May 04, 2017

Ernst Zundel

Ernst Zundel

Source: Wikimedia Commons

There’s that big-brained Deutsche brilliance Hitler was always going on about.

Zundel was sentenced to five years”€™ imprisonment for the stuff he legally posted while legally residing in the U.S. The sentence was cheered by (here we go again) Jewish organizations, and, as before, free-speech advocates the world over remained silent.

Zundel was released in 2010, a tired, sickly, broken man. Yay, we got “€™im!

So why was Zundel in The Washington Post last week? Well, leave it to the exceptionally fair-minded UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh (who I”€™ve previously interviewed for this column on an unrelated matter) to dare to examine the legality of Zundel’s latest nad-kick. Zundel, now 78, had sought to return to the U.S. to join his 80-year-old wife (she can”€™t join him in Germany, because her ideas traveled to Germany and committed crimes too). Volokh’s column deserves to be read in full. The short version is, Homeland Security denied the request, stating:

A foreign conviction can be the basis for a finding of inadmissibility only where the conviction is “€œfor conduct which is deemed criminal by United States standards.”€

Volokh points out what should be obvious (but, of course, isn”€™t) to any rational American:

But as best I can tell from press accounts, Zundel’s speech that formed the basis of his German conviction would not have been “€œdeemed criminal by United States standards.”€ Denying the Holocaust and expressing anti-Semitic sentiments is just not a crime under American law. Indeed, it can”€™t be made a crime, given the First Amendment.

Volokh concludes that the ruling “€œappears to have been a violation of American immigration law.”€

Now, here’s where I”€™m gonna lose a few readers. One might be tempted to think that the repeated involvement of Jewish organizations, in multiple countries, in the persecution of Ernst Zundel indicates the presence of some vast international conspiracy…the “€œJewish octopus”€ of anti-Semitic lore. But no, I”€™m actually suggesting the opposite. Jewish advocates were able to get their way regarding Zundel because no one on earth gives a shit about him. When Jews whined, “€œGive us Zundel,”€ it was a very cheap and painless bone to throw them to shut them up. Bully Jews picked on a nobody, and politicians, who never give a damn about nobodies anyway, happily threw him under the bus to stop the kvetching.

But, my Jewish brider, look what the war on Zundel wrought. Holocaust denial was put on the map, and Zundel became an international figure of note. Was it worth it, going after this rotund little bald man? Is it still worth it? Yes, it’s a victory in that Zundel is finished. He”€™ll probably die soon, and Jews can dance on his grave. Satisfied? But in a broader sense, it was a terrible defeat, in terms of what Zundel’s bullies were hoping to accomplish versus what they actually did. In attempting to silence Holocaust denial, Jewish groups gave it a megaphone. Worse still, in trying to squash a man who spreads Jewish conspiracy theories, Jews acted just like the vengeful, world-controlling puppeteers Zundel portrays them as. In trying to suppress Zundel’s crude stereotypes, Jews ended up personifying them.

This is Jewry’s “€œAppointment in Samarra,”€ the old fable in which a man, seeking to flee the Reaper, ends up riding straight toward him. The moral of the tale is that sometimes, in our blind desire to avoid an unpleasant fate, we end up bringing it about ourselves.

Such is the sad, bitter legacy of Ernst Zundel.


Sign Up to Receive Our Latest Updates!