
won't have a choice, because according to a press release that you can
double-check on the US-based German Embassy website, dated 18 April
2006 (!), we now get this - imagine!
[start]
German Minister of Justice Zypries and US Attorney General
Gonzales Sign Bilateral Agreements for Mutual Legal Assistance
German Minister of Justice Brigitte Zypries and US Attorney
General Alberto R. Gonzales met today, April 18, for bilateral talks
on German-US judicial cooperation. Within the scope of those talks,
they signed two supplementary treaties to the German-US extradition
treaty of 1978 and to the bilateral mutual legal assistance treaty
of 2003.
"German and US authorities have been working closely together in
criminal prosecution for many years in an atmosphere of mutual
trust. Regrettably, the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 have
clearly underscored the necessity for close cooperation among
criminal prosecution authorities. At the same time, we must continue
to be able to build upon a reliable legal foundation which allows
both sides to shape cooperation consistent with their constitutional
law princi-ples," said Federal Minister of Justice Brigitte Zypries.
The supplementary treaties signed today complement the existing
bilateral agreements with regulations that had been agreed upon by
the EU Justice Ministers and are the subject of two agreements
concluded between the EU and the USA. The aim of these agreements is
to create harmonized contract-ual foundations for cooperation in
criminal matters between the USA and the Member States of the
European Union, and thereby modernize the existing bilateral
agreements with a view toward meeting the challenges of fighting
terrorism and cross-border organized crime.
Minister Zypries said: "With the supplementary treaties signed
today, we are creating the conditions for allowing the agreements on
mutual legal assistance in criminal matters and extradition
concluded between the European Union and the USA to take effect in
relations between Germany and the USA as well."
Extradition Treaty
An extradition treaty has been in effect between Germany and the
USA since 1978. For both countries, it forms the foundation for the
extradition of individuals sought by the judicial authorities of the
other country for the purpose of criminal prosecution or enforcement
of sentence. The supplementary treaty signed today complements this
treaty - for example, with regulations involving protection of
privacy. Unchanged in the amended extradition treaty is that no
individual sought will be extradited from Germany to the USA if he
is threatened there with the death penalty. A precondition for every
extradition is that the criminal offence concerned is subject to
criminal penalties both pursuant to the law of the requested and the
requesting state, and is subject to deprivation of liberty for a
minimum period of at least one year. Additionally, the supplementary
treaty simplifies the procedure for notarization and forwarding of
extradition documents, which has thus far been quite complicated.
Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement
Germany and the USA have also been cooperating intensively for
many years on other mutual assistance matters. This might involve,
for example, the examination of witnesses, the seizure of evidence,
or the service of summons and other documents at the request of the
other state. The German judicial authorities have been able to
provide this type of legal assist-ance even without a contractual
basis; this is based upon the Act on International Mutual Legal
Assistance in Criminal Matters. The German-American Mutual Legal
Assistance Treaty signed in October 2003 by Germany and the USA
places this cooperation onto a foundation which is binding under
international law.
The supplementary treaty signed today complements the bilateral
treaty, among other aspects with regulations on the formation of
joint investigation teams, the possibility of video examination of
witnesses and experts, as well as the investi-gation of holders of
certain bank accounts. These regulations are also oriented to the
agreement concluded between the European Union and the USA.
[end]
What do you read into this press release? It sounds to me that any
EU country could request my extradition if somebody, some country or
some individual within the EU countries decides that the content of
the Zundelsite is "criminal." And here I am, having lived on the
American Continent since I was 24 years old and never ever having been
in conflict with the law! I don't want to think that yet another hit
squad could come racing up my hill with their hands on their guns and
kidnap me as they kidnapped my husband - but these liars and con-men
are desperate as their lies unravel before the world's very eyes, and
anything is possible.
Again, I ask for your input. What do you make of this latest?
Ingrid Zundel
