RE: Canada Imprisons People For Human Rights Activity

[Rich Graves <rich@c2.org>]

On Wed, 21 Aug 1996 jbugden@smtplink.alis.ca wrote:

> Nota: Quebec recently held a referendum on seperation from Canada. 
> Just talk about secession of a state in the U.S., and you'll quickly see
> which country makes political ideas illegal.

You mean stuff like this? :-)

 http://www.softdisk.com/comp/dan/politics/parties.html#Seccession

The one about the Provisional Government of the Republic of Texas is a hoot. 
The reason you don't hear people wanting to secede from the US is, well,
they don't want to, not because we can't take it. That little incident in
the 1860's was really an international conflict, not a secession.

Some other entertaining sites that would probably be frowned upon in
lily-livered Canada include: 

 http://www.nationalist.org/platform.html#Social
 http://www.natvan.com/WHAT/na2.html#aryan

Back to Zundel, the full text of the Supreme Court decision is at
http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/z/zundel-ernst/supreme-court/ The
reasoning is rather different than what you said, but maybe you were
thinking of the earlier postal decision, which I haven't read. The latest
attempt at a criminal charge never even got to trial. 

I also just received a copy of Judge Heald's ruling on the citizenship
matter. Unfortunately, it's a second-generation Xerox that my OCR software
just looks at and laughs. I'll key it in manually if I ever find the time. 
Essentially, it says the government either has to give him citizenship or
change the law, because the only body that is legally empowered to advise
the Crown whether he's a threat to Canadian society or "of bad charater" has
already concluded that he is, so it can't be objective. Very strange
reasoning, but I agree with the outcome. 

-rich