RadicalPress.com

The Missing Word by John Kaminski

May 20, 2013 by admin Leave a Comment

The Missing Word

FAILURE TO USE IT DESTROYED THE WORLD

By John Kaminski
pseudoskylax@gmail.com
https://therebel.org/kaminski

Finely dressed wordsmiths who pretend to be the hippest, most intelligent, most popular, most thorough, most insightful writers on the planet are still sticking to the same program that got us into all this trouble in the first place. And the schizzed out public is marching right along with them, investigating every nook and cranny of sadistic corporate perfidy and still coming up with the wrong answer. Why is that? Why won’t anybody name the perps? It’s so obvious. How can everyone not know? And if they do know, why won’t they say it?

Is it simply the corporate mindlock, as evidenced by Google and YouTube, where anybody who names the Jews and their worldwide crime syndicate is automatically filtered out by the kosher censors who own these so-called services? We’ve certainly seen plenty of evidence of this over the last decade, although it seems to be becoming more subtle, now that Jews themselves have pretty much taken over the opposition, so pseudo celebrities like Carl Bernstein can come right out and say it, and still people still don’t pay attention to it because it causes them too much discomfort to have to reassess everything they’ve learned in their lives. Jews can occasionally be candid about Jews, whereas non Jews are not allowed to, which is, in fact, why the opposition has always been going nowhere fast.

When a Jew comes right out and says the neocon war machine is a strictly Jewish operation, as Watergate reporter Bernstein did, he’s feted as a free speech hero, but when a non Jew says it (as many of us have been doing for years, if not decades), he’s regarded as a conspiratorial nut bag and thrown into jail or financially ruined for life, if not something much worse.

Is it fear? Lots of people who had something important to say have wound up suddenly dead over the past few years. Decades. Centuries (remember Warren Harding?). Yet the Jew-S government can come right out and pretended it’s not financing the overthrow of the nation of Syria (after not financing the overthrows of Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan etc.), and people nod their heads approvingly when mind controller Richard Falk goes to the Mideast to “assess the situation” and “try to restart the peace process”, a contention that should induce widespread projectile vomiting, but instead people who should know Jewish scams better than this continue to take demonic vaudeville acts like this seriously.

It’s almost as if the past is being evaporated right out of brains, sucked right out through our ears by the vacuum cleaner of television news, which never once in a hundred years has ever mentioned that the Jewish takeover of the world started 400 years ago when Cromwell let the Jews back into England to start a worldwide war machine that has never stopped killing since. They’ve also never mentioned that both World Wars and the take down of the World Trade Center were accomplished by the Jews who control the United States.

Is it because of the indoctrination of a phony educational system that has been constructed by kosher perverts who teach middle school students the art of lesbian kissing and trumpet the exploits of the now-dead Seal Team 6 for murdering a man who had been dead for a dozen years? A Hollywood film on this theme actually won the best picture Oscar THIS YEAR. How’s that for mass mind control? It makes you wonder what our children are going to do to us when they find out what we’ve been saying. If the poison vaccines don’t get them, then the TV news surely will, but because of what they have been told to believe, they’ll probably kill us first before they keel over prematurely.

Is it fear of violating hate crime laws, created by cynical proponents of the greatest hate crime of all time, which is the Jewish Talmud, an encyclopedia of perversion that commands the murder and robbery of all the non Jews of the world, lasciviously lusts after sex with children, and teaches its adherents how to lie about everything and then defends the practice with its annual Kol Nidre oath, making it a sacred act to lie about the crimes they commit. Notice how none of those ever charged with hate crimes are the New York newspapers detailing how insane the Muslims are, or slick perverted Jewish artists laughing about how stupid the Christians are for protesting images of their messiah being immersed in a jar of urine.

These are heinous hate crimes, but the Jews are never charged with them because Jews wrote the laws and Jews control the courts.

When Jews do it, it’s legitimate social criticism; when non Jews do it, it’s a hate crime.

As wily Jews infiltrate the principled groups that oppose them, they offer up all sorts of synonyms to camouflage themselves from responsibility for their crimes. The most popular of these nicknames are Communists and Zionists, but no Jew can ever explain why all these same crimes committed prior to the invention of these words are the same as the crimes they are committing now.

So why can’t people who know the score safely use the word Jew in a critical sense in public?

Is is patriotism? Certainly not. Because of the Patriot Act, actual patriotism has now been classified as a subversive activity, subject to indefinite detention, false charges and the confiscation of all your property. The current definition of patriotism, according to every member of the U.S. Congress, is that it is a treasonable offense. Yes, in case you hadn’t noticed, reality HAS been flipped on its head.

Is it poisoned food, fluoride sedation, radiation deterioration and television comedies that tell you they’re funny though they’re not.

Or is it simply a case of wanting to keep your job, because all the jobs in America, at some level, are owned by Jews?

People haven’t realized yet that there aren’t any jobs anymore, or least none in which you can save your soul and maintain your employment.

Doctors going bankrupt, teachers committing suicide, unemployed garbage men from the ghettos getting large sums of money for testifying that, yes! they saw that man plant a bomb along the parade route. And that man, which could be you, never saw it coming, although he did get interviewed by the feds in the recent past, and because he was a loyal citizen, he of course agreed to help them out if called upon.

After all, there IS one occupation that is growing in America, and the U.S. government has lots of openings for it. That job is corpses — utilized in one of an infinite number of public relations stunts, which are the false flag mass murder massacres to further some devious objective to take away what few remaining rights we have left. You can either be a collateral damage deceased bystander, or a suddenly famous psycho assassin without ever having to know how to use a gun or a bomb.

It’s horrifying to see people read the newspapers these days, at least those who can still read. They go right to the help wanted section, then to the commercial flyers, and only as they get ready to throw it in the trash to they happen to notice an actual news story or two. And their reaction is always the same — nothing we can do about that; that’s the way things work; might as well forget about since there’s nothing we can do about it. Shoot, Qaddafi probably deserved to die that way since Obama said he was such a bad guy. This is the way Americans are these days. Totally brain dead and physically dying.

Most people get their news these days from YouTubes created by people with coded names, or directly from TV commercials, tailored to tweak their inner compulsions. You can see in the deliberately grubby men and pustulish painted women with guns, all looking to make a big score with no thought of tomorrow’s testosterone tragedies. What counts is the wallpaper, and the lamps, and the computer games, and maybe the blowup pool in the backyard.

It has been frequently said that the future will consist of only prisoners and guards, but usually they forget to mention witnesses, who are hired for any occasion and then disposed of when the objective is achieved. This is the fate of all U.S. military personnel, who are now prevented from owning guns because they followed those homicidal orders and accepted those poisoned vaccines so they are obviously insane and therefore should not be allowed to own guns.

They are going to be among the occupants of all these new prisons and concentration camps that have been built to house — and process! — those who simply won’t go along with the plan, who won’t get with the program. These facilities have no bathrooms, no kitchens, no beds and no chairs. You, then, tell me what the program is.

All of this has happened because all those finely dressed wordsmiths who are so proud of their media exposure and their highly hyped reputations have consistently and universally failed to use the magic word, the word that most accurately describes the nearly invisible force that is poised, after centuries of assiduous planning, to completely destroy society as we know it and the world as we hoped it would be.

And even at this late date, you still demur; you still refrain from using the word that will be the cause of death of everything you know and love. Perhaps you will wait until you can no longer utter an honest protest, or even think an honest thought. If you’re lucky, that time will come in the camps, if you make it that far.

Do you plan on making your big protest when it is clear to you that you will never have another bite of food to eat, never have another dollar in your pocket, or never have another moment of comfortable sleep? What do you think your protest will accomplish then? Surely, it will be much less effective that what it can accomplish now.

Remember, all of this has happened because you failed to use the magic word, and configured your plans to erase that word from the memory of man.

But because you didn’t — because you didn’t want to hamper your career prospects, or offend your neighbors, or violate your religious rules — the certainty now is that you and your loved ones are the “useless eaters” who are about to be erased.

————

John Kaminski is a writer who lives on the Gulf Coast of Florida, constantly trying to figure out why we are destroying ourselves, and pinpointing a corrupt belief system as the engine of our demise. Solely dependent on contributions from readers, please support his work by mail:
6871 Willow Creek Circle #103, North Port FL 34287 USA.
https://therebel.org/kaminski
http://johnkaminski.info/
http://www.rudemacedon.ca/kaminski/kam-index.html
http://web.archive.org/web/20040323232319/http://johnkaminski.com/

Filed Under: Editor's Zone, Jesus Christ, Jewish Crime, Jewish Defense League (JDL), Jewish Hatred, Jewish Hatred toward Germany, Jewish Holocaust Industry, Jewish Holocaust Lie, Jewish Israeli Settlers, Jewish Lobby, Jewish Media Monopoly, Jewish Porn Industry, Jewish power, Jewish Racism, Jewish Supremacism, Jewish Talmudists, Jewish Terrorists, Jews, Jews Behind Bolshevik Revolution, John Kaminski, Kol Nidre oath, Oliver Cromwell, Patriot Act, Political Zionism

Did We Think … We Canadians? by Robin Mathews

May 19, 2013 by admin Leave a Comment

Did We Think … We Canadians?

by
Robin Mathews
rmathews@telus.net

Did we think, Canadians, we’d be permitted Canada without fighting for it day by day, hour by hour – as if we were unlike people all over the rest of the world? Did we think we could live in, possess, own, develop, and share the country fairly for the good of all – without fighting against the greedy, the brutal, the corrupt day by day, hour by hour?

That was, for a very long time, the rhetoric we heard and spoke and believed here in Canada. And now the rhetoric is being torn from us by forces more crude and destructive and devious and psychopathic and brutal than any of us could have imagined even a decade ago. Call the forces ‘Harperism’, neo-liberalism, U.S. Imperialism, ‘Chinese expansionism’, ‘the One Per Cent’, corporate fascism – they are all correct in their ways.

They are, in short, forces that are willing to brutalize populations, to desecrate economic stability world-wide, and to (literally) destroy the environment (and the planet) in their blind and all-consuming greed. (Think, merely, of Stephen Harper and his clown clones on the subject of climate change!)

Protestors and bystanders cordoned off by two lines of riot police in downtown Toronto during G8/G20 Summit.

What has changed in our time is that local oppression of the population in “advanced” countries is now globally rearranged by “outsourcing” to ‘slave economies’, by air power (and electronic surveillance) used to police populations, by ‘tax haven’ locations to hide wealth in trillions of dollars, by the destruction of unions in the “advanced” countries, by the normalization of “precarious” employment, and by the wholesale purchase of political systems – like the ownership of the increasingly lawless Stephen Harper group by ‘the one per cent’.

The “outsourced” disaster that killed more than 1100 workers in Dahka, Bangladesh, thousands of miles away, under the new imperial system, is the new normal. At the height of the last, the British empire, savaging of working people was more local … and the ‘normal’.

In the 50th year of Queen Victoria’s reign (1887) the famous “Bloody Sunday” happened in and around Trafalgar Square in London. British workers were so brutalized by violent capitalism– to the point of widespread starvation – that a movement to change had begun. Dahka, Bangladesh was then in Leeds and Manchester and Hull and Bradford – in fact, all over England.

Bloody Sunday, Trafalgar Square, London England 1887

George Bernard Shaw (playwright) and Willliam Morris (poet, furniture designer, editor, utopian novelist, wall-paper designer, etc.) were supporters of the oppressed, present at “Bloody Sunday”. William Morris called himself a Socialist and a communist. Shaw was a parliamentary, gradualist socialist (a “Fabian”).

What is compelling about “Bloody Sunday” is its similarity to famous demonstrations in the last fifteen years, its almost rubber-stamp similarity. Nothing has changed in 125 years! Think of the G20 (so-called) ‘riots’ in Toronto in 2010. The ‘organized’ opposition groups (critics of capitalism) included unions, anti-poverty people, Council of Canadians, Native Rights supporters, environmental activists, Oxfam, etc. They were met by more than 20,000 police/security personnel. At least one officer said orders came from Ottawa. Police violence was obvious. Fake “Anarchist” provocateurs were almost certainly employed. Arrests of the innocent were wholesale.

