----- Original Message -----
From: "C-FAR" <1315038@primus.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 3:57 PM

Dear Free Speech Supporter;

The case of German-born publisher Ernst Zündel grows more bizarre by the
minute. Last Wednesday, June 9, Mr. Zündel was summoned to appear before
Mr. Justice Pierre Blais to begin his detention review (bail hearing).
Although, Judge Blais turned down Mr. Zündel's application for bail on
January 23, 2004, after days of hearings, Mr. Zündel is entitled to another
review every six months. In January, Mr. Justice Blais had decided that Mr.
Zundel -- a lifelong 65-year-old pacifist -- might be a terrorist and,
therefore, a threat to the security of Canada or the life and safety "of
any person."

Judge Blais had wanted to start the detention review to show that he'd met
the timeline. Lead defence counsel Peter Lindsay had offered others dates.
Both he and co-counsel Chi-Kun Shi had other court commitments, June 9. In
what Mr. Lindsay describes as a highly unusual decision, Judge Blais
insisted on proceeding anyway. Fearful of leaving Mr. Zündel without
representation, Mr. Lindsay had another lawyer and friend Alex Beadie
appear with Mr. Zündel. Mr. Lindsay and Chi-Kun Shi communicated with the
court by phone.

The hearing lasted 15 minutes and formally began the detention review
which will continue with arguments and submissions on July 27.

Part way through the hearing, Mr. Lindsay, as he always does, asked if
there had been any more secret hearings since the last round of hearings in
early May. Judge Blais said he couldn't remember! Here is the extraordinary

MR. LINDSAY: I will ask if there have been any more secret proceedings
since last I asked.

JUDGE BLAIS: Since May 5?

MR. LINDSA: That's right.

JUDGE BLAIS: Frankly, I don't remember sir. I would have to review my
notes. I had a trial after that. I don't remember, sir. Usually, I tell you
about that on the basis of courtesy, but I don't remember. ... I know that
Mr. Lindsay asks every time. I responded to that question last time. I
don't have my notes. Notes about classified information are never with me.
I would have to search my memory and, quite frankly, I don't know, sir.

Another federal judge, Mr. Justice Hugesson has indicated that these
secret hearings and briefings by CSIS occur somewhere in Ottawa in a
bunker-like secure facility. It's amazing that the judge and former CSIS
boss Pierre Blais cannot seem to remember whether he attended a secret
hearing within the last five weeks. It's not as if Mr. Lindsay had asked
whether he'd had a second cup of coffee one morning 10 years ago.

Judge Blais had also promised to render his decision about quashing four
subpoenas issued on Mr. Zundel's behalf to leaders of the Canadian Jewish
Congress, the League for Human Rights of B'nai Brith, author Andrew

CANADA'S SECRET SERVICE) and John Farrell (the CSIS-hired mail

snoop who had overseen the interception of Ernst Zundel's mail in 1995).


 As of Monday afternoon, the
judge had not fulfilled his promise to announce his decision by June 11.

Mr. Lindsay expects a decision from the Supreme Court of Canada seeking
leave to appeal within a couple of months.

In another development, Ingrid Rimland attended a 15-minute oral hearing
at the Sixth Circuit Court in Cincinnati, where Mr. Zundel's U.S. attorneys
are challenging his kidnapping and deportation and the denial of his habeas
corpus rights last year. The hearing took place on Friday, June 11. The
panel of judges reserved their decision.

Paul Fromm


Here is Ingrid Rimland's report.



Just now I returned from our 15 minute Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals
hearing, and as soon as I am a bit rested, I will have to get my
brain in gear and sort things out as to its meaning and write it up
accordingly.  Let me just say that we did not have a hostile panel,
and some good things were being said (and learned) which will be
useful in the future - as we intend to soldier on.

Before we went, I had summarized for my attorneys what I felt was the
core of our case, and to save myself some time and again document for
our archives the progression of this case, I am going to use that
summary for today's Zgram:


The facts in this case are ridiculously simple and straightforward. 

They hinge on a faulty "visa waiver overstay" claim by US Immigration
(now part of Homeland Security) - and two mysteriously missing
letters from the Zundel Immigration files.


The Zundels are a couple in their mid-sixties,  caught up in what
current Patriot Act jargon calls a "rendition" - a brutal arrest of a
"terrorist suspect" based not on what a person may have done or even
planned, but on a flimsy legal irregularity such as a minor
immigration violation.

Van Dinh, an attorney who helped draft the Patriot Act, explained
such arrests in an interview with Wired News, a publication concerned
with the preservation of Freedom of Speech in America:

"It may well be that a number of citizens were not charged with
terrorism-related crimes, but they NEED NOT BE. Where the department
has suspected people of terrorism it will prosecute those persons for
OTHER violations of law, rather than wait for a terrorist conspiracy
to fully develop and risk the potential that that conspiracy will be
missed."  (Emphasis added)

For irresponsible people in power with little oversight, that is wide
enough net to catch one's "enemies" one needs, to score a political
point, to advance a political career, perhaps to get a hefty grant -
or to settle a private political agenda!

For a family caught in such a phony, politically motivated arrest, it
is a nightmare crying out for judicial redress.

In an interview write-up with Attorney Van Dinh, Wired News cites
5,000 such arrests that have happened since 9/11- the Department of
Justice admits to 500.  Ernst Zundel has been one!


Ernst and Ingrid Zundel are known as an articulate, historically
well-versed, politically incorrect couple.  Both are first-generation
immigrants of German ancestry. As children, both experienced World
War II in all of its harshest brutalities.   Both experienced  years
of hunger and cold during and after World War II, appalling want of
the barest necessities, very little formal education.  Both came to
Canada when they were very young - Ernst as a 19-year-old, Ingrid in
her early twenties. They did not know each other then, although their
World War II experiences were very similar, as were their ethnic and
religious backgrounds.

Both have been lifelong pacifists.

In the 1960s, Ingrid moved to Kansas and then to California.  Only in
her mid-thirties did she have a chance to acquire formal schooling,
culminating in doctorate in education.  Over time, she became an
award-winning ethnic novelist and celebrated keynote speaker,
addressing huge audiences at national conventions about her
experiences as a young child in war-torn Germany - telling a story of
hardship and suffering from the German point of view.

Ernst lived in Canada for more than 40 years. He, too, became a
renown, award-winning artist who owned a lucrative graphic arts
studio.  World War II history was his passionate hobby - which over
the years morphed into an all-consuming need to "set the record
straight" about politically suppressed history, as seen from his
parents' generation point of view.  This made him, over time, quite
controversial  and somewhat of a household name in Canada because he
challenged certain widely held beliefs about what really happened
during World War II in Germany in concentration camps such as
Auschwitz.  His views led to several high profile political trials.

Despite their unorthodox views, both Ernst and Ingrid were considered
model first-generation immigrants.  On the American Continent where
they lived all of their adult lives,  neither one has a criminal

Ernst and Ingrid met in September 1994 at a historical Revisionist
conference.  They married on January 19, 2000 as both were
approaching retirement age. They looked for a place to settle down
after a lifetime of struggle - and found it, so they thought, in the
tranquility of rural Tennessee.

Ingrid was a U.S. citizen, Ernst still a German national, although he
lived in Canada for more than 40 years.

German nationals from Europe usually enter the United States under
what is known as a "visa waiver" tourist permit, valid for only three
months - and quite restricted as to legal recourse if challenged.  A
tourist facing deportation,  for whatever  reason,  is generally not
entitled to appeal. 

Canadian nationals and permanent residents, on the other hand,
commonly enter the U.Ss via what is known as a B-1/B-2 permit,  valid
for 180 days.  Overstays are not normally a concern and hardly ever
enforced, since many retired people living in Canada spend their
winters in Florida and return at their leisure in the spring. 

Furthermore, in general, how Canadian nationals or permanent
residents cross the border to the United States from Southern Ontario
depends on where they cross.

If they come to the US by plane, a B-1/B-2 stamp in their passports
is required.  If, on the other hand, they cross in Niagara Falls in a
car with Canadian or US licence plates, they are habitually waved
through without a visa or a passport check because there is a steady
stream of cars at these bridge crossings - visitors from the US to
Canada as tourists, Canadians who hop across the border to Buffalo to
shop for items that are cheaper on the U.S. side, such as, for
instance, gasoline and cigarettes. Crossings via car, without visa
checks of any kind between two friendly countries, are the rule
rather than the exception.  Whether or not a passport is checked or
stamped when crossing by car is at the discretion of the border
guards and usually depends on how heavy the traffic flow is on any
particular day.

