Zundel Videos

Ingrid's Veterans Today Articles


File Index

Copyright (c) 1998 - Ingrid A. Rimland

February 27, 1998

Good Morning from the Zundelsite:

This is the first of two ZGrams on the historical Garaudy trial in France - the New World Order sentence, that is. The first will give the background, summarized, and the second will summarize the actual sentence.

Hot off the fax machine out of the Zundel-Haus, via one of our prime correspondents in France, I received the following brief notice:
RE: Garaudy's Trial

"I've just come back from the court in Paris. The sentence is: $240,000FF altogether (approx. US $ 40,000). More details in tonight's e-mail."

These days, in our bizarre world, that is good news for us. Here's why, as summarized in the Revisionist publication, Smith's Report (Feb 1998) a CODOHWeb ( http://www.codoh.com ) supplement:
"One doesn't envy France's Holocaust mullahs their dilemma here: convicting Garaudy could make of him an even greater martyr. Acquitting him would show that the Loi Gayssot can be defied - to the applause of the Arab world!"

Well, the obscene Fabius Gayssot law was not defied. It was affirmed, to the disgrace of France.

From our point of view, that is good news, because what do we have now in the Arab world? A dozen countries being notified the French are in the clutches of an enemy we share!

So now here-s France, the once-upon-Country-of-Thought, annoncing itself as the Country-of-Thoughtcrimes - where an 84-year-old man gets fined in the tens of thousands of dollars for doubting the Holocaust Myth!

How did he doubt the Holocaust? In these fine words, introducing the title of his now famous bestseller:
"The Founding Myths of Israeli Politics...will examine one of the untruths which continues to wreak the most havoc after over half a century in today's world, and not only in Israel: the myth of the six million Jews exterminated that has become a dogma justifying, sacralizing (as the very term "Holocaust" implies) all the extortion of the State of Israel in Palestine, in the entire Middle East, in the United States and, through the United States, in world politics, placing it above all international law."

Writes Bradley Smith in Smith's Report:
"It was this sentiment and his analysis on the alleged gas chambers of the Third Reich which resulted in Garaudy being dragged before a French court for having violated their anti-free speech legislation known as the Fabius Gayssot law.

"The trial in Paris. . . has sparked an unprecedented explosion of support for Revisionism in the Middle East.

"Political, intellectual, professional, labor and religious leaders, as well as ordinary citizens, have spoken out, demonstrated, and given their support to the 84-year-old (Garaudy). In doing so, they have defended the right to question the Holocaust story and have begun - many for the first time - to study revisionism, not only in published texts, but also on revisionist sites on the World Wide Web, including CODOHWeb - the world's first website to post Garaudy's book in its entirety.

"The first evidence that the Garaudy trial would be different from the trials of Robert Faurisson and other revisionists in France came after a couple of days after the trial's beginning on January 8, when the Agente France Presse reported that the Palestinian Writers Association had expressed its solidarity with Roger Garaudy's "courageous fight for creative freedom."

"On the next day, January 11, a support committee for Roger Garaudy was set up in the Gulf state of Qatar, and it called for the Arab world to take action "against the intellectual terrorism of the Zionists." Meanwhile, the newspaper Al-Khaleej (Dubai), in the neighboring United Arab Emirates, launched a campaign on behalf of Garaudy, calling for donations and messages of solidarity in a front-page appeal.

"These were only the first boulders, however, in what became over the following weeks, as the Agence France Presse reported, "an avalance of support" for Roger Garaudy's stand against Zionist oppression and against the Holocaust mythology that buttresses it. On January 12, Sheikh Ahmad Kaftaro, the highest Sunni Muslim authority in Syria, spoke out against the French effort to muzzle Garaudy, and Iran's Islamic Human Rights Committee pronounced: "This trial is a demonstration of disrespect and non-conformity to the practice of free speech." Prominent Lebanese attorneys, including the president of the Beirut bar association ("It is not acceptable that freedom of opinion be treated as a crime"), rallied to Garaudy's cause, as did the Union of Arab Journalists, which pointedly asked European journalists to defend Garaudy's right to freely express his opinion.

"Garaudy himself addressed, via satellite, a demonstration held at the House of Youth in Doha on January 12; on the same day he published a letter of thanks in Al-Khaleej, warning: "Zionism, with its aggressive colonial policies and claims to eternal domination of Jerusalem, could detonate a world war."