G20 summit protestors being repelled by Toronto riot police as they approached the security perimeter.

At “Bloody Sunday” (125 years before) a surprising number of police showed up, too. E. P. Thompson [William Morris, 1955, 1977, pp. 485-502] reports “the police were deliberately provoking [protesters] into an insurrectionary temper”. William Morris saw the mounted police with “batons” (clubs). Other witnesses recorded lavish police brutality. Morris recorded “the complicity of almost the entire capitalist Press”. And he saw “the treachery of the professed advocates of freedom in Parliament and public life”.

Witnesses wrote of charges laid against demonstrators backed by perjured evidence. Fake Anarchists were said to be in the crowd, and before the gathering George Bernard Shaw wrote jokingly of “those fervid orators who preserve friendly relations with the police” and suggest London be set on fire … and worse.

But the character of “Bloody Sunday” was no joke. Shaw fled, saying a friend “found me paralysed with terror….”

That was more than 125 years ago. Dahka, Bangladesh was local. Nothing has changed in the class forces arrayed against each other – or in the tactics used to continue the system of looting and oppression of ordinary people. What has changed is the character and size of the landscape. (The North American corporations raping Bangladesh are considering changes … until the story blows over. Then they will proceed as before … supported by their unlegislating governments who are in bed with the oppression and inhumanity).

Dahka, Bangladesh

125 years ago senior politicians didn’t take responsibility for the organized police attacks on demonstrators seeking justice in Trafalgar Square. In Toronto in 2010, police were alleged to have made the choices they received as orders from above.

Characteristically, Stephen Harper has stayed as far from the discussion of the Bangladesh deaths as possible since he supports the system of ‘outsourcing oppression’ on behalf of the one per cent. He is owned by the one per cent. His role is to keep power in order to keep serving the one per cent. All else is secondary to winning the class war.

Self-explanatory

By the same token, his hand in the G20 violence was carefully disguised (while his present Minister of Foreign Affairs and his present Treasury Board head were draining $50 million from public moneys for pork-barreling – for which, it seems, he promoted them both.) Lying, deceit, cover-up, election fraud, fake contracting, union harassment, active repression of democratic freedoms form the basis of Harperite policy: in order to serve the one per cent.

Stephen Harper’s hand in the 2006 election fraud – we may allege – was disguised, as it was in the 2011 Robocall election fraud. As it is in the $90,000.00 payment made by his chief of staff Nigel Wright to senator Mike Duffy (who was deep, deep in election work for the Harperites – collecting expenses, some suggest, more than once from sources illegitimately billed).

The question has to be “was Nigel Wright directed by Stephen Harper to pay Mike Duffy a ‘free gift’ of $90,000.00 so that the public could be prevented from seeing the depth of corruption involved in Conservative Party electioneering and party pay-offs?” How much is Harper’s hand present in the PMO’s refusal to make public the records it has of Duffy’s paid activities? And was Duffy instructed by Harper to keep the records secret? He said so, didn’t he?

Still peaceful the Saturday’s rally heads down Spadina Avenue in Toronto’s Chinatown neighbourhood.

We know that poor Stephen Harper was ‘confused’ when he named costs for the F35 fighter plane that were proved to be ridiculously false. Every time an independent auditor reviewed F35 costs, the Harperites were proved to have given seriously incorrect figures. (To have lied?)

Harper learned from that fiasco to pass the buck as often as possible. But, then, desperate to get Peter Penashue elected in Labrador after his exposure for hugely violating spending limits in the 2011 Robocalls Election, Stephen Harper called violator Penashue “the best member of Parliament Labrador has ever had”. Consistent with his deceitful ways – Harper said he would let the people of Labrador make their own choice … as he sent in his ‘unmanned drone” Peter MacKay to tell Labradorians that if they would re-elect Peter Penashue he would be guaranteed a cabinet seat. The bribery didn’t work. Penashue lost.

That takes us to the incredible Arctic Patrol Ships fiasco right now in white heat. Briefly (comparing it to the F35 fiasco), experts can’t believe the cost of design alone. What should cost, one says, $10 to $15 million is set to cost $288 million. God only knows what the cost of actual construction might be. Other countries have bought or built similar vessels for around $100 million completed!

Strangely, after the CBC/Terry Milewski coverage of the contract, Irving Shipbuilding took a full-page ad in select newspapers to counter it. The countering, I believe, is not credible, but big-push public relations. What is going on? I suggest it is corporation/government interpenetration. Or put another way, neo-liberal government paying off a neo-liberal corporation – to buy solidarity and get favours come 2015 and the next election.

The apparently inexplicable, incredible contracting is perfectly clear, I believe. The purpose of the one per cent, of the neo-liberal ideology, of the Harperite world view, of corporate fascism is to transfer the wealth belonging to the population to the dominant class and to further the interpenetration of corporations and government. As that proceeds, the population is increasingly impoverished, oppressed, and robbed on behalf of ‘the one per cent’.

When the Canadian people get that message and begin to organize protest in really meaningful ways, the ‘security forces’ riding horseback with clubs, on motorcycles with tear gas and rubber bullets, in Anarchist outfits to provoke violence, will be there to stage another “Bloody Sunday”, another G20 “riot”. At that point – if it hasn’t happened before that point – Canadians are going to have to know if they don’t fight for the country and go on fighting for it until they defeat the Harperites completely, once and for all, their democracy will be finished. Canada will become another slave economy, and Canadians will be the slaves. We didn’t think … we Canadians … that it would come to this. But it has.
———-

Filed Under: Bangladesh, Canadian Sovereignty, Editor's Zone, G20, Political Zionism, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Robin Mathews, “Bloody Sunday”

Surviving the avalanche by John Kaminski

May 17, 2013 by admin Leave a Comment

Surviving the avalanche

DO YOU SLEEP SOUNDLY KNOWING COPS

MAY BREAK DOWN YOUR DOOR AT ANY TIME?

By John Kaminski

pseudoskylax@gmail.com

https://therebel.org/kaminski

Which thing keeps you awake at night? Which disaster that you can’t do anything about do you choose to worry about?

Seeing your money evaporating before your eyes? Wondering why your child was killed by friendly fire? Hoping what they say about methane isn’t true, and likely to end all life on this planet in just a few short years?

It makes you feel truly patriotic when you realize the cops can break down your door at any time for any reason and take your life, doesn’t it?

When you finally fall asleep tonight, will you dream of being tazed to death on a Tennessee interstate? Of a drug-addicted doctor amputating the wrong leg? Or of a drunken judge declaring you a terrorist and ordering a Thorazine injection so that you will never recognize yourself again, like Jose Padilla?

The threats to our continuing survival, our everyday health, and our chances for happiness are so overwhelming, so ubiquitous and so in-your-face every moment of every day, that without some kind of stimulant, some kind of sedative or at least some kind of sheep-counting meaningless distraction mechanism, chances are you’re like more and more people these days — lying there staring at the ceiling praying for a good dream to take you away from this nightmare reality.

And it isn’t so much the panic-inducing threats to your continuing existence that keep you from reaching that balmy sanctuary of sleep. Really, it’s the agony of not knowing what to do about any of these atrocities. Stress like this causes cancer, and worse.

People are committing suicide in record numbers, especially in the military <http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/14/16510852-military-suicide-rate-hit-record-high-in-2012?lite>.

For most people who can think with a modicum of functionality, the worst of it is the lies, the betrayals, and the deliberate deceptions that everybody — and I mean everybody — encounters on a daily, if not hourly, basis.

And the worst of those come from our authority figures, the people in whom we place our trust and around whom we attempt to structure our lives. An epidemic of mistrust and lack of faith in our so-called leaders has not only shattered our sleep, but forced us to assess our futures in terms of hours and days rather than years and decades.

Yet, there are faint signs that a revolution is under way. A massive outcry in support of the Second Amendment forced the Congress to derail President Obama’s cynical gun grab.

Even more auspicious are the legislative movements in various states rejecting the Obama’s pathological contentions that he can kill anyone he wants any time he wants. In Missouri, as one example, both legislative houses voted overwhelmingly — with a veto-proof majority — to tell Obama’s police state goons to go to hell by commanding all state and local cops to not enforce unconstitutional federal gun control laws.<http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2013/05/missouri-legislature-nullifies-all-federal-gun-control-measures-by-a-veto-proof-majority/> Similar efforts are under way inTexas, Wyoming, Missouri, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Iowa.

Maybe the biggest slap in the face of the American people in recent memory (although it’s hard to rank them; there have been so many) came from the mealy mouth of Al Gore, recent vice-president and smug Nobel Prize winner, who said he knew all about chemtrails and how bad they were for everyone, when the official government policy practiced by criminal politicians across America was that chemtrails don’t really exist — they’re just tinfoil hat conspiracy theories. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=SrrWXurroWw>

After being misguided and abused by the lies of paid-off politicians throughout our lifetimes, here’s an example of the reward we get for our dedicated patriotic support of the demonic forces that control our country.

The mother of a Seal Team 6 member (you remember Seal Team 6, the ones who supposedly assassinated Osama bin Laden ten years after he died of kidney disease, and then supposedly dumped his body in the Indian Ocean) spoke of suspicious circumstances in her son’s death. This was their reward — a government set-up to get rid of them so they couldn’t talk about the scam. Listen to her outraged description of her dead son’s funeral. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gafqJ6YMl6c&feature=youtube_gdata_player>

In her words, “It is now time to change things I can’t accept.”

Seal Team 6 has just about been completely wiped out. <http://www.gopusa.com/news/2013/05/13/families-of-seal-team-6-demand-answers/>.

The latest episode of this apparent attempt to silence everyone involved with the fake murder of the already-dead Al-Qaida honcho involves Hillary Clinton, with the story resurfacing that she was injured in a secret jet crash in Iran, and the pilot of which was Job B. Price, none other than the leader of Seal Team 6 whom the government claimed committed suicide in Afghanistan. <http://jhaines6.wordpress.com/2013/05/11/what-really-happened-to-hilary-clinton-and-us-navy-seal-commander-job-w-price-republished-modified-by-peter-eyre-may-10-2013/>

Then there is also the latest story that no U.S. military personnel witnessed the supposed burial at sea of Osama bin Laden.<http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2236617/Revealed-Military-emails-NO-U-S-sailors-witnessed-Osama-bin-Ladens-secret-burial-sea.html>

As your head spins while you try to go to sleep, you realize that the general condition of the American population at this time is best reflected by a growing trend in Ohio putting people in jail for not being able to pay their debts, including one man sent to jail repeatedly for not paying fines for not leashing his dog. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z41YRgFll3A> The time he spent in jail caused him to lose his job, which meant he couldn’t pay his fines, and kept going back to jail as the money he owed kept growing.

What to do about this growing onslaught?

What remains the best weapon to use against this avalanche of homegrown tyranny was compiled by the late great American patriot William Cooper, who was assassinated by county sheriffs in Nevada as he was gearing up to deconstruct the 9/11 caper back in 2001.

In his meticulous history of the income tax, he revealed that the Internal Revenue Service is illegally constituted and most people are not required to pay income taxes. If you read this document carefully — and, as Cooper says, memorize the chronology he has so diligently assembled — you can successfully defend yourself against this quintessential federal tyranny that has duped the Americans for a century into paying money to the war machine that they legally don’t have to pay.

This may be the best way to put the federal government tyrants out of business.

According to Cooper, citizens of the 50 United States have never been required to file or pay “income taxes”. Read the sorry history of a law that was never passed, and smell the stench of typical government scams like phony wars for billionaires that impoverish most Americans, or parents put in jail for homeschooling or refusing vaccinations that still wreak today. <http://www.usa-the-republic.com/revenue/BATF-IRS%20Criminal%20Report.html>.

Study it carefully. The day will come, if it is not already here, when this knowledge will become supremely important.

Can anybody say “Tax Strike”!? This would be the ultimate no-confidence vote. We can’t count on the politicians to do it, so the people must.

But nowadays, the IRS scam is a relatively minor lie compared to the giant lies of 9/11, the bogus wars, the genetically modified foods and the geoengineering that are poisoning the world, and purchase of ammunition by every department of the government in preparation for a shootout with the American people, whose guns continue to be taken away.

In addition, when you know some of these things and your head hits the pillow at bedtime, there can be no sleep without serious nightmares about your future.

Sooner or later you can only come to one conclusion. That it’s time to fight the criminal traitors who pretend to be our leaders, but who only steal our money, our property and our lives.

There is only one answer. Be who you always dreamed you’d be, who you always wanted to be: defender of hope, arbiter of truth, rescuer of the oppressed, and guilt-free preacher of all that is right and true. Do not accept the lies that ruin your life. If you’re going to die anyway, you might as well check out being the principled hero you always hoped to be, fighting the greatest evil civilization has ever known — the United States government.

The time has come to oppose every single thing the government — the corrupt Obama-Bush machine — orders us to do, by any means necessary.

Of course, if you choose that path, you have a few hard questions to answer.

Like, why do you remain silent about 9/11, the inside job that triggered this cynical neocon war against the world which does not benefit average Americans but only the international bankers who buy our local politicians to help them steal our money. Why haven’t you confronted every public official you can find, and demand that he resign and be tried for treason, for covering up the fact that our own government mass-murdered thousands of its own people to promote a sinister political objective?

Or, why do you remain silent while the government approves poison food that makes everyone sick, poison medicines that are put on the market without mandated clinical trials to prove they’re safe, or puts the clamps on radiation news about the radical rise brain-damaging births among California babies that guarantee the retardation of America’s next generation.

If you think you can escape the consequences of these demonic trends, you’re a fool and an idiot, not to mention a traitor.

The principal threat to world peace and our future survival is our own government in Washington. It’s time for the masses to sweep them from power and into jail where they belong.

It must be done before they shut down the money supply, start World War Three, or gas the population, because then the game will really be over. And since they’ve already started all three projects — the deliberate evaporation of the currency, the war against everyone in the world, and the chemtrail pollution of the atmosphere — you’re running just a little bit late about deciding what to do.

Sleep tight. And sweet dreams.

I hope you survive the avalanche, because many people — many millions of people — won’t.

———-

https://therebel.org/kaminski

http://johnkaminski.info/

http://www.rudemacedon.ca/kaminski/kam-index.html

http://web.archive.org/web/20040323232319/http://johnkaminski.com/

Filed Under: 911, 911/WorldTradeCenter, Editor's Zone, John Kaminski, Osama bin Laden, Seal Team 6, William Cooper

Radical Press: Legal Update #12 by Arthur Topham

May 16, 2013 by admin 2 Comments

May 16th, 2013

Dear Free Speech Advocates and Radical Press Supporters,

Today, May 16th, 2013, marks the first anniversary of my arrest and incarceration last May 16th, 2012 when Det. Cst. Terry Wilson and the BC “Hate Crime Team” flew up from Vancouver and along with a crew of approximately 14 police officers, stopped my vehicle containing myself and my wife while on route to Prince George on a business trip and charged me under the criminal code of Canada with a sec. 319(2) “Hate Crime”. I was read my rights, arrested, handcuffed and carted off to the Quesnel jail where I spend the rest of the day in a cell while Det. Wilson’s team awaited an illegal search warrant and then entered my home and stole all of my computers and electronic files as well as my firearms which are my only means of defense well outside of any RCMP range of immediate help in case of an emergency.

Coincidentally today was also the latest in a protracted series of court appearances that began back on October 9th, 2012. Today’s menu of misfeasance included a new item that suddenly popped up when I was supposed to be appearing before the provincial judge to discuss my last application to the court requesting particularization of the disclosure material submitted by the Crown. Those who have been following these legal updates will be aware of what that was all about and for anyone new interested in finding out they can go to Legal Update #11 at the following url and review it there. That application plus setting a date for a preliminary inquiry and an update on my Rowbotham application were all scheduled for the 16th. For some unknown reason Judge Morgan who normally hears my case was unable to be there and another out of town female judge was sitting in for him.

The judge, after looking over the menu, decided that she would not attempt to deal with the application for particularization and told the Crown that she would postpone that until May 28th, 2013 when Judge Morgan would be in attendance as he had been dealing with it and knew much more about the case. Seeing that I was without counsel the judge, having looked at my Rowbotham application and noted that it had all be prepared properly and had been accepted, then took the time to explain to me how and why the Rowbotham application works and when a person can file one. For obvious reasons I knew how it worked as I had already prepared the document awhile go but I stood quietly and listened to her review the process. She then explained that if I wished to have counsel prior to the planned preliminary enquiry that I would have to apply beforehand but that if, after the preliminary enquiry, it was determined that the case would proceed to trial then I would have to file a second Rowbotham application in order to obtain another counsel to represent me in the trial.

I had received a package of material from the Ministry of Justice Legal Services Branch on May 11th in response to my Notice of Application and Affidavit which I had served on the AGBC April 23, 2013. In it Keith Evans, legal counsel for the Attorney General of British Columbia (AGBC), explained all the details of how to go about filling in the additionally required documents related to the application and also informing me that I would have to decide beforehand whether or not I wished to have the application relate to obtaining counsel for the preliminary enquiry or the pending trial or both. If both then I would have to submit two separate applications.

At this point I asked the honourable judge if I might ask her a question and she consented. I wanted clarification as to primary purpose of holding a preliminary enquiry and I asked the judge if, in fact, the preliminary enquiry was meant to determine whether or not the Crown had a strong enough case to warrant going to trial. She answered in the affirmative saying yes, that was the main reason for conducting such a procedure. I said thank you for explaining that.

It was around this point in the proceedings that Crown counsel Jennifer Johnston brought up the new item mentioned earlier. She informed the judge that she had just recently received word from Det. Wilson’s “E-Division” office in Surrey, B.C. that additional information had gathered and was being sent to Crown and that the Attorney General’s office was now planning to take the unusual step of attempting to circumvent my right to a preliminary enquiry by going for what the Crown termed “a Direct Indictment”, a process by which I would be forced to go to trial without having the opportunity to argue against the Crown’s charges as laid out in the original Indictment of November 5th, 2012.

Crown counsel Johnston then informed the judge that no final decision had been made as of today but that she expected the Attorney General’s office would have their final decree in place prior to the next court appearance this coming May 28th, 2013. At this point Cst. Wilson was sending the additional to Crown via a thumb drive or memory stick and that I would also be receiving a copy of whatever new “evidence” they had come up with in their “ongoing investigation”.

All that covered the judge then looked at me. I gave her a sort of dazed and confused look and she, half-smiling and half-laughing, apologized for all the apparent incertitude and then did her best to provide me with a general overview of what had transpired, ended by saying that everything would be postponed until the return of Judge Morgan on May 28th, 2013.

—–

[Editorial comment: The new item of going for a Direct Indictment on the part of the Attorney General's office still remains a mystery to me at this point. They are obviously not happy with my wanting to have a preliminary enquiry which is standard procedure in most cases. They are also planning to introduce additional evidence or information into the case. Where would that evidence come from? One can only assume that it comes from whatever additional posts I have been making on the RadicalPress.com website. Why additional evidence in the first place? Didn't they feel they had enough already?

Feedback on these issues is always appreciated.

As Walt Disney used to say at the end of his productions, "Stay Tune Folks!"]

For Justice and Freedom of Speech for Everyone Everywhere,

Arthur Topham
Publisher & Editor
The Radical Press
“Digging to the root of the issues since 1998″

———

PLEASE NOTE: More than ever, now that my former lawyer Douglas Christie has died, I am dependent upon financial help to carry on.

The struggle to retain our inherent right to freedom of speech doesn’t come without costs both financially and otherwise. Out of necessity, I am forced to ask for financial assistance in this ongoing battle with the foreign Zionist lobbyist/censors who are determined to stop all freedom of expression in Canada.

Being a ‘Senior Citizen’ on a very limited pension and having now been denied assistance by Legal Aid services here in B.C. I’m left in the unenviable position of having to rely solely upon donations from supporters to pay my legal and related expenses.

I would ask readers to give serious consideration to helping out by either sending a donation via PayPal using either a PayPal account or a credit card or else sending a cheque or Money Order or cash to me via snail mail at the following postal address. Please don’t make the cheque out to “RadicalPress” as that account is no longer available to me.

Arthur Topham
4633 Barkerville Highway
Quesnel, B.C
Canada
V2J 6T8

To access my PayPal button please go to either the Home Page at http://www.radicalpress.com or my blog http://www.quesnelcariboosentinel.com The PayPal button is up on the right hand corner of the Home Page on either site. Feel free to click on it.

For Freedom of Speech, Justice for All,

Sincerely,

Arthur Topham
Pub/Ed
The Radical Press

Filed Under: BC HATE CRIME TEAM, Crown Council Jennifer Johnston, Cst Normandie Levas BC HATE CRIME TEAM, Det-Cst Terry Wilson BC HATE CRIME TEAM, Direct Indictment, Douglas H. Christie, Harry Abrams, Hate Crime laws, Legal Update, Richard Warman, Rowbotham application, Sec. 319(2) CC "Willful Promotion of Hatred"

Statement of Roy Arthur Topham regarding his Arrest on May 16th, 2012 on the charge of “Willful promotion of hatred CC 319(2)”

May 16, 2013 by admin Leave a Comment

ARREST STATEMENT OF ROY ARTHUR TOPHAM
REGARDING HIS ARREST AND INCARCERATION BY THE RCMP ON
WEDNESDAY, MAY 16TH, 2012 IN QUESNEL, B.C. ON THE CHARGE OF:

“Willful Promotion of Hatred CC 319(2)”

Posted May 16th, 2013 on 1st Anniversary of this Event

Arthur Topham

[Editor's Note: In the interests of freedom of speech and freedom of the Internet I am posting my "Arrest Statement" which my former lawyer Mr. Douglas Christie advised me to write soon after my arrest on May 16th, 2012. His wise counsel was that this case would likely drag on in the courts for years and by the time it came to trial (should such an event arise) that many of the details of my recollection of that fateful day would by then be hazy and doubtful. Acting on Mr. Christie's advice I wrote out a detailed description of what took place that May morning last year. It's an interesting picture of what can happen to you here in Canada should the Jewish lobby decide they don't like being criticized. Read. Heed. And please pass it on to your friends and associates. ~Arthur Topham]

On Wednesday, May 16th, 2012 I started out my work day travelling out to my mining property on the 2400 Rd off the Barkerville Hwy to meet up with the Petro Canada fuel truck at 9:30 a.m. I was having the company fuel truck filled with 1200 gallons of diesel fuel for use during the upcoming placer mining operations for this season. When that was completed I returned home to my residence at 4633 Barkerville Hwy and prepared for a trip up to Prince George where I had to go to the Richie Bros. Auctioneers site to pick up some mining equipment that my business associate had recently purchased at an auction on May 10th. My business partner and wife, Shastah Topham, came along with me and we left our home at approximately 11:00 a.m. heading west toward Quesnel.

Plans had also been made ahead of time to meet another mining associate at Princess Auto in Prince George at 1 p.m. and between the two of us we would haul equipment back to my placer claims on the 2400 Road.

Due to the fact that the Petro Canada fuel truck was a bit late in arriving at the site plus the additional time necessary to fuel the 1200 gallon truck I was running behind schedule by about half an hour.

We were travelling in a 2009 Chev pickup owned by my mining associate with whom I am presently in a Joint Venture Agreement.

When one leaves my property at 4633 Barkerville Hwy you must turn right on to the Barkerville Hwy in order to travel toward Quesnel and Hwy 97 the route necessary to travel in order to get to Prince George. The section of Hwy 26 (Barkerville Hwy) that runs past my residence stretches in a straight line for approximately 1 km. As soon as I pulled out on to the road I immediately saw that there was a white pickup truck sitting adjacent to the eastbound lane of highway just before the road descended down a small dip and passes Cottonwood Historic Site.

As we drove toward it I remarked to my wife, “There’s the cops sitting there. Looks like they’re either waiting to catch Willie again or maybe they’re doing surveillance on Don Carter’s property. Don Carter has been experiencing ongoing harassment by the Canadian Revenue Agency over the past few years and has also had numerous encounters with the RCMP in conjunction with the CRA.

As we approached the white pickup we could see two men in dark clothing sitting in it trying to look as unobtrusive as possible. Again I said to my wife, “If we weren’t running so damn late I’d stop and asked them if they were lost or needed any assistance.”

As we crested the dip and passed Cottonwood Historic Site I noted that within a minute or so the white pickup was now following us. I asked my wife is she was buckled up (she was) and then I set my vehicle on cruise control at about 95 cpm. The limit was 90 kph so I knew that at least if the cops were going to stop me they wouldn’t have the excuse that I was speeding.

As we proceeded on toward Quesnel Shastah was spoon-feeding me my breakfast as I drove because we were too late for me to sit down at home and eat before leaving. I remarked to my wife that the cops were likely watching us through their binoculars and wondering what she was doing. We also were discussing the vehicle that was now so obviously tailing us. It’s always a joke for the locals around Cottonwood when the police come and try to set up either a surveillance vehicle or radar to catch unwary speeders. The cops never seem to understand that when you live in a very small, tight-knit community that everyone in the area is very aware of who drives what type of vehicle and when they see a vehicle parked on the side of the highway with people sitting in it they know right away that they’re either broke down or else cops.

We continued along the highway talking about cops and related issues until we reached the top of 11 Mile Hill. When one begins to descend you are overlooking the Fraser Valley viewshed and can see westward for over a hundred kilometres. About half way down I noted that a regular white coloured RCMP van with the usual bells and whistles was now directly behind the white pickup. At the same time, due to the steep grade of the hill, I was also watching my own speedometer to make sure I didn’t begin coasting beyond the 100 km speed limit. As we neared the bottom of the hill the RCMP van’s lights came on. I told Shastah and proceeded to slow down and pull over on the right hand side of the highway just where the road levelled off.

Who are the original creators of “Hate Crimes” and Hate Crime laws? by Arthur Topham

May 15, 2013 by admin 3 Comments

Dear Readers and Free Speech Advocates,

I’m writing on the eve of the first anniversary of my arrest and incarceration last May 16th, 2012 by the B.C. “Hate Crime Team” when I was charged under sec. 319(2) of the criminal code of Canada with the crime of “willfully promoting hatred against ‘people of the Jewish religion or ethnic group.’”

The two complaints that led to my being charged under this specious act were laid against me by Harry Abrams of B’nai Brith Canada and Richard Warman, the serial complainant in numerous other cases involving “hate crimes” and the sycophantic toadie of the Jewish lobby here in Canada

Since that time I’ve been immersed in a legal battle with the B.C. courts because of this trumped-up charge.

On May 16th I must again appear in court to deal with more matters related to my current attempts to find myself a new legal counsel to assist me in having this spurious charge tossed out and the case dismissed. I will be providing a further legal update following tomorrow’s events but for now I wish to remind readers once again of just who the real purveyors of so-called “hate” truly are and how long they’ve been carrying on this charade in order to cover up their own actions over the past century and longer.

One of the biggest beefs that both these two charlatans had with my website, which subsequently became perfectly clear to me when the arresting officer Det. Cpl. Terry Wilson was talking to me while I was in jail, (and which I subsequently noted in my Arrest Statement to my former lawyer, Doug Christie) was the issue of an article that I had posted on my site dealing with the 1941 book Germany Must Perish! by Theodore N. Kaufmann.

I had written a satirical parody of Kaufmann’s book back in May of 2011 and titled it “Israel Must Perish!” and took some of the more juicy, hate-filled quotations out of it and substituted the words “Nazi” and “Germany” and “Hitler” and a few other German words with synonymous Jewish words like “Jews” and “Israel” and “Netanyahu”, etc. in order to highlight the hypocrisy of the Jews in daring to accuse the western world of being eternal haters of the poor, downtrodden Jews throughout history.

Somewhere, in the shallowness of their conniving, degenerate minds, they figured that this parody/satire would somehow stand up in a court of law and prove to the world that I, rather than them, was the real disseminator of so-called “hatred” and ought to be treated like a common criminal, found guilty, tossed into jail, and to have my rights and freedoms as a Canadian citizen removed from me.

For the record I want readers to know about this classic of Jewish hate literature and thus I’m republishing here my Introduction to the original article plus the url to the original book of Kaufmann’s so that people can go and look at the abhorrent mind that first created this ugly and obscene proposal for the complete and total annihilation of the German people.

What readers must also realize is what is printed on the back cover of Kaufmann’s book as shown in the graphic below. Three of most revered U.S. publications still operating today, and all Jewish owned, were promoting Kaufmann’s book back in 1941 in order to turn the American public away from decency, justice and truth and twist their perceptions of Germany and Adolf Hitler into the same grotesque mindset that conjured up this classic demonic-inspired book; one openly advocating the total extinction of the German people.

And these are the same folks who are desperately trying to subvert every democratic nation in the world into obeying their “hate crime” legislation that they’ve surreptitiously slipped into the statutes of former free nations via lobbying and pressuring and intimidating politicians of every stripe.

Now that folks is what I call chutzpah.

Please try to pass this article on to every free speech lover that you can. The Canadian public and the world at large needs to know just who the real, originators of these “hate crime” laws are.

Arthur Topham

Publisher/Editor

The Radical Press.

———————-

The Book that Hitler Fears

Germany Must Perish!

by Theodore N. Kaufman

Newark, N.J., Argyle press

RadicalPress Editor’s Introduction [from original post]:

Seventy-two years have now passed since Theodore N. Kaufman published his infamous, hate-infused book, Germany Must Perish! Over the course of these last seven decades the Zionist Jews have been working relentlessly to create in every democratic nation so-called “Human Rights” legislation that would contain special sections dealing with “hate crimes,” the type of which they themselves obviously had perfected back before the USA had even entered WWII.

Here in Canada, in the mid-1970s, the Jewish lobby began in earnest their surreptitious efforts to silence Canadians by working through Ontario’s then Deputy Attorney General, F.W. Callaghan. Callaghan, obviously pressured by Jewish groups who wanted to silence one of their critics, John Ross Taylor, began lobbying the Federal Department of Justice demanding the inclusion of speech-restricting legislation that removed the need for “willfulness” or fair comment based on public interest. ( See the following site for the full history of Section 13: http://www.stopsection13.com/history_of_sec13.html )

According to Marc Lemire’s history of Section 13, “In 1976, the Federal Government was looking at a larger Act for employment issues and the provision of federally regulated services.” This Act eventually would end up with the innocuous sounding name: the Canadian Human Rights Act. Although no other section of the Human Rights Act covered speech, it was not a problem for the Federal government to capitulate [to the Jewish lobby. Ed.] and slip in an extra section to satisfy Ontario’s Attorney General’s lust to silence John Ross Taylor and his home-based answering machine.”

In 1977 Bill C-25 or the “Canadian Human Rights Act” was passed by the House of Commons on July 14th. Contained within it under the sub-title of “Hate messages” was Section 13 which read:

13. (1) It is a discriminatory practice for a person or a group of persons acting in concert to communicate telephonically or to cause to be so communicated, repeatedly, in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a telecommunication undertaking within the legislative authority of Parliament, any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt by reason of the fact that that person or those persons are identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.

As Lemire goes on to state:

“Only a few years after the law was enacted, Mr. Callaghan finally got his wish and John Ross Taylor became its first victim, with the Canadian Human Rights Commission itself and several professional Jewish groups [Canadian Holocaust Remembrance Association and the Toronto Zionist Council. Ed.] as the complainants.

Since the law was first enacted, two major changes were made to Section 13. These changes fundamentally shifted the original intent of the legislation, and turned Section 13 into an instrument to financially and morally punish those with politically incorrect views.

The first change to the legislation occurred on May 15, 1998, when Royal Accent was given to Bill S-5 (1998), which added a new penalty provision to the Canadian Human Rights Act. Bill S-5 added Section 54 to the Canadian Human Rights Act, and allows the Human Rights Tribunal to impose a financial penalty of up to $10,000. On top of the fines, Section 54 also gave the fanatical Tribunal the ability to impose penalties of up to $20,000 as so-called ‘special compensation.’

According to the background section of Bill S-5, these penalties were added “as a response to the rising incidence of hate crimes around the world. The government believes that stronger measures are needed to deter individuals and organizations from establishing hate lines. It hopes to accomplish this by allowing victims of such lines to apply for compensation and subjecting offenders to financial penalty.”

The second change occurred in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11th 2001. Sadly, this legislation equated non-violent politically incorrect words – which are covered by Section 13 – with terrorism and concerns of national security. Under the guise of Bill C-36 – Canada’s Anti-Terrorism Act, Section 13 was expanded to cover “a group of interconnected or related computers, including the Internet.” This change, gave the power to Canadian Human Rights Commission to censor the internet and harass Canadians with views that the Rights Fanatics disagree with. [Emphasis added. Ed.]

This change was made according to Preamble of Bill C-36 to allegedly ‘combat terrorism.’”

It is assumed that the reader will already be fully cognizant of the Zionist agenda for global governance that is a given in today’s political reality, especially within the alternative media and on the Internet where Zionist “hate” laws are still not fully in place to restrict the natural flow of ideas and opinions that proceed from historical research and experience.

In 1941 Kaufman’s book was a brilliant piece of Zionist Jew propaganda designed to stir up anti-German hatred in America. Some say that it formed the basis of the infamous “Morgenthau Plan” that was later signed in Quebec, Canada by President Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill; one designed to dismember Germany after its defeat and reduce it to the status of “a goat pasture.” It probably remains to this day the foremost example of hate literature ever to have been published and dispensed to the general public.

As the reader will surmise from viewing the image of the back page of Kaufman’s book (see above) some of America’s most prestigious newspapers and magazines were in full support of the objectives set down in this classic book of Jewish hate literature.

I firmly believe that all of what the Zionist Jews write about others is actually but a reflection of their own inner, perverse, dislocated self. By projecting outward on to others their innate paranoid and deep-seated hatred for the rest of the world they’re able to meet the requirements of the Israeli state’s motto which reads, “By Way of Deception Though Shalt Cause War” and feel a sense of superiority and self-righteousness in doing so.
—————-

Germany Must Perish! Please take the time to look at this book.

Filed Under: Adolf Hitler, B'nai Brith Canada, B'nai Brith International, Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Cst Normandie Levas BC HATE CRIME TEAM, Det-Cst Terry Wilson BC HATE CRIME TEAM, Douglas H. Christie Barrister & Solicitor, Free Speech on the Internet, Freedom of Expression, Freedom of Speech, Germany Must Perish!, Harry Abrams, Hate Crime laws, Hate Crimes Bills, Hate laws, HOLODOMOR, Israeli Terrorism, Israeli War Crimes, Jewish Hatred, Jewish Hatred toward Germany, Jewish Lobby, Jewish Media Monopoly, Jewish Racism, Jewish Terrorists, Political Zionism, RCMP Corruption, Richard Warman, Sec. 319(2) CC "Willful Promotion of Hatred", Sec. 319(2) Criminal Code of Canada

Exclusive Interview with Ayman Qwaider from Intifada/Voice of Palestine

May 8, 2013 by admin Leave a Comment

http://www.intifada-palestine.com/2011/02/exclusive-interview-with-ayman-qwaider/

Ayman Qwaider, is a 24 years old humanitarian activist who has a bachelor’s degree in the English language and General Education. He was born in Nuserate Refugee camp which is located in the middle of the Gaza strip . He has worked in different fields for 4 years prior and after terminating his university studies.

During his university studies, he has volunteered in different local humanitarian organizations, where he developed social activism skills. He organized a series of projects for refugee camp children who have endured devastating conditions due to the Israeli military activities and its Assault on Gaza , and the on-going blockade. Part of that work included active participating in practical community initiatives carried out by young people.

Two years prior to leaving Gaza to complete his master’s in Spain, he participated in the Palestinian International Campaign to End the Siege on Gaza. Throughout his time working for this campaign he took part in organizing many non-violent activities that enjoyed the support of many international civil societies, Israeli human rights organizations and other solidarity groups from across the world. The main objective of this campaign has been peaceful and non-violent struggle, coupled with international media campaigns to unmask the Israeli siege over the Gaza Strip.

___________________________

Exclusive Interview with Ayman Qwaider

Please describe what life is like for a Palestinian from Nuseirat, a refugee camp situated in the middle of the Gaza Strip?

Ayman Qwaider: The living conditions in a Palestinian refugee camp have been the same ugly picture since 1948, when the indigenous peoples of that area were forced out of their homes by well-armed and funded non-indigenous Jewish immigrants just arriving from Europe intending to create an exclusively-Jewish state known as Israel. It would be pretty hard to describe what life for such a refugee is like in only a few sentences, and even with that, it truly is something that unless you experience it you will more than likely not understand.

Part of the painful history endured by these refugees is that their situation is very harsh. Without assistance agencies such as UNRWA–the United Nations Relief and Work Agency–and other humanitarian agencies to keep their life sustainable they would simply cease to exist. The overall awareness amongst the 1.5 million people living in Gaza is the feeling of insecurity and uncertainty. It is difficult for a human being to live in an unstable and insecure environment such as the Gaza Strip where people are constantly exposed to all colors of human rights violations. Every day the mother sends her children to school to receive an education, but she is not assured of having lunch for them or not. The farmer takes care and cultivates his land, but he is not sure that he will eat what his hands have created. The Gazan fisherman goes every day to fish but is not certain he will make it back alive to feed his family. Students spend 12 years in their studies but are not sure they will be able to pursue higher education. In the rare case students are allowed to exit Gaza to study they are unable to visit their families on holidays. The only EU-funded Gaza international airport that is supposed to connect 1.5 million Gazans with the outside world has been totally destroyed by our Israeli occupiers. This a brief overview about the current unstable and insecure existence in the Gaza Strip due to the four-decade Zionist occupation of our lands.
What was your education in Gaza like?

Ayman Qwaider: I received my overall education in UNRWS School (United Nation Relief and Working Agency) in Nuserate Refugee Camp. Despite the unstable drastic conditions that dominate in the Gaza Strip, I had a regular education. I finished my degree at the Islamic University of Gaza in January 2008 where I studied English and Education. As “normal” as all this may sound, the truth is that the situation for students in Gaza is completely different from those studying outside of Palestine. Most students here never get the chance to prove their true potential. I am 100 percent certain that they have the desire and energy to do so, but they are simply not given the space to demonstrate their abilities. Of course, the students are seriously affected by the on-going siege of the Gaza Strip; we cannot get the materials we need, such as books, stationary and even paper. In the most recent one-sided war, several of my university buildings were partially (or in some cases COMPLETELY) destroyed. With the borders closed by Israel, no raw materials are being allowed into Gaza, so those buildings that were destroyed a year ago are still lying in piles of rubble.

I can still remember the time I was still in secondary school before the withdrawal of Israeli settlers from Gaza in 2005, when the Israeli army would block the road that ran from where I lived to where my school was. So, from an early age I learned the education of occupation.

You were 14 years old when the 2nd intifada started. Did you take part in it? What did you do at this time?

Ayman Qwaider: Great question. I was 14 years old when the second Intifada erupted in 2000. Needless to say that second Intifada was dominated by the sense of violence and destruction carried out by the Israeli aggressive occupation. It was pretty hard for me to get engaged in the Intifada in the sense of using violence as I do not believe in it. Therefore I (alongside my friends) helped in organizing regular demonstrations to challenge the occupation and raise up our voice to the entire world concerning the system of injustices Palestinian are forced to endure. Though the occupation has been brutal, I have built my capacity in learning how to challenge occupation with peaceful means. I joined a set of programs to educate people on how to endure life under occupation during the Intifada.

During the winter of 2008-2009 Operation Cast Lead was waged by Israel against the Palestinians of Gaza. What did you and your family experience during such hard times?

Ayman Qwaider: It would be hard to express our feelings during the time of this one-sided war. I do not prefer to refer to the war as a Cast lead, because it’s hard for a rational human being to give such name for a military operation that dehumanizes human beings the way it did. In short, it was 3 weeks of uninterrupted terror. 23 sleepless nights hearing the continuous noise of gunfire. All sectors of life had been paralyzed, from education to health care. Each and every minute during this brutal massacre you are sure you are the next victim. Part of ongoing occupation, Palestinians in Gaza felt totally insecure at that time. Many times my family thought of leaving our home to look for refuge where we might be safer. But glumly we found ourselves fleeing from death to death even at the UN office which is responsible for supplying Palestinian refugees with food and the other basic needs for survival. Even this, the UN compound was targeted, leaving the people in absolute insecurity. I still remember how my mother was afraid during the war due to the constant shootings and regular Israeli F16 fighter jets flying overhead. It was devastating to me to see how my mother was not able to even offer tranquility and security for my younger brothers and sisters because of the fact she herself was not safe. Each minute we heard tragic news of dozens of people being killed, others injured, of homes being destroyed and other public institutions. Directly when the war ended, all that was left was tragedy–not by an act of God, such as an earthquake or tsunami, but rather by the hands of evil men and through their war, violence, and ongoing siege.

Personally it has been hard for me to understand how human beings can do this to others, this systematic dehumanization. According to the mainstream media and Israeli and international human rights organizations, we lost 1450 people, most of them innocent men, women and children. More disappointing to me however was to see that the great part of victims were children under the age of 18. It has been so hard for me when I think about how those children were systematically targeted in this inhuman way. We often hear that man is a rational creature, but I have a very hard time understanding how such rational creatures could do something like this to their fellow human beings and especially innocent children.

When and why did you decided to come to Spain to study a Peace Master?

Ayman Qwaider: I was accepted to pursue my post-graduate studies on November 2009 as a scholarship granted student. I chose to study a masters of peace because I totally believe in peace. As a Palestinian living in an impoverished environment deprived of peace in all its aspects, I therefore value peace and believe in its significant role in transforming society. I believe in peace that is based on justice, equality and human respect. I chose this study so as to be able to offer alternatives in viewing the Palestinian conflict on one hand while on the other contributing to the restructuring of peace for those who have lost their sense of it. I am studying peace to transform people’s negative mind-set that for a long time has been associated with losing land and compromising with the opponent. My master program is actually examining three main fields of studies – Peace, Conflict and Development. It draws the great interlink between these three fields of studies, in terms that you do not initiate a healthy peace framework without deep understanding of the conflict and that there can be no progress or development without first accomplishing peace. I chose peace studies to widen my knowledge and to be prepared to address the issues of injustices and inequalities in proper ways. I chose peace because my people back home in Palestine have been deprived of that very thing for decades.

What happened when you wanted to come for the first time to Castellón? How did you manage to get out of Gaza?

Ayman Qwaider: It was almost impossible for any students to leave the Gaza Strip in February 2010, the time I left Gaza with little to no change up until today. In my own case, even though I had obtained the visa to Spain and all needed documents to leave the country, the greatest obstacle for me was something called the Rafah border with Egypt. Like some country behind the Iron Curtain where citizens were not allowed to leave under penalty of death, so too are we Palestinians prevented even from leaving.

After working tirelessly in contacting anyone who would listen to my story I launched a comprehensive media campaign in the local and Spanish press, including the Facebook group and an online petition. Without going into the painful details, I received my longed-for transit permit from Israel in order to exit the Gaza Strip to the University of Jaume in Spain to pursue a graduate degree in Peace, Conflict and Development Studies. My efforts ultimately bore fruit and ended happily but at that time there were about 600 young people waiting with permits to exit Gaza.

Did you receive international help and support at this time?

Ayman Qwaider: I would not have done it–meaning getting out from the Gaza Strip–without the international support which supported my right to education. When I was stuck in Gaza, within almost one month I was receiving supporting e-emails and international calls supporting me in my cause. I also admit that some Israeli human rights organization supported me very much when I was denied access to start my education.

What is your experience as a Peace Master Student here in Spain?

Ayman Qwaider: It has been a deeply-enriching experience doing my peace masters in Spain. Meeting students from different parts of the world and sharing experiences have been a wonderful opportunity for me personally. I learned that there is not only one way to understand peace but rather many ways, as there are different people, cultures and ideas. Throughout this masters program I have gained proper knowledge of issues of conflict transformation, human rights discourses, theories of humanitarian aid, action and other courses. Through my studies I have developed intimate relationships with many people from diverse backgrounds. More importantly, this program has assisted me in academically framing my experience that I acquired first hand living in a conflict zone like Gaza and it has given me the opportunity to share this experience with my peers. Given the chance to do this Masters program has actually given me the sense of strength and security to pursue my studies as the educational environment here is much better than in the Gaza Strip.

Do you have any grant from any international organization to help you pay for this master?

Ayman Qwaider: I am currently a scholarship student pursuing my Masters, depending mainly on my scholarship payment assistance.

Which kind of social and economic actions are being taken to help the Palestinian people?

Ayman Qwaider: As a Palestinian from the Gaza Strip, I have found alarming and disturbing the level of pessimism about the state of the economy and the future of the peace process. The mainstream of the Palestinians have been not satisfied with the peace process result carried out with Israel. The estimated number of Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip is 1.5 million inhabitants and of those, almost 1.2 million are totally dependent on humanitarian aid and assistance delivered from UNRWA and other international humanitarian organizations. In light of the ongoing Israeli blockade followed by the devastating war, the entire economic and social system has severely deteriorated, with the level of unemployment at 80% and over 90% of people living below the line of poverty.

The absolute control of Israel over the Gaza Strip and restrictions on movement have devastated the economic system in the Strip and in just letting the basic necessities enter the Strip. This has had profound negative consequences for Palestinian society in all sectors. My concern is that the rapid population growth will only add to these already-terrible problems and make finding a solution all the more difficult.

As a peace master student, do you hold out hope for a viable solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

Ayman Qwaider: Before being a peace student but rather as human, I do believe that there is still great opportunity for true peace. Peace is always possible but it absolutely requires strength and commitment, and particularly during difficult times. Peace must be based on justice and in cultivating understanding in the face of misconception and conflict. Indeed, it has been 63 years now since the eruption of conflict, and if we have learned anything, it is that recent history has proved that peace can never be accomplished through direct negotiations between Palestinian-Israeli leadership since Israel has always and will always put great obstacles in front of any peace process. This is the orchestrated scenario since the agreement of the Oslo Accords of 1993, as Israel never deals in good faith. Humanity has been dehumanized for so long in Palestine, with the ongoing system of injustices represented through an apartheid system, a blockade over the Gaza Strip, the killing of the innocent and the outright theft of land. The only solution to bring about peace and justice in the entire region and to create a fair solution for the conflict is the power of the people. By cultivating a civil, non violent society between Palestinians and Israelis is the only solution to break down the Israeli apartheid system that separates people from people.

We all know how the world would welcome such a development. The power of civil society that helped bring about the end of the apartheid system in South Africa in 1980s can perfectly work in the context of Palestine. South Africans would not have done it without the assistance of the international civil society.

Please sketch for me the future you are working to achieve.

Ayman Qwaider: Since my childhood, I have dedicated my life to assisting my fellow man through education and to help as much as my ability permits me. Life in Palestine always puts a person in daily resistance due to the hardships. Therefore I would like to contribute to the process of bringing about peace and justice, a human right for all people.

You fight every day for the rights of your people. For them, you could be described as a hero. What do you think about this?

Ayman Qwaider: What is a hero? From my perspective several thoughts emerge in my mind when I think of a hero, specifically in a very broad sense. The word hero applies dynamically to individuals in different contexts of culture, history, gender, etc. The term hero might generally be associated with that person who is brave, generous and courageous. Considering yourself a hero, you would intimately reflect your own identity, culture, conflict and history.

For me, it had been actually wonderful when I discovered that my personality is motivated toward many interests. I finished my studies from the Islamic University of Gaza and was well-prepared to be a teacher of English language. Through my early life, people around me never stopped telling me that I have a smiley face. I always enjoyed being close with children. There is one prime characteristic I really admire about the life of the refugee camp, in that its small roads are always crowded with young children where they have fun and enjoy their time, even in such a dire environment. Accordingly, my attitude has changed from being a teacher of the English language for children to being very close to them through another dimension of work, which is the humanitarian aid and relief work.

Personally, it would be simple to identify the concept of hero according to my perception and my experience in Palestine. For me, the hero is the Palestinian child who grows up and builds his life despite living in such terrible conflict. This perspective is due to the fact that I lived in this situation of conflict my entire life as well as being close to children though my previous work. In this regard, I shift my thoughts dramatically to recognize the smiling child as the truly heroic figure.
——–

Filed Under: Ayman Qwaider, Gaza Strip, Intifada/Voice of Palestine, Islamic University of Gaza, Nuserate Refugee camp, Oslo Accord of 1993, Rafah border, UNRWA–the United Nations Relief and Work Agency, UNRWS School (United Nation Relief and Working Agency)

World Jewish Congress approves resolution calling for criminalizing Holocaust denial

May 8, 2013 by admin Leave a Comment

http://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/2013/05/08/world-jewish-congress-approves-resolution-calling-for-criminalizing-holocaust-denial/

The resolution on anti-Semitism also calls countries where appropriate constitutional provisions exist to consider banning neo-Nazi parties.

[TUT Editor's Note: so, in other words, these same Jewish interests CONSTANTLY lecturing others on ‘free speech’ and CONSTANTLY warning of the dangers of ‘Islamic Shariah Law’ where people are punished for holding/voicing opinions contrary to the precepts of a certain religion are now calling for laws to be made criminalizing free speech/free thought as pertains the ‘holy of holies’–meaning the Holocaust.

As one famous philosopher stated over and over when warning of Jewish power, ‘beware the leaven of the pharisees, which is hypocrisy and lying’]

Haaretz

The World Jewish Congress approved on Tuesday a resolution that calls on countries around the world, “in particular those whose Jewish populations were decimated in the Shoah,” to outlaw the public denial of the Holocaust, and where appropriate constitutional provisions exist, to consider banning neo-Nazi parties.

The resolution also urges Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and other national leaders and legislators in Europe to join the 125 legislators from more than 40 countries in signing the 2009 London Declaration on Combating Anti-Semitism.

The WJC decided to hold its Plenary Assembly in the Hungarian capital as an expression of solidarity with the local Jewish community in the city, who have been under threat of rising anti-Semitism ever since the extreme right-wing Jobbik Party won a relatively large share of the vote in the last election.

The WJC resolution, supported by hundreds of delegates from Jewish communities around the world, urges the Hungarian authorities “to take effective measures including by enacting and enforcing legislation, for the protection of all citizens and residents of this country, in particular vulnerable minorities such as the Roma and the Jews, against threats of violence, racist hate and insults and the denial of the Holocaust.”

On Sunday night, the Hungarian prime minister opened the Plenary Assembly promising to act more forcefully against anti-Semitism, although he did not specifically mention the Jobbik Party, which captured 17 percent of the vote in the 2010 election. WJC officials expressed disappointment with his speech, which to their minds lacked substance.

In the resolution, the WJC calls on Hungary “to recognize that the ideology and the actions of the Jobbik movement and its subsidiaries, including the New Hungarian Guard, pose a fundamental threat to Hungary’s democracy, and that decisive action by all democratic forces against these contemporary expressions of extremism must now be taken.”

The resolution also expresses concern about recent signs of rising anti-Semitism in Ukraine.

Earlier today, the Plenary Assembly heard about a new legislative initiative in Greece, which promises a radical crackdown on anti-Semitism and other forms of racism in the country. David Saltiel, the head of the country’s Jewish community, who reported on the development, said the legislation will be submitted to parliament in the coming days, following the Easter holiday break.

According to the legislation, any individual or group that incites against or acts violently toward other individuals or groups “because of their racial origin, the color of their skin, their religion and/or their sexual preferences” could be punished with three months to six years in jail and be fined up to 20,000 euros. The same punishments would apply to Holocaust denial and the National Socialist salute. The legislation also stipulates that if a parliamentary party chief is found to be in violation, public funding for his or her party would be suspended.

———

Filed Under: "Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Anti-Semiti, "hate speech", "Jewish" holocaust, 6 Million Myth, Aboriginal Issues Can/U.S., Abrams/BBC v. Arthur Topham & RadicalPress.com, Adolf Hitler, Editor's Zone, Haaretz, Holocaust denial, HOLODOMOR, Hungarian Jobbik Party, Jewish Censorship, Jewish Hatred, Jewish Holocaust Industry, Jewish Holocaust Lie, Jewish Lobby Groups, Jewish Media Monopoly, Jewish Racism, Jewish Supremacism, Jewish Terrorists, Jews, London Declaration on Combating Anti-Semitism., National Socialism, Nazis, Neo-Nazi parties, Occupy Movement, Palestine, Political Prisoners, Political Zionism, World Jewish Congress (WJC), World Zionist Organization

Why Justin Trudeau May Be More Dangerous than Harper by Damien Gillis

May 7, 2013 by admin Leave a Comment

http://thecanadian.org/item/2066-justin-trudeau-more-dangerous-stephen-harper-politics-keystone-xl-fipa-nexen-damien-gillis

Why Justin Trudeau May Be More Dangerous than Harper
Written by Damien Gillis
Monday, 06 May 2013

Adrian Wyld/CP

Justin Trudeau just may be Canada’s most dangerous man.

He of the throngs of adoring supporters, the pretty new face that promises to resurrect “Canada’s party”.

The key positions he’s taken thus far – supporting the sellout of our strategic energy resources to the Chinese Government, giving away our sovereignty through the Canada-China Trade deal, new pipelines to expand the Tar Sands – hardly vary from those of Prime Minister Stephen Harper. They just look and sound far more attractive coming from Canada’s prodigal son.

And that’s what scares me.

Trudeau’s latest decision to out-Harper Mr. Harper on boosting the proposed Keystone XL pipeline to Texas give us a sobering sense of where the young Liberal leader is headed. Perhaps more troubling is the question of what he actually believes – or whether these positions derive from polling data, focus groups, and a cynical drive to get elected at all costs (more on that in a moment).

In his first swing out west following a successful leadership bid, Trudeau took the time to praise Alberta Premier Alison Redford’s efforts to secure access for Keystone by talking up improved “environmental sustainability” in the Tar Sands (exactly how, we’re left to wonder, beyond a carbon tax proposed by Redford).

“I’m very hopeful despite the political games being played by the NDP…that we will see the Keystone pipeline approved soon,” Trudeau proclaimed.

If Bay Street and the energy sector see that Trudeau is prepared to fulfill the same key objectives as Harper, they will not think twice about swinging their support back to the Liberals. This latest statement on Keystone signals that Mr. Trudeau is truly open for business. For this reason, while backing Keystone may be unpopular with certain segments of the Canadian public, it could prove a shrewd political move in the long-run.

Harper is uncharacteristically weak at the moment. There is the infighting within his usually locked-down caucus, the cratering polling figures (a recent Nanos poll has the Liberals leading the Conservatives for the first time in years, at 34 to 31% support), and an authoritarian image that is becoming increasingly problematic. He and his embattled foot soldiers, the likes of Joe Oliver and Jason Kenney, have had a very bad month.

Oliver overplayed his hand a couple of weeks ago when he attacked the world’s most respected climate scientist, the recently retired James Hansen of NASA, while on a “diplomatic” mission to Washington to build support for Keystone.

The tone-deaf Oliver ranted that Hansen should be “ashamed” of “exaggerating” the effects of climate change and impacts of the Tar Sands, apparently missing the irony of attacking his hosts while trying win them over. The comments, which backfired severely, were picked up by everyone from the New York Times to the UK’s Guardian. Hansen shot back, aptly branding Oliver a “Neanderthal“.

On this score, Trudeau seems to understand something his Conservative opponents don’t – i.e. cultivating buy-in for Keystone requires more sophisticated framing and at least a modicum of tact with our southern neighbours.

Meanwhile, the most likeable and politically adept figure in the Harper Government, Immigration Minister Kenney, finds himself embroiled in the growing scandal over his government’s foreign temporary worker program. The seriousness of this political pitfall is evident in the unusual backtracking Harper is doing on the program.

He’s right to do so. The problem for Harper with issues like this one, the buyout of Canadian energy company Nexen by Chinese state-owned CNOOC, and the botched fighter jet program, is the way they rile his base. Unpopular with small “c” conservatives, they drive division within Harper’s tenuous right-wing alliance.

With these troubles brewing on the home front and attack ads aimed at Trudeau falling short of the effect they had on his predecessors – Michael Ignatieff and Sétphane Dion – things are shaping up nicely for Harper’s young challenger.

The question is, what does this mean for Canada?

If all Mr. Trudeau represents is a better-packaged version of Harper’s economic vision, then how will the Canadian public and environment – not to mention the planet – be any better off?

The thing that has always bothered me about Justin – ever since his entry onto the public scene at his famous father’s funeral – is that he’s never appeared to stand for anything real. Years later, even following a lengthy leadership race and literally thousands of media clips and public appearances, I still don’t know what core principles motivate his drive to lead the country. He speaks in platitudes, clever but meaningless tweets – which is partly what makes him so effective with social media and our soundbite-obsessed mainstream press.

He is our version of Robert Redford’s character in The Candidate.

Evidently, if Justin stands for anything, it’s selling out Canada’s strategic resources and exploiting the climate-destroying Tar Sands. Where his father tried and failed to build a made-in-Canada energy policy, the younger Trudeau is going in the opposite direction.

Even that, though, I suspect, is more a reflection of his willingness to shape-shift his policies into whatever form advisers tell him will track best politically.

With Harper, by contrast, we have a sense that his zeal for expanding Canada’s fossil fuel industries through foreign ownership is something in which he believes on a deep, ideological level. I’m not sure which is better – the guy who believes in something I and many other Canadians patently don’t, or the guy who probably doesn’t but is willing to say he does, just to get elected. If these are our two choices, then I’m ready for a third.

Real leadership means fighting for real principles, even when they’re unpopular. Great politicians find a way to sell good ideas to the public and media.

Justin Trudeau does none of these things. But, boy, does he look good not doing them.
—-

Filed Under: Alberta, Alberta oil & gas industry, Alberta Premier Alison Redford, Alberta Tar Sands, Canada-China Trade deal, China, Chinese Government, Chinese state-owned CNOOC, Common Sense Canadian, Damian Gillis, Editor's Zone, Environmental Issues, Immigration Minister Jason Kenney, Jason Kenney, Justin Trudeau, Keystone XL pipeline, Liberal Party of Canada, Nanos poll, NDP, New Democratic Party of Canada, Prime Minister Stephen Harper

Apologists for Israel take top posts at BBC by Amena Saleem

May 3, 2013 by admin Leave a Comment

http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/apologists-for-israel-take-top-posts-at-bbc.html

Apologists for Israel take top posts at BBC

Wednesday, May 1, 2013
Gilad Atzmon

Introduction by Gilad Atzmon: The Zionification of Britain is completed. However, the piece below is also a tragic glimpse into UK PSC’s impotence.

It is far from being a secret that the PSC has been Zionised. However, Considering PSC colossal failure in representing Palestinian interests within British media, PSC unprecedented success in expelling Palestinians from its ranks is pretty remarkable indeed.

Apologists for Israel take top posts at BBC

by Amena Saleem / April 28th 2013

http://21stcenturysocialism.com/

The American poet T.S. Eliot wrote that ‘April is the cruelest month’. The phrase springs to mind in April 2013, the month that a new director-general took up his post at the BBC and, within two weeks, had installed a line-up of hardline Zionists at the top of the world’s largest publicly-funded news organization.

Tony Hall, whose role as director-general commenced on 2 April, is a former BBC director of news and can boast a total of nearly 30 years working at the corporation. As such, he is well-versed in the BBC’s values — he knows what the BBC wants.

Soon after his own appointment, Hall named James Harding as the BBC’s new director of news and current affairs. Until December, Harding was editor of The Times, an avowedly right-wing, pro-Israeli paper owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News International group.

In 2011, Harding spoke at a media event organized by The Jewish Chronicle, telling his audience: “I am pro-Israel. I believe in the State of Israel. I would have had a real problem if I had been coming to a paper [The Times] with a history of being anti-Israel. And, of course, Rupert Murdoch is pro-Israel.”

Glee

The strongly Zionist Jewish Chronicle reprinted those words with glee as news of Harding’s BBC appointment broke. And it also took the opportunity to remind its readers that, during the Israeli massacre in Gaza in late 2008 and early 2009, when more than 1,400 Palestinians were slaughtered, Harding wrote a Times editorial titled, ‘In defense of Israel’.

Now bringing his pro-Israel biases into the top ranks of the BBC, Harding will be in charge of its flagship news and current affairs programs including Today, Newsnight, Panorama and Question Time. He will also be responsible for daily news bulletins on the BBC’s main television channels and radio stations.

According to the Guardian, Harding now holds “arguably the most important editorial job in Britain”.

The news of his appointment to the £340,000 ($518,000) per year post comes just a fortnight after the former Labour Party minister James Purnell took up his new position at the BBC as director of strategy and digital.

Purnell, who was one of Hall’s first appointments, served for two years while in Parliament as chairman of the Westminster lobby group Labour Friends of Israel. Hugely influential, Labour Friends of Israel has drawn support from senior figures within the party, including the former prime ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.

Unsurprisingly, Purnell subscribes to the Zionist view, often taken in BBC news reporting, that Israel can do no wrong. Rather than as an aggressive occupier, Purnell portrays Israel as a victim of hostile, terrorist Arab neighbors. In a letter to Prospect magazine in 2004, Purnell wrote of the comparison made by campaigners between Israel and apartheid-era South Africa, saying: “I find it hard to reconcile that image to the reality on the ground. Israel is a democracy, suffering terrorist attacks, surrounded by countries that don’t recognize its existence, the victim of well-funded terrorist organizations that preach anti-Semitic hate”.

Fact-free propaganda

Israel, with more than 60 laws discriminating against its Palestinian citizens in all areas of life, including political and civil rights, can hardly be called a democracy if a democracy is a state for all its people. And two of its closest geographical neighbors, Jordan and Egypt, have long-standing peace treaties with Israel, something which would scarcely be possible if they didn’t recognize its existence.

However, Purnell’s fact-free, propagandized view of Israel will not be out of place at the BBC. The irony of course is that, under the terms of its Royal Charter, the BBC is meant to be committed to impartiality in its broadcasting.

That it is not can be evidenced in Hall’s third appointment — the promotion of former Today editor Ceri Thomas to the post of BBC head of programming. In his last full year as editor of Today, Thomas presided over a program that interviewed a senior Israeli politician or ambassador on average once every two months. Interviewees included Danny Ayalon, then Israel’s deputy foreign minister, and Tzipi Livni, an architect of the 2008-‘09 Gaza massacre.

Airbrushed

During the same period, not a single Palestinian leader or spokesperson was accorded a similar honor. There was no serious recognition, under Thomas’ reign at Today, of the Palestinian viewpoint.

Thomas may well have felt that a Palestinian viewpoint was unnecessary on Today — widely seen in British media circles as the morning program which sets the news agenda for the rest of the day. After all, Palestine itself did not register in any of the aforementioned interviews, which were conducted by the BBC’s heavyweight journalists, including James Naughtie and John Humphrys.

Every single interview focused on a BBC obsession, embodied in Harding and Purnell, and practiced by Thomas at Today, of the ‘threat’ to Israel from its Arab neighbors and Iran. There was no grilling of any interviewee on Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land, its violence against Palestinian civilians, or its arsenal of nuclear weapons which threaten the whole of the Middle East.

After each interview, the UK-based Palestine Solidarity Campaign wrote to the Today program to ask why Israel’s ongoing occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, in the face of international condemnation, had been airbrushed from the conversation.

Each time, this reply was received: “It simply wouldn’t be possible to discuss the complexities of the Middle East conflict during such a brief interview.”

So, over the course of six interviews in 12 months, each one about five or six minutes long, the Today program under Thomas couldn’t find a moment to bring up the Israeli occupation with the Israeli top brass it was interviewing. All of that airtime was needed to discuss not Israel’s aggression, but its own perceived victimhood.

One other moment from that year, 2011, stands out. On 23 March, Israel had carried out air and tank bombardments on Gaza, killing eight Palestinians, including two children and their grandfather. This was followed late at night by two rockets being fired from Gaza into Israel, which resulted in no injuries or deaths.

The next morning’s news bulletins on the Today program reported on the rockets which had hit Israel, but there was absolutely no mention of the death and destruction wreaked on Gaza by Israeli forces.

As ‘journalism’, it was beyond disgraceful. However, the presentation of some facts and the complete omission of others which resulted in the portrayal of Israel as a country under attack, while trying to live peacefully, was entirely consistent with BBC news reporting.

The BBC’s response to the Palestine Solidarity Campaign when questioned on why it hadn’t felt the deaths of eight Palestinians — two of them children — newsworthy, while giving coverage to non-fatal rocket attacks which took place in the same time period, was this: “Choosing the stories to include in our bulletins; the order in which they appear and the length of time devoted to them is a subjective matter and one which we know not every viewer and listener will feel we get right every time.”

This, then, is the history that Thomas brings with him to his new role as head of programming. Harding and Purnell carry with them their dedicated commitment to the Zionist cause. What hope now for Palestine at the BBC? April is indeed a cruel month.
———

Filed Under: Amena Saleem, BBC, Ceri Thomas, Gilad Atzmon, Guardian, James Harding, James Purnell, Jewish Chronicle, Palestine, Political Zionism, T.S. Eliot, The Times, Tony Hall

Smearing Kennedy by S.H. Pearson

May 3, 2013 by admin Leave a Comment

http://pearsonpayload.blogspot.ca/2013/04/smearing-kennedy.html
Tuesday, April 30, 2013
Smearing Kennedy

by S. H. Pearson

Listen bitches. Why would a man go out for hotdogs when he’s got this at home.

In this fast-reading autobiography, George Lincoln Rockwell educates, awakens and entertains. You will be brought to laughter and tears by his eloquent pendulum. You can count on this book having been suppressed by his killers for decades. Rockwell exposes them by it.

He was a brilliant, albeit, secular man. A Navy Commander whose last fighter cockpit was in the F8F Bearcat. Oh hell yes. Top that all you ground-pounding New York rats. I dare you.

He was tall, talented, well-turned, well-bred and had all the right stuff. The only thing he lacked was a God-fearing soul. He charged into the fray of life banking only on his human abilities. Sometimes a man needs more. But I read in his words a hard leaning toward Jesus Christ. Rockwell was devoid of hatred. He was right as rain and good as gold. He sang the praises of Christians from a secular mind — in that an honest man cannot deny the fruits of their tree. Rockwell was an honest man.

A virtuous man on his path to God with too many irons in the fire. Too many balls in the air. Too many wild dogs snapping at his heels when he wrote this book — to “be still and know that I am God” as the Word says.

This can be seen by the way life knocked him around. He leapt out there, taking on the punches without a prayer. Just his guts and wit. His first wife was an ice queen. His second finally collapsed under the pressure of his persecution. He was survived by seven children.

After a surprisingly good childhood despite the Great Depression and a broken home, Rockwell entered Brown University in the fall of 1938. A hurricane ravished the New England coast that year — tantamount to the covert, creeping communism. He fast learned that President Roosevelt was a traitor and a liar. And that Charlie Chaplin was a Marxist jew who changed his name from Israel Thonstein. Rockwell wrote that Chaplin “…is so red [that] even our pinko State Department has banned him from the U.S.A.”

However, even an intellectual like Rockwell swallowed the lies about Hitler. When Roosevelt’s jew-friendly war broke out, Rockwell rushed off to “come to the aid of his country.” To save them from the evil Nazi’s in a fratricidal war fanned up by the jews for the jews.

Headlong into the U.S. Navy. Back when “wooden ships and iron men” was still the motto. Rockwell got a kick out of military discipline. It was a good fit. He embraced the dangerous life of a Naval Aviator with zeal. Catapulted off USS OMAHA into blushing dawn. Dreams still in his head. Barely out of bed. Yonder lay blue Neptune kissing Aurora. Lip-lock to die for. Oh the sight of that. What a wake-up, aye, sailor-boy?

Five hours of wartime surveillance in an old prop-job with every drop of fuel measured to the mile. One mistake in his calculations and he goes the way of Amelia. Out here in the Fleet, it’s all pass/fail baby. Saying nothing of trying to set ‘er back down on a pitching, rolling deck, bleary-eyed, sapped and woozy. Can you find that little ship?

Rockwell sure as hell did. The John F. Kennedy Navy hardened him for what would come later. And like Kennedy in those days, boy was he good-lookin’. Had his pick of the fillies too. His accounts of women will make you tingle. Where are men like that today? Where are the gentleman in choker whites? He was eighteen before he got his first kiss. A Victorian to the bone.

All this in a man whose home life provided no church. I can only imagine the spiritual edge that a good Catholic or Muslim upbringing would have given him.

Beautiful writing about his Navy days will bring you to your knees even if you never wore the blue. He puts you there — flying stick in an old recon bird over El Caribe. The adventures of which he would later recount to the “less heroic deck-apes.” Lording it over the black-shoe Navy as they eagerly awaited reports from their pilots about what had been seen. “I ached for a carrier and a hotter plane with more combat…”

He longed for a brand new F4U Corsair, “at that time the hottest and deadliest thing in the air.” Make me break out in a cold sweat, fly-boy. Dang that gull-wing thing. With a monstrous cowling and a monstrous prop. Surly blue to disappear into the sea. I long for one too.

But next it was off to Pensacola and the P-38 Lightning. Life gallops along at top speed. A wife is taken. A family emerges. The war ends. Civilian life begins.

In 1950 the Korean War recalls Rockwell as a Navy pilot. This time as an instructor in the F8F Bearcat. “The F8 is the hot-rod of the sky and how I loved it.” He called it a bumble-bee. He called it a hornet. “It has so much power… It’s like riding a lightning bolt.”

About this time Rockwell learns about a Senator from Wisconsin named Joseph R. McCarthy. His awakening to the jewish problem thence began. It hit him like a tidal wave. As it does all of us. Just in time for Harry Truman to fire General Douglas McArthur, Rockwell’s beloved hero. The jews hated both McCarthy and McArthur, smearing them in their character assassination rags. Hissing venom and vitriol, they shouted about how McArthur threatened to become another Hitler.

Rockwell wrote, “I found that Communism was not only Jewish, but the Jews boasted about its Jewishness in their books and papers!” His new mission had begun. Smitten with the clarion call of duty to rid our society of this menace who was “forcing integration on us, degrading our culture with their filthy art of chaos and pornography and, worst of all, spreading the disease of Communism…” Once Rockwell heard the speeches of Senator McCarthy, his fire was ignited. He tore into text like he did everything in life — like a tiger.

He devoured all the commie rags and mags. The Daily Worker, New Masses, the Library of Congress yielded up its hidden treasures. He learned how Communist jews planted their seeds in China before the 1949 overthrow of its government. He read Henry Ford’s warnings from the 1920?s. He read the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion.

America was crawling with Communist spies in the 1950?s (all jews). Some of whom were caught and hanged. I bet you won’t read about them in the New York Times.

Rockwell writes that Jews were in charge of our atomic weapons and programs also. Leave it to Lyndon to undo what Kennedy did in forbidding the newly-formed jewish state a nuclear arsenal. Now look at the monster they have become.

