From freedom@pathcom.com Wed Jun  5 13:10:44 PDT 1996
Article: 31032 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.portal.ca!van-bc!van.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!news.synapse.net!n4ott.istar!news.pathcom.com!usenet
From: Marc Lemire 
Newsgroups: alt.fan.ernst-zundel,can.politics,alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: Where's my CD, Mr. Lemire?
Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 13:38:33 -0400
Organization: Digital Freedom BBS
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <31B08019.4036@pathcom.com>
References: <4ooiq1$e3j@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ts2l3.pathcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01Gold (Win95; I)
To: Rich Graves 
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.fan.ernst-zundel:1338 can.politics:49476 alt.revisionism:41158 alt.politics.white-power:31032

In article <4ooiq1$e3j@Networking.Stanford.EDU>, rich@c2.org says...
>
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>Two weeks ago, I ordered a "Digital Freedom" CD-ROM from "The Heritage
>Front." 

Mr. Graves, as you well know, the DIGITAL FREEDOM CD-ROM is a fund 
raiser for DIGITAL FREEDOM BBS.

The CD-ROM has nothing to do with the Heritage Front at all.


I also question your motives about posting this article to UseNet.

This conversation would be much better handled through E-Mail.



>It has not arrived. Mr. Lemire, is it going to?

I received your letter on May 28, 1996 and sent out the CD-ROM May 30, 1996.


>I really want to
>see what you've put together. I'm sure the postage was correct. It was
>mailed from within Canada. The payment was correct. If you did not receive
>my order, please let me know, and I will resend it. If you do not wish me
>to have your CD, please explain, and I will order one for an alternate
>name and address.

Your cd is on the way....


... have a little patience man!




Marc


From freedom@pathcom.com Thu Jun  6 07:59:14 PDT 1996
Article: 21625 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!icarus.lon.hookup.net!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!bofh.dot!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!ott.istar!istar.net!n4ott.istar!news.pathcom.com!usenet
From: Marc Lemire 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,can.politics,alt.fan.ernst-zundel
Subject: Re: Zundel & the SIRC hearings
Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 14:14:36 -0400
Organization: Digital Freedom BBS
Lines: 227
Message-ID: <31B0888C.1586@pathcom.com>
References: <4od0ng$208@nizkor.almanac.bc.ca> <4o04nj$5fd@news1.panix.com> <4o4ogu$inv@nizkor.al  <4og08q$sf@nizkor.almanac.bc.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ts2l3.pathcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01Gold (Win95; I)
To: Ken McVay OBC 
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:21625 can.politics:49591 alt.fan.ernst-zundel:1345

Ken McVay OBC wrote:
> 
> SIRC: (Canada) Security Intelligence Review Committee
> 
> In article ,
> aq220@freenet.toronto.on.ca (Marc Lemire) wrote:
> 
> >In a previous article, kmcvay@nizkor.almanac.bc.ca (Ken McVay OBC) says:
> 
> >>The government of Canada has designated Ernst Zundel as a
> >>threat to the security of the country. As the SIRC hearings
> >>have only just begun, neither I, nor anyone else (outside
> >>CSIS) can explain why.
> 
> >And unless you are going to be let behind the close door meeting you will
> >never know.
> 
> Wrong. I fully expect SIRC to release a report, as they did
> for previous investigations. I also expect some of the
> hearings to be held in public, although I may be wrong about
> that. When that report is released, I will archive it here.

If you are refering to the Heritage Front Affair... it is a complete sham.

I have talked to numerous people who names were mentioned in the SIRC report
and everyone of them have been either misqouted or out-right lied about.

You should certainly not hold it up like some kind of sacred document or quote from 
it called me part of the "donut shop gang"

I know at least 10 people (including me) who have personally filled out Affidavits reguarding this
BS report.  


And as to your claim about holding hearing is public.  I doubt it.  It is of "national security"

But we will both have to wait and see.


> >As a matter of fact, even Ernst Zundel does not know who will be
> >testifying against him in the tribunal.
> 
> Is it your claim that Mr. Zundel will not know any of the
> witnesses' names? 

He only knows a few of the "Public witnesses" like Bernie Farber and a few others.

The "meat" of the governments case is brought by CSIS agents, who are protected
by the government.  SO Ernst Zundel or his lawyer Douglas Christie, will not know who is
testifying against him, what their claims are, or what evidence they are submitting.

His lawyer is also not allowed to cross-examine the CSIS witnesses.


Doesn't sound like a very fair trial does it!


>Is it your claim that the SIRC hearings constitute a criminal court meeting? 

The SIRC hearing are not a court of law.  The SIRC tibunal are free to set limitations as it see's fit.


>That, in fact, SIRC is acting as a court?

No a tribunal would be a better anology.

But none the less Mr. Zundel's free life is still in their hands.

If they come back and do not change what CSIS has claimed, Zundel will be deported back to Germanym since that 
is his country of origin.  Once he reaches Germany, he will be thrown in Jail for "Denying the Holocaust".
Even though those "criminal" offences where committed on Canadian soil, and within Canadian laws.