As a German national with a high activist profile but politically
incorrect view, and as a man who was meticulously careful not to
offend in any way, Ernst always made sure he had a 3-month "visa
waiver" permit in his passport as a precaution, whether he needed it
or not.  Most of the time he did not need it, since he habitually
traveled by car.

Ernst crossed at Niagara Falls on March 12, 2000 for a few hours only
- merely to renew this "visa waiver" permit.  He did not stay;  he
immediately returned to Toronto.

The last time he came to the United States - this time to stay - was
on May 21, 2000 by car.

May 21, 2000 was entered on his Immigration application as the last
date when Ernst left Canada to take up residence with Ingrid.

He had his "visa waiver" permit lying on his seat, but it was never
checked by busy border guards who simply waved him through.  He
therefore crossed like a regular B-1/B-2 Canadian resident - NOT as a
"visa waiver" visitor as Immigration claims.   He has hotel and gas
station receipts to prove it.

With the help of a well-known immigration attorney, Ernst's
application for "Adjustment of Status based on marriage" papers were
formally filed and accepted as legitimate and proper by Memphis
Immigration on October 4, 2000.  On that date, the couple was advised
by Immigration in a written communiqué that there would be a waiting
period of 36 months - and that no status report would be given in the

Shortly thereafter, as a result of his filing, Ernst received an
American social security number, a work permit, and a document called
"advanced parole" which permitted him to re-enter the United States,
should he decide to travel.  Immigration also sent him a date to be
fingerprinted by the FBI and another date for a health check by an
Immigration-approved doctor.  He meticulously kept both

The couple was told by their attorney that one last step was needed -
a personal interview by an immigration official to ascertain that
theirs was a legitimate marriage.  The date for this interview was
set for June 12, 2001 but had to be canceled and rescheduled due to a
court calendar conflict by the attorney.

The attorney requested a new date in a letter written  on his
stationary on May 23, 2001.  The Zundels have the original,
time-stamped envelope in which a copy of this request was sent to
them to notify them of the re-scheduling request.

Immigration, however, did not acknowledge this letter - and did not
reschedule the appointment.

After waiting patiently, the Zundel's attorney wrote a second letter
on June 5, 2002, reminding immigration to reschedule the appointment,
this time sending a registered letter, "return receipt requested."

The Zundels have the original return receipt, documenting that this
letter was sent and received.

Again, there was no reply, no new date set by Immigration.  However,
since the Zundels had been told that there would be no status report
and that the process would take as long as three years, they had no
reason to worry.  They waited for that interview and went about their
business establishing their domicile.

On February 5, 2003, Ernst Zundel was brutally arrested at his
residence on grounds of "having missed a hearing" and "having
overstayed his visa."  In handcuffs and leg irons, he was shoved into
a van and taken away by armed guards.

It was later claimed that this arrest was based on the fact that he
had overstayed in the U.S. as a "visa waiver" tourist - which he had
not!  Had there been a legitimate concern about a "visa waiver"
problem at the time Ernst's papers were filed for "Adjustment of
Status based on marriage", Immigration should not have, and would not
have, accepted the Zundels'  application and proceeded with it as
they did!

Subsequent inquiries and FOIA documents reveal that both of these
letters of request for rescheduling are missing in the Immigration
files.  Immigration officials now claim that they never received a
rescheduling request, despite the fact that at least one letter was
sent registered - and immigration signed for it.

Were those two crucial letters lost? Misfiled?  Maliciously destroyed?

The Zundels don't know, but they are surely entitled to find out.
Since then they have found out through FOIA that other documents are

Suspicious FOIA faxes and emails further indicate that there was
shady and improper communication between Canadian and US immigration
and secret service officials coordinating and masterminding the
Zundel arrest exactly prior to and on the date of the first scheduled

To this day, despite repeated requests and inordinate efforts, no
immigration official has agreed to meet with Ingrid Zundel, review
procedures and regulations - and get to the bottom of this mess!