All this Rockwell figured out before he got his hands on Mein Kampf. Like Henry Ford and DeWest Hooker, the blinders were off. He was wide awake, “I began to wonder why we had gone to war on the side of the Bolsheviks who had openly bragged for a hundred years of their plans to destroy us by force and violence, lies and subversion; while we completely wrecked Christian Germany, which never had a single highly-placed spy in our country…”

That was the pivot. That was the turning point. Then after he found a copy of Hitler’s magnum opus tucked away in the back of a bookshop, the big picture emerged. “I could not lay the book down without agonies of impatience to get back to it. I read it walking to the squadron, I took it into the air and read it, propped up on the chartboard… circling over the desert. I read it on the Coronado Ferry. I read it into the night and resumed the next morning. … I studied it, thought about it and wondered at the utter, indescribable genius of it.”

And thus began Commander Rockwell’s fever to fix what ails us. He tried doing this without a Nazi arm-band, but the news jews gave him no coverage. So he started the American Nazi Party knowing damn well that now they would.

He drew fire from the jews something fierce. They do the usual thing they always do. Smear you in their crooked press. Wreck your job. Go after your marriage and family. Yadda yadda. If all that does not deter you then they pay someone to kill you.

Rockwell was picked off like Kennedy in 1967. Oh well. Better than dying in adult diapers at 97. His book survived just fine. In full Nazi garb, he was invited to speak at universities all over the country. These speeches were filmed for posterity and can now be seen on YouTube. Rockwell is all over the Internet. You can download a free copy of this book here: http://jrbooksonline.com/PDF_Books/This_Time_the_World.pdf

—–

Filed Under: Adolf Hitler, American Nazi Party, Bolsheviks, Charlie Chaplin aka Israel Thonstein, DeWest Hooker, Editor's Zone, General Douglas McArthur, George Lincoln Rockwell, Germany, Germany Must Perish!, Harry Truman, Henry Ford, Sr., Joseph R. McCarthy, Mein Kampf, New Masses, New York Times, S.H. Pearson, The Daily Worker

Holocaust History Denial: A Clear and Present Danger by Kevin Barrett

May 1, 2013 by admin 1 Comment

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/04/22/holocaust-history-denial-a-clear-and-present-danger/

Monday, April 22nd, 2013
Holocaust History Denial: A Clear and Present Danger

by Kevin Barrett

I used to believe in “the Holocaust.”

Not as a religion – I’ve never been to any of the museum-temples or made a pilgrimage to Auschwitz or pored over the sacred texts. And I never was stupid or crazy enough to accept the Holocaust as a valid excuse for the Zionist theft of Palestine. (If the Holocaust had anything to do with Israel, then Israel would have been established in Germany – not Palestine.)

In short, I believed in “the Holocaust” as history, because I assumed that 99% of Western academic historians can’t be wrong.

I assumed that about six million Jews were exterminated by the Nazis in concentration camps, mostly in gas chambers, as part of a pre-planned effort to exterminate the Jews of Europe. As far as I knew, all of the reputable historians believed this. The handful of dissenters, I assumed, were cranks of one sort or another. And though I had met many Muslim academic colleagues who were Holocaust skeptics, I thought they were probably biased due to their anti-Zionism.

Then in 2006, out of the blue, for no apparent reason, I was attacked on Wikipedia as a “holocaust denier.” In fact, I was a well-known skeptic about 9/11 – not the Holocaust. I knew next to nothing about the controversies surrounding the alleged gas chambers. Wikipedia claimed I was a supporter of David Irving, Mark Green, and Ernst Zundel. In fact, I had never heard of Green, and barely even knew the names of Irving and Zundel. (I had spent most of the 1990s reading every French literary classic for my French Literature MA, then learning Arabic and studying Islam and Morocco for my Ph.D. while supporting my wife and two small children, so I wasn’t really paying attention to Holocaust-controversy news.)

I tried to correct the erroneous information – which came from some crank’s personal website, and had never been checked, much less corroborated – along with the dozens of other derogatory factual errors, on my Wikipedia page. The corrections would always be removed, and the lies, reinstated, by the next day. Sometimes it happened in a matter of hours.

This was enough to make me slightly paranoid.

But as the hippies used to say, just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t out to get you.

Somebody was trying to frame me as a “Holocaust denier” – presumably to damage my credibility on 9/11. Why would they do that?

By 2010 or so, I finally got around to reading a few books about the Holocaust controversies. The first book I read was Denying History by Michael Shermer and Alex Grobman. It had been recommended as the best introduction to why the Holocaust deniers are wrong.

Denying History blew my mind – but not in the way its authors presumably intended. It consists mostly of weak ad-hominem attacks against “Holocaust deniers.” Its arguments about the actual issues – the questions of pre-planned total extermination, cyanide gas chambers, and six million Jewish victims (or was that six million total victims?) – were not nearly as strong as I had expected. In fact, they were surprisingly flimsy.

Shermer and Grobman admit that the keepers of the Auschwitz memorial suddenly decided, one day in 1989, to reduce the number of victims of that notorious camp from 4 million to “about one and one half million.” That is a lot of victims to vanish so suddenly.

Shermer and Grobman claim that the suddenly-missing 2 1/2 million Auschwitz victims somehow magically re-appeared on the Eastern Front, where they turned out to have been shot down by German firing squads. This maneuver preserves the seemingly magical “six million” figure. But it raises some obvious questions about the reliability of the death counts. First, isn’t the mathematics of “subtract-two-and-one-half-million here, add two-and-one-half-million there” just a bit too convenient? Second, what about the forensic evidence? How can the remains of 2 1/2 million human cadavers have suddenly moved from Auschwitz to the Eastern Front? And third – if the orthodox Holocaust historians were that wrong about Auschwitz prior to 1989, what else might they be wrong about?

Shermer and Grobman downplay the issue of forensic evidence – because, it seems, there really isn’t a whole lot. Millions of people seem to have vanished without a trace. Instead, orthodox Holocaust historians rely on eyewitness accounts, not forensics, to establish the existence of mass-execution cyanide gas chambers and six million dead bodies. They say the bodies and skeletons were almost completely burned, so little or nothing remained. No point in looking for millions of bodies, you won’t find nearly enough.

On that point, the skeptics and the orthodox historians agree.

Denying History raised questions in my mind about the truth of what I had previously believed. It also, paradoxically, evoked my sympathy for the people the authors wanted me to despise. Just about all of them seemed like reasonably nice people. David Irving, Shermer and Grobman admitted, was a highly-qualified and accomplished historian who had suffered greatly, and even been imprisoned, for his sincerely-held scholarly opinions. David Cole, a young Jewish man led to “Holocaust denial” by his penchant for truth, had won a debate against the pro-Orthodoxy forces, including Shermer himself, on the Phil Donahue Show. The only way the forces of orthodoxy could win their debate with David Cole, it turned out, was by issuing death threats to terrify him into recanting.

Shermer and Grobham made me like David Cole, feel sorry for him, and despise the JDL terrorists who threatened to kill him if he didn’t pretend to agree with them.

Since Shermer and Grobman were such poor defenders of orthodoxy, I turned to Deborah Lipstadt, who had won a libel suit filed against her by David Irving. I assumed that anyone who could beat Irving in a history debate must have a rock-solid command of the facts. Her book Denying the Holocaust, I assumed, would put the deniers’ arguments to rest.

As I turned the pages of Denying the Holocaust, my astonishment gradually turned to fury. The book has nothing to do with history. It is one long hysterical polemic in favor of the author’s utterly unexamined a priori belief system. Lipstadt’s book consists of 100% emotion, zero percent rational-empirical argument about historical fact. It is basically an endless chain of mindless ad-hominem insults against the “holocaust deniers.”

If this was the best the defenders of Holocaust orthodoxy could do, maybe they didn’t have quite the airtight argument that I had assumed.

At this point, my faith in Holocaust orthodoxy was somewhat shaken.

Then one of my 9/11-skeptic acquaintances told me I should read Debating the Holocaust: A New Look at Both Sides by Thomas Dalton. I did – and found it was far better than the books by Shermer/Grobman and Lipstadt. Of course, it wasn’t really as neutral as the title sounded. Dalton obviously believed the holocaust skeptics had a better case than the keepers of orthodoxy. But at least he did try to elucidate the historical arguments, point by point. Though he did not convince me that the Holocaust skeptics were right, he successfully argued that the Holocaust controversy was a legitimate topic of historical debate.

I invited Dalton to join me on the radio to debate two defenders of orthodoxy, Roberto Muehlenkamp and Andrew Mathis, on my radio show. (Read about the show here, and listen at http://www.americanfreedomradio.com/archive/Truth-Jihad-32k-042410.mp3 ).

Then I met Nick Kollerstrom, author of the best book on 7/7, Terror on the Tube. Dr. Kollerstrom, a Ph.D. History of Science chemistry specialist, was expelled from his teaching post at University College of London simply for publishing a scholarly article evaluating the chemical evidence for the existence of homicidal gas chambers during World War II. Those who expelled him threw in gratuitous insults, but refused to make any effort to dispute the facts as laid out in the offending article.

I got to know Nick, rambled all over London with him, and found I liked him and respected his intellect. His views were legitimate scholarly interpretations, not bigotry.

These experiences have led me to conclude that the problem isn’t Holocaust denial – it’s Holocaust history denial (HHD). People like Deborah Lipstadt, and the other keepers of Holocaust orthodoxy, irrationally deny that the Holocaust is history, and therefore open to free and fearless rational-empirical debate. For them, the Holocaust is emotion-saturated sacred myth, not history.

Western culture – not just a few keepers of orthodoxy – is suffering from HHD. Everywhere you go, it is denied that the Holocaust is just one unfortunate historical episode among others, and that the data can be interpreted and reinterpreted in a wide variety of ways. The sacred shibboleths – six million dead, cyanide gas chambers, and a pre-planned total extermination – are the new holy trinity. Anybody who doubts them isn’t just another revisionist historian, but a heretic.

And the heretics are sent to prison, or have their careers destroyed, simply for writing or speaking about their interpretations of historical data.

Nick Kollerstrom tells me that many thousands of people have been prosecuted, in Germany alone, under the “political correctness” laws. How can anyone possibly be a historian in a society that imprisons people for expressing their interpretations of history?

Holocaust history denial is a clear and present danger. The Western tradition of freedom of inquiry is under threat. Ever since Socrates founded philosophy, acerbic skepticism about “public myths” has been central to Western thought. Today, it can get you thrown in prison or ejected from your job.

It’s time to meet the threat of Holocaust history denial head-on. Let’s re-historicize the Holocaust, and put an end to the Holocaust Religion!

I propose that America’s top fraud investigators should be immediately assigned to the Holocaust survivors’ fraud beat. The recent discover of $42 million in phony “survivor” claims is undoubtedly only the tip of the iceberg; billions more are there for the taking. The money recovered from the “no business like Shoah business” shysters should be applied to the endowment of Holocaust Revisionism chairs in a dozen or so of our leading universities. There, the world’s top Holocaust revisionists should be turned loose to develop their very best historical arguments. A lively scholarly historical debate between the revisionists and the defenders of orthodoxy would ensue.

Who would win the debate? I have no idea. Maybe, with the debate reinvigorated, the orthodox camp would find the motivation to go out and look for the long-lost forensic evidence, including the ruins of actual mass-human-extermination gas chambers and the remains of millions of victims’ bodies. Or maybe the revisionists, given a modicum of legitimacy and funding, would definitively prove their case.

Either way, history – and the Western tradition of freedom of inquiry – would be the real winners.
—

Filed Under: Auschwitz, Bishop Richard Williamson, David Cole, David Irving, Deborah Lipstadt, Editor's Zone, Ernst Zundel, Holocaust denial, Jewish Defense League (JDL), Kevin Barrett, Mark Green, Nick Kollerstrom, Thomas Dalton

How Many Jews? by Douglas Reed

April 30, 2013 by admin 1 Comment

How Many Jews?

Douglas Reed

[Editor's Note: The issue involving the "6 Million Jews" purported to have been gassed and roasted (holocausted) in German concentration