"Evidently this was music to the ears of Sheikha Zayed ibn Sultan Al-Nahayan, the wife of the president of the United Arab Emirates: on January 14 the Agente France Presse reported that she had donated $50,000 to Garaudy's defense (the maximum fine for denying "crimes against humanity" under the idiotic law under which Holocaust revisionists are prosecuted in France is 300,000 francs, or $50,000). In the following days came the public support of:

* the Arab Organization for Human Rights in Jordan, which supported Garaudy's "freedom in everything he has written" and lamented that France "has fallen under the Zionist influence which is deep-rooted in some sectors of European society";

* one hundred sixty members of Iran's parliament, who signed a petition backing Garaudy;

* one hundred Palestinian writers, who demonstrated for Garaudy in front of the French Cultural Center in Gaza;

* the Egyptian Labor Party, which held rallies denouncing the two hundredth anniversary of Napoleon's Nile expedition - and the trial of Roger Garaudy;

* The Kuwait Society for Human Rights, which addressed a letter of protest to the French ambassador;

* the Sudanese bar association;

* and last, but not least, Egypt's Nobel laureate in literature (1988), Naguib Mahfouz, who wrote in Al-Ahram Weekly:

"I was amazed to learn, in connection with the trial of the French Muslim thinker, Garaudy, of the existence of a French law according to which it is a crime to question facts relating to the Holocaust."

Yep! It is a crime - in France, in Austria, in Germany, in many other European countries. Is is a crime in Canada, where Ernst Zundel is battling the censors.

I charge the world's fight-censorship advocates with ostrich behavior. Time and again we have appealed to this community to come to our help because your worthy Zundelsite is under siege, and odious laws, such as the Fabius Gayssot law, are creeping up on us in the United States. We need all the help we can get - not just for our sake! For everybody's sake!

So far, there has only been deafening silence - except for one Jamie McCarthy, who wondered aloud why anyone would want to "save Zundel's butt."

Yesterday, I wrote again:
". . . might there be one or two of you who would decide to lend us your goodwill and expertise instead of just your sneers? We ask in all sincerity."

Here's Jamie McCarthy, at his mendacious and arrogant best, feigning a "helpful" stance:
"Ingrid, you're really puzzling me.

"What the heck is it you want? Affidavits? Affidavits on what
subject? Or subjects? What legal tactics are Z's lawyers taking
and how might affidavits help them?

"A large part of the reason you're not getting any help from f-c
readers is that you're just screaming "help me, help me" and
whenever anyone (like me) tries to talk in any detail about the
legal issues at stake, you clam up.

"I'm guessing that you're doing this on purpose: that you're only
putting in token yelps, so that every once in a while you can
tsk-tsk in a Zgram about how we're all a big bunch of phonies.

"If I'm wrong, if you really do want help, then for your own sake
start talking about what help you want. I've already offered a
legal avenue that Z's lawyers might want to pursue, if they want
to not only get him off the hook but also establish precedent
that the CHRA does not apply to the internet. I've mentioned
this twice: the exemption for broadcasting. This makes the
third time, then, that I've suggested how Z might beat the rap.

"If that's not what you want -- what the heck _do_ you want!?"

Jamie, we need goodwill and expertise in law and the computer sciences - not merely snotty sneers. I have said that before.

The Zundel-Haus is only a phone call away. The Zundel case and all that it entails is not a well-kept secret to the participants of fight-censorship who aren't the dummies, exactly, you make them out to be. They know. They don't need your "translations". Not a few of them, including you, receive the ZGrams, have visited the Zundelsite repeatedly and, thus, are well-informed.

They also know, as you do, that all it takes on our sappy world is intermittent shrieks of "Nazi!", at which you are an expert, to make a man of professed principles roll over like a dog.

Thought for the Day:

"Benjamin Natanyahu was seen on CNN's Larry King Live recently muttering angrily about the proliferation of Holocaust Revisionism. To think that it all started in cyberspace - on CODOHWeb! There is no doubt about it, the information war is under way. . . CODOHWeb is now being accessed once every 45 seconds."

(Smith's Report, Internet Roundup 1998)

Comments? E-Mail: irimland@cts.com

Back to Table of Contents of the Feb. 1998 ZGrams