The Zundels ask:

* What REALLY happened in this highly irregular arrest?  Who
was behind it?  Who had an interest in interfering and sabotaging
this couple's Adjustment of Status proceedings?

* Why were Ingrid Zundel's repeated phone calls, letters, and
faxes to immigration and other authorities ignored after Ernst was
deported to Canada?

* Why was a formal application for Reconsideration of the
Application for Adjustment of Status never  acknowledged,  much less
responded to by Immigration?

* Why were the Zundels not notified that their application was
considered to have been "abandoned"?  Why was there no letter of
"Intent to Deny", as regulations require, to notify them?

* Why was there no hearing by an immigration judge prior to deportation?

* Why was habeas corpus denied in a one-sentence ruling by the
Knoxville District Court without either the Zundels or their attorney
being present?

* Why is there now a ban for 20 years in effect, preventing
Ernst Zundel from returning to his home and to his U.S. wife and
family?  Is that a proper "punishment" for "having missed an

* Why was Ernst Zundel delivered in chains to the Canadian
authorities - when, as a German national, he should have been
deported to Germany?

* Why is he being held in Canada in solitary confinement on a
"security certificate" - with no criminal record, and without any
charges - for more than 16 months?

The Zundels claim, with much justification, that this arrest was a
political vendetta operation - an extradition in the guise of
deportation due to Ernst Zundel's unpopular political stance.  It is
no secret that he has well-connected, powerful enemies in Canada.
However,  he was legally in the United States, legally married to a
U.S. citizen, legally in Adjustment of Status procedures - which,
according to a memorandum by Attorney General Ashcroft issued in
March of 2000, entitled him to wait for as long as it took for
Immigration to process his papers!

Had habeas corpus been granted in the Knoxville District Court, this
tragic deportation - with U.S. law officials acting as de facto hit
squads to please a nefarious Canadian lobby - could have been

The Zundels are asking for a legal remedy to end this political charade.



----- Original Message -----
From: "C-FAR" <1315038@primus.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 3:56 PM


Dear Free Speech Supporter"

Well, Communist Party of Canada member and sometime Communist candidate
David Lethbridge doesn't think too much of the New Orleans Protocol, agreed
to by a number of populist leaders; including David Duke, Don Black, Kevin
Alfred Strom, Sam Dickson, John Tyndall, Willis Carto, and Paul Fromm in
New Orleans on May 29. Luckily, its success as a responsible guideline for
behaviour is winning widespread endorsement. Already, from Canada, the
Canadian Heritage Alliance and the Northern Alliance have come on board.
There have been a few snipers and critics, but, then, these tend to be
those who all too often seem to use their long hours on the Internet to
defame others in the populist/immigration reform/revisionist/free speech

Lethbridge was found guilty of defamation in the Pressler case some years
back. In his rants, he has a shaky grasp on the truth. Back in 1996, he
sent a videotape to the Peel Board of a eulogy I gave for the late Prof.
Revilo P. Oliver in November, 1994 in Urbana, Illinois. He asserted falsely
that the meeting had been sponsored by the National Alliance. After I was
fired for my outside political activities, he claimed credit, although the
League for Human Rights of B'nai Brith also put in for the censorship
honour Lethbridge's rant is carried on the "Bethune Institute" webpage.
Yes, that's Bethune, the alcoholic Canadian doctor who fought first for
Stalin in Spain and then for Mao in China. The Bethune Institute is
Lethbridge's website.

One of several places in his rant where Lethbridge veers far away from
reality is his crediting  Communist Party activists with bringing an end to
Western Canada for Us about a month ago. He writes: "As Alberta comrade,
Jason Devine, put it, WCFU's demise was the result of "unity in action;
many people across Canada, with differing views but united in their hatred
of fascism, all took aim at WCFU and it has paid off."
In fact, it was the goonish activities of the Edmonton Police's "hate
squad" that drove WCFU leader Glenn Bahr out of the province. I'm pleased
to announce that the remaining associates of WCFU have reconsituted
themsleves and will be holding a protest on behalf of Ernst Zundel outside
Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan's constituency office this Saturday at
1;00 p.m.


Paul Fromm


Paul Fromm: No Enemies On The Right
by David Lethbridge

In these times, when antifascist resistance is, justifiably, focused on the
increasingly fascistic character of US imperialism, it is easy to forget
that neo-fascist organizations and demagogues are continuing to operate and
to step up their activities.