 
> >And for the "security of Canada" Ernst Zundel will not be allowed to find
> >out who is testifying against and his lawyer is not allowed to cross
> >examine the witnesses.
> 
> Is it your claim that this will be true across the entire set
> of hearings, 

As I have already stated, His lawyer can cross-examine public witnesses like Bernie Farber, but not secret 
witness's that CSIS will call.

>and that these hearings have the force of criminal or civil law? 

No they will not.  They are a tribunal, as I have stated above.

>Are you claiming that SIRC is a court, not an oversight committee? 

Again with the courts.... read my answers above.


>Did you take civics in high school, Mr. Lemire?

Have to throw in petty sarcasm...

I notice people only do that when they either 1. have a weak arguement, 2. Are very childish



> >Pretty scary thought eh McVay.
> 
> If your contention is correct, yes, it is. I believe your
> contention (Zundel's, no doubt, since you've never shown much
> ability to have any thoughts of your own) is incorrect,
> however.

First off, this crap about me not having a thought of my own reguires no response from me.


Secondly, if you had evidence in the contrary to what I was saying you should bring it up.  Asking me a 
hundred times if I think the SIRC hearing are a court, is just plain stupid, get to the meat of the discussion 
and bring up other facts if you have them.


> >In 1996 in Canada someone's life hang on the whims of person unknown to
> >him, who he is not allowed to cross examine and correct what they are saying.
> 
> That has not been established. Nor has it been established
> that the SIRC hearings have the force of civil or criminal
> courts.

It does not matter what kind of court it is McVay, and you know it.  

The basic's of this is that if SIRC who is supposed to be the watchdog group over CSIS has to power to agree 
with the CSIS assesment of Zundel.  If they do agree with CSIS, Zundel will be deported, if they do not agree, 
he will remain here to fight the Sibina Citron civil suit.

Also keep in mind that SIRC has proven to be in "bed" with CSIS over the whole Heritage Front affair.

And as to your point reguarding Zundel knowing the secret witnesses, of course it has been established.  They 
have already told Zundel that he is not allowed to know the "secret" witnesses against him nor will he be 
allowed to cross-examine them.

What the hell do you think Zundel took SIRC to "real" courts for.  He was trying to say that it is 
unconstitutional to hold such a tribunal.

 
> >Does not sound like the Anglo-Saxon traditions this countries courts were
> >founded on.
> 
> That's what the Immigration appeal process is for, Mr. Lemire.

What an answer.  

I say that it is against Anglo-Saxon tradition to hold hearing where you can not face and cross examine your 
accusers, and you say... Thats what appeal is for.

Man are you ever out out to lunch.

And that reminds me... if you are considers a threat to Canadian security, do you think that once SIRC find 
for CSIS that he is going to get a chance to "Appeal" to anyone???


> SIRC hearings are not court hearings, even if SIRC can require
> testimony under oath. It's an interesting ploy by Mr. Zundel,
> fully in keeping with his beloved "Woe is me!" position, but
> it won't wash. He isn't in court - yet.

You are beating a skin-less drum with this court crap.

They have the power as I have shown above.  


BTW, Where has Zundel claimed these hearing are "official courts" as you claim..

Back up you claims  


> >>Ernst Zundel, it would seem, is not fit to be a citizen of
> >>this country - that is the CSIS position, as I understand it.
> >>Unless SIRC reverses that position, Mr. Zundel deserves
> >>deportation on that merit alone.
> 
> >Well what would you do if *unknown* people said you were a threat to
> >Canada. For reasons not made clear to you, they want to deport you back to
> >the United States.
> 
> I have not yet seen any evidence that your contention is
> correct. I've seen Ms. Rimland prattle about it, but that
> doesn't make it true.

No it doesn't, but she has access to these certain documents that SIRC has released.  You don't.  

I am sure her analisis of the facts are genuine.


> Your analogy is not valid - I am a Canadian citizen, Mr.
> Zundel is not. However, if the government wanted to strip me
> of my citizenship, they would have to do it before a federal
> court, and I don't see that happening here until _after_ SIRC
> completes its hearings, and then only if SIRC backs CSIS.

If SIRC back CSIS, a federal court would have no choice but to deport him.  

 
> >Do you think it would be fair that you are not allowed to face your
> >accuser and make your case in a court of law?
> 
> Mr. Zundel will be able to do that - SIRC hearings are not
> court proceedings, Mr. Lemire. The purpose of the hearings is
> to determine whether or not CSIS had a basis for their
> finding. Mr. Zundel has not been charged with a crime, and
> will not be before a court.

We will have to wait and see.

I hope for Canada, you are right.

 
> If SIRC finds that CSIS was correct, then Mr. Zundel will have
> full access to the immigration appeal process, which I am
> quite certain he will milk for years.

I doubt that.  If he is classed as a "security threat" to Canada, I doubt he will be "milking" anything for 
year to come.


 
> Back to the donut shop. Mr. Lemire.

Why are you so childish?




Marc

Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor