It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: Ernst Zundel deported from Canada

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 07:59 PM
link   
While I have no love for people that try and deny the Holocaust especially to push an agenda, it is disturbing to see someone held as a national security threat because he had an unpopular opinion.




posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 09:28 PM
link   
You know what? You guys, for the most part, sicken me.

Yeah, there's something called "Free Speech", and you know what's always existed to counter that? "Hate Crimes".

I quote from the Canadian Constitution/Bill Of Rights:



1. It is hereby recognized and declared that in Canada there have existed and shall continue to exist without discrimination by reason of race, national origin, colour, religion or sex, the following human rights and fundamental freedoms, namely,

(a) the right of the individual to life, liberty, security of the person and enjoyment of property, and the right not to be deprived thereof except by due process of law;

(b) the right of the individual to equality before the law and the protection of the law;

(c) freedom of religion;

(d) freedom of speech;

(e) freedom of assembly and association; and

(f) freedom of the press.



and



5. (1) Nothing in Part I shall be construed to abrogate or abridge any human right or fundamental freedom not enumerated therein that may have existed in Canada at the commencement of this Act.



Hate crimes, namely antisemitic actions such as the denial of the Holocaust, deprive all those people of the Jewish faith of equality.

Because of section 5., paragraph 1, regardless of the law of freedom of speech, you aren't allowed to deprive others of their freedoms.

Ernst knew the rules - you aren't allowed to hate and prosecute based upon religion.

Well, he did that.

The consequence was a trial for breaking the law, and subsequently, jail-time for breaking the law, until he was deported back to Germany as a German Citizen, where he is being tried for their specific crime of Holocaust Denial.

This isn't indefinite detainment of countless unknown P.O.W's in a special prison out in the middle of the ocean.

This is the lawful detainment of a single Holocaust denier for infringing upon the rights and freedoms of others, and then the transportation of the individual to his home country, where he is wanted for crimes, as has always been Canada's philosophy, unless he will be sent back to face the penalty of death, in which case we will negotiate between the criminal and the country to try to talk them into a suitably long sentence as opposed to death.

Honestly, you guys must be desperate to gain some moral ground, if you're getting all "OMG CANADA ISNT GOOD" about the fact that we lawfully deported a Holocaust denier.

I don't remember the last time I said that America was evil, or that all Americans were evil, or that they do bad things. I've said that I don't personally like how their government goes about things, and that they have been tricked in a lot of ways into doing things - but I'd never go off on some rant about how evil America is specifically the second it's doable.

Really, you guys are proving the points of whatever attackers you seem to have perceived. The second you had some tiny bit of dirt that you felt you could throw at us, boom. How morally superior you suddenly are.

[edit on 1-3-2005 by Viendin]



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 09:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
And you people howl about us imprisoning al-Qaeda, eh.


Sorry OTS, we don't whine about you locking up AQ members. We don't like you imprisoning suspects without trial. We don't like you torturing them to death, either. We don't like the conditions. While I am happy that Zundel is gone, you cannot compare conditions in a Camp X-Ray cell and a Canadian prison. In addition, I believe Zundel had access to the outside world through mail, and consulted his lawyers. There is a big difference between locking up a person who is narrowly skirting -or even violating- the laws of the land, and flat-out torturing PoWs.

DE



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 09:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Billybob,
There is a distinct difference between supporting Mr. Zundel's, or any other person's, right to freedom of speech, and supporting the content of his, or another person's, speech.
Question: Do you support his right to free speech or do you support his right to free speech and the contents of his speech?


i support his right to free speech. it is this kind of case that is the precedent-setter. if ernst goes down, we all go down. (what? it's already over? the fat lady sang? damn.)

you say he is a holocaust denier. i say he isn't. he claims ONE million jews were murdered by the nazis. that's NOT denial.

here is the court transcriptwww.whatreallyhappened.com...

here is ernst's website for further insight(for those few brave stragglers who care about principal over content)....

www.zundelsite.org...

please do a search on the man. learn about how much 'hate' he actually pedalled, and how much the media has blown him up into some kind of demon that's he's not(necessarily).



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Viendin
You know what? You guys, for the most part, sicken me.

Yeah, there's something called "Free Speech", and you know what's always existed to counter that? "Hate Crimes".


we sicken you. you hate us. criminal.


Originally posted by Viendin
This is the lawful detainment of a single Holocaust denier for infringing upon the rights and freedoms of others,


he infringed on nothing. who's rights and freedoms did he infringe on?
read the court transcript.

he doesn't deny the holocaust. read his material.