David Duke, former American Nazi Party activist, former Ku Klux Klan Grand
Wizard, and current leader of the European-American Unity and Rights
Organization (EURO), held a major international Leadership Conference, in
New Orleans, over the Memorial Day weekend. The occasion was in celebration
of Duke's recent release from prison on tax and mail fraud charges.

Speakers at the conference included representatives of every significant
tendency within the extreme right: neo-Nazis such as Erich Gliebe and Kevin
Strom of the National Alliance, and Don Black of Stormfront;
Holocaust-deniers such as Willis Carto and Germar Rudolf; and white
supremacists such as Ed Fields, Sam Dixon, and Paul Fromm.

Duke, who maintained that he had known Fromm "a long time," introduced him
as "one of the best spokesmen for our cause in the world ... and a great
leader for our people."

Fromm began his speech by praising the slave-holding Confederacy and
referring to the US Civil War as a "Yankee war of aggression." "After the
defeat of the Confederate cause," he said, "we (Canada) provided a shelter
and a refuge to the President of the Confederacy, Jefferson Davis. We
provided shelter to Confederate irregulars who had liberated some money
from a bank in New York state."

Fromm went on to claim that 1965 was a "cursed year" because, as a result
of "Zionist pressure," Canada opened its doors to "Third World" immigration
and instituted its "evil twin" - multiculturalism. According to Fromm,
Sikhs are "a kind of nasty lot." He referred to an Islamic woman who wore
the traditional chador as a "hag in a bag," and wished "we could ship the
whole lot over to Afghanistan."

Fromm's contempt for multiculturalism extended to the 21 March annual
observance of the International Day for the Elimination of Racial
Discrimination, which he repeatedly referred to as the "International Day
for the Elimination of White People."

Fromm's antisemitism was expressed in his reference to the "so-called
Holocaust," his suggestion that the photographs of 1930s Nazi book burnings
might be "doctored," his ludicrous implication that the Soviet revolution
was instigated by Jews, and his fraudulent allegation that US imperialist
aggression in Afghanistan and Iraq was controlled by Zionists, leading to
his wildly applauded call, "no more foreign wars for Israel!"

Finally, Fromm urged his American audience to adopt the policy and rallying
cry he is "implementing in Canada - No Enemy on the Right."

Certainly Fromm himself appears to have no enemies on the right, only
friends. Wherever neo-fascists meet, he is there. A mere glance at his
proudly displayed Internet photo gallery shows Fromm's participation at
numerous events with France's neo-fascist leader Le Pen, Russian neo-Nazi
Zhirinovsky, German neo-Nazi Gunther Deckert, British Holocaust-denier
David Irving, the pro-Confederate Council of Conservative Citizens, the
Italian neo-fascist group Nuovo Nazionale Ordine, and many more.

But despite the triumphal tone of the Duke conference, not every activity
that Fromm engages in is crowned with success. Quite the contrary. The very
recent attempt by the Alberta-based Western Canada For Us (WCFU) to build a
white racist organization was smashed largely due to the combined efforts
of members of the Communist Party, Anti-Racist Action, and other

WCFU had originally advertised its presence on the neo-Nazi web pages of
Stormfront where organizers were promoting the purchase of land to build a
whites-only township to be called "Whiteville." WCFU planned a meeting near
Red Deer, Alberta, but under pressure from Communists and other activists
shifted the location to Edmonton. Speakers at the meeting included leaders
from BC White Pride, Ontario-based Canadian Heritage Alliance, and, of
course, no-enemy-of-white-supremacists, Paul Fromm.

Despite the high profile speakers at WCFU's founding meeting, the
organization was short-lived. Glen Bahr, WCFU's leader, crumbled after a
disastrous appearance on a radio talk show and the subsequent abdication of
the Manitoba leader, Jamie Murphy.

As Alberta comrade, Jason Devine, put it, WCFU's demise was the result of
"unity in action; many people across Canada, with differing views but
united in their hatred of fascism, all took aim at WCFU and it has paid off."

Poor Paul Fromm. One less white supremacist organization to not be an enemy

June 2004


Top of Page | Home Page


©-free 2004 Adelaide Institute