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 10:23 PM
link   

as posted by billybob
you say he is a holocaust denier. i say he isn't. he claims ONE million jews were murdered by the nazis. that's NOT denial.

--snip--

he doesn't deny the holocaust.


No, he doesn't "deny" the Holocaust, he just "denies" the amount murdered and slaughtered.

As such, he is a "denier," and is thus a "Holocaust-denier."
Plain, simple, and straight to the point.

As for links to Mr. Zundel being a "Holocaust-denier," they are profusely abundant. As for a good history of him and those numerous trails:
Ernst Zundel





seekerof

[edit on 1-3-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 11:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof

As for links to Mr. Zundel being a "Holocaust-denier," they are profusely abundant. As for a good history of him and those numerous trails:
Ernst Zundel


seekerof

[edit on 1-3-2005 by Seekerof]


well, germany can have him, tout suite. HAHA! what a rodent, eh? seriously. a despicable creature.
that does not mean everything he ever said or researched is untrue. the man was fanatical, no doubt. evil? hateful? i guess. earlier i asked who would be his champion. i wasn't exactly trying to volunteer, LOL.
it's just that there are some very valid questions to be answered regarding vril saucers, antarctica, zionists, sealing wax and whatnot. cabals, black magic, industrial warmongering, mass sacrifice, luciferianism, power brokering, the black sun, egypt, prophecy, manifest destinies, chosen people, propoganda through the ages, forbidden archeology, insider trading, nepotism, law makers and breakers, pyramid power, and, .....yes, ....dare i say it????! CONSPIRACIES!!!

my question is, who killed yitzhak rabin?



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 11:19 PM
link   

The Ontario Court of Appeals, however, ruled that the judge who rendered the 1988 verdict had acted properly in accepting the basic facts of the Holocaust as not open to debate by reasonable people. Nonetheless, on August 27, 1992, the Supreme Court of Canada struck down as unconstitutional the law banning the spread of false news. This decision apparently put an end to the deportation proceedings launched against Zundel after his 1988 conviction.


this is what i find scary seekerof. should we outlaw 'bat boy' and elvis sightings, too?
the original decision, that is. 'not open to debate by reasonable people? ' very 1984 thought policeish, don't ya think?

by the way. i like the look of the site from your link. LAW ENFORCEMENT. POLICE. very subtle.



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 11:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeusEx

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
And you people howl about us imprisoning al-Qaeda, eh.


Sorry OTS, we don't whine about you locking up AQ members. We don't like you imprisoning suspects without trial.


What do you know of Mohammed Harkat, let alone Zundel. Eight hundred Canadians were detained and held without trial after 9-11.

What you don't like is when America does it. If Canada does it sweep it under the rug. If America does it cry foul on the internet and the Fifth Estate.

That's the difference between America and Canada, when our government does something screwed up half the populace is mad. When the Canadian government does something like this the populace tries to find away to explain it away or make "less" bad than what America has done. Cutting off four fingers isn't as bad as cutting off all of them, but not very much. It's not going to get you anywhere staying just a step "behind" America in your draconian-ness.

But rest on those laurels anyway.


Viendin
Hate crimes, namely antisemitic actions such as the denial of the Holocaust, deprive all those people of the Jewish faith of equality.

Because of section 5., paragraph 1, regardless of the law of freedom of speech, you aren't allowed to deprive others of their freedoms.

Ernst knew the rules - you aren't allowed to hate and prosecute based upon religion.

Well, he did that.


How? How did he deny any Jews of their freedom by being a Nazi? If I said I hated Haitians do I deny them of there freedom? No.

Did Zundel ever call for the murder of Jews? I don't think so. Maybe he hates them. So you can deport a guy for hate in Canada? I'm sure there's a lot of Canadian's that hate some group of people (ya, I mean American's).

You should lock them up for a while, you're taking away my freedom. Hell, quite a few members of ATS won't be heard from for a while.

Ernst Zundel was a nut, but he was no more a danger to national security than chem-trail "believers".



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 11:44 PM
link   
www.rense.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow">yes, it's on rense. i could have picked thousands of links that say the same thing......'GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT'
the new standard of LAW ENFORCEMENT, and POLICE.
this is the danger of the zundel precedent.
thought crime.
think minority report.

all charges because of what he might do, not because of what he's done.

the final word from the judge.....


The constraints of national security have made the Ministers unable to show public evidence to link Mr. Zundel to any of the violent acts that have been committed by extremist, racist groups. The information that has been provided to me, however, has satisfied me that there are reasonable grounds to believe that such a link exists. I am also satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that if Mr. Zundel were freed from detention, he would be able to reestablish links with groups that present a threat to the security of Canada.


i bet the judge believes in the tooth fairy, too, 'cause mommy said so.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 12:09 AM
link   
seekerof says:

"Billybob, There is a distinct difference between supporting Mr. Zundel's, or any other person's, right to freedom of speech, and supporting the content of his, or another person's, speech."

Rubbish. The point is not whether or not we support "contents of the speech". In America you can make political speech, no matter how it might upset some people, because we realize the First Amendment is not designed to protect the Boy Scouts and the Sunday School teachers, because their speech is not threatened..

It is designed to protect the speech of the Nazis and other bozos.

"Question: Do you support his right to free speech or do you support his right to free speech and the contents of his speech?"

\Answer: It doesn't matter. His right to free speech (at least in the United States) is what counts. Whether or not you or I or anyone else agrees with what he says is completely irrelevant.


"He is a Holocaust-denier."

That doesn't matter.

"The man is a full-fledged neo-nazi."

That doesn't matter, either.

What part of "freedom of speech" do you not understand, Seekerof?

[snip]

"Mr. Zundel's message was given with a specific intent, as with virtually all Holocaust-deniers, and that intent was malicious."

You quote Canadian law saying it's all right to take away a person's right to incendiary speech if it's a certain kind of incendiary speech.

I won't argue that. Canadian law is Canadian law, and if the people in Canada are happy with what most Americans would consider abrogation of their freedoms, then it's their call.

My whole point is that anyone -- Canadian or American -- who defends what the Canadian thugs are doing while excoriating our American thugs for doing the same thing is a hypocrite, pure and simple.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 01:18 AM
link   
I think that a big difference is that in Canada our watchwords are not 'Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness', although I must admit that is kind of inspiring. Instead, we have 'Peace, Order and Good Government'. While it might not sound as catchy as your saying, I think it might help explain the Canadian mentality and laws a bit in this situation.

I think that by operating a publishing house, Samisdat Publishers, and distributing such classic gems as 'The Hitler We Loved and Why' and 'Did Six Million Really Die?' in 14 countries, he crossed a line we Canadians don't want crossed within our borders. In the short history of Canada we have allowed the First Nations, the Chinese and the Japanese to be treated absolutely horribly, and we do not want to add another group to the list.

He would have been kicked out eventually, the system just got tired of dealing with him, and so they used the certificate and took the easy way out. Every time he goes to court it costs the taxpayers millions of dollars and it had been dragging on for far too long.

I guess the bottom line is in Canada we don't have the same laws you do. I know it may be hard for Americans to understand because it is of such importance to you, but we just don't have the same strong attachment to freedom of speech if it infringes on the rights of another.

After saying this I would like to add that I don't agree with national security certificates on principle; I object to any accused not having full access to the evidence against him. I think we should strengthen and enforce the Criminal Code of Canada instead. We have other laws that could have been used, this was just the most expedient way to get rid of him.

I think the difference between our certificates and your laws is in the details. Prisoners on national security certificates have access to lawyers and contact with their family, and we know who they are and the general reasons they are under one. I'm not being judgemental here, I'm really not, I just think that these are important distinctions to make. To compare the two is like apples and oranges; you could if you wanted to, but it just doesn't really work very well once you get past the basic shape.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 08:48 AM
link   
Duzey, you keep trying to make a differentiation between Canadian laws and the Canadian idea of government and the US laws and the US ideas of government.

But you're still missing the point. The point is not that you're any worse than we are. We lock up people without charging them sometimes, and lock them up for things that I don't think should be "crimes" at all, like medicating themselves.

You lock people up without charging them sometimes and lock them up for things that I don't think should be "crimes' at all either, like saying unpleasant things.

Your government denies rights, and so does ours. How you handle your government is your business, not mine.

But the point (as i see it) as that I hear so many Canadians on this board excoriate Americans for taking away peoples' freedoms, and yet so many of them are fine with their own government doing exactly the same thing.

It's this hypocrisy by so many Canadians, who often hold themselves up as exemplars of goodness, that upsets me -- as well, probably as the other Americans, who have endured Canadians' comments over these years.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Duzey


I think the difference between our certificates and your laws is in the details. Prisoners on national security certificates have access to lawyers and contact with their family, and we know who they are and the general reasons they are under one.


The general reasons they're under one?
Yah, the VERY general statement that they're a security threat. THEY don't even necessarily know why they're there.

What benefit is there of knowing who they are when they're still being held, indefinitely, and their rights have been stripped?




posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 09:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Viendin
No one cares whether he has hatred.

The point isn't that he's a new nazi - that he's the next big evil.

He's just going into places that no one needs to go.

Why would you need to do it? Why would you need to go 'check out the numbers' to see if exactly 6 million people died?

Is it really a 'better' crime if it's 4 million? 1 million?

I say it isn't. There's no need to apologise to Hitler, or any of the nazis. There is no one on earth being hurt by the possibility that the number of jews who died in the holocaust is exaggerated. I don't believe it is, and I think that you'd have to be filled with anti-semitism just to look into it.

Regardless - he's opening a can of worms with the intent of getting people dirty, because the truth doesn't even matter at this point. It just doesn't.


I wonder if the question of historical accuracy enters your thoughts. Somepeople may examine this issue without the restrictions of emotional attachment in order to provide the rerest of os with a clearer picture of what really happened. I would imagine that the best way of preventing such occurences is to know exactly how and why they happened, yes?
Please not I am not sying this in relation to Ernst whatshisname just making a point.

Another point too Jews got a country out of the holocaust. Why arent they sharing it with Gypsies, gays and retards???



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 09:11 AM
link   
Ignore Duzey! he is an embarrassment to Canadians! Zundel was a nut job but he shouldn't have been deported. If I want to believe that the sky is pink then that should be my right even if we all know the sky is really blue. Canada now represents the danger of what happens when a country becomes too left wing. You can be deported or arrested if you say something that goes against popular opinion. The holier than thou Canadian liberals have gone to far. If I deny the Armenian holocaust of the Turks during WW1, I will be simply ignored cause the Turks were muslim & the victims were Christian. BUT if you hint at anything anti-semetic then look out! Your going to jail! That is not freedom of speech. If someone praises Ghengis Khan, Richard the lion heart, Salladin or Attila the Hun for their military accomplishments nothing is said even though they slaughtered entire cities, raped, pillaged, enslaved, women & children BUT if you mention Hitlers military success suddenly your guilty of hate crimes.
CANADA IS BECOMING A HYPOCRITE AND A JOKE!!



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 09:56 AM
link   
Off_The_Street mentions:


\Answer: It doesn't matter. His right to free speech (at least in the United States) is what counts. Whether or not you or I or anyone else agrees with what he says is completely irrelevant.

--snip--

What part of "freedom of speech" do you not understand, Seekerof?



Off_The_Street, in all that picking and choosing of what I initially said, did you happen to miss this?

as posted by seekerof
I agree with the rights of freedom of speech, but even with those rights, comes responsibility and restrictions. As such, Mr. Zundel is entitled to his right to speech, despite a large portion of us not liking it one bit. Hell, there have been "deniers" that have won Pultzer Prize's. For that matter, being a Holocaust-denier is not a criminal offense...


Yeah....I thought so.





seekerof

[edit on 2-3-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by BattleofBatoche
Canada now represents the danger of what happens when a country becomes too left wing. You can be deported or arrested if you say something that goes against popular opinion.


it is jewish legal lobbies that are causing the deportation and arrest. it has nothing to do with the left or right. it has to do with propoganda and the unquestionable version of history we MUST BELIEVE.

the whole jewish thing just makes me angry. being jewish is like some badge of diplomatic immunity from criticism. they can shoot up american ships at sea, they can bulldoze american peace protesters into the soil and then cause a media gag on the story, they can steal land and then terrorise the inhabitants for half a century, they can have as many nukes as they want, 'occupy' as much land as they see fit, and have hate literature as a holy book(ref. 'goyim'), and the list goes on....

that is hypocracy in my eyes. why are the jews so special? propoganda. jewish propoganda is no better or worse than nazi propoganda. 'through deceit, thou shalt make war'. nice motto.

will i be deported or imprisoned now? i'm sure i'm setting off some alarms deep in the bowels of the ministry of truth.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 10:17 AM
link   
this guy gets in trouble when the jews controlled the slave trade for 2000 years. it is insane to think that you can get arrested in germany for denying the holocaust. that sounds like a nazi law. i now hear you will be arrested in the united states for denying slavery.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 10:28 AM
link   
I think everybody is forgeting one little thing.

Ernst Zundel was NOT a Canadian citizen, yet when he was deported from the US he was sent to Canada. Why did the Americans not deport him back to Germany, where all of your arguments on his behalf would have made much bigger headlines.`

Why is no-one debating this?




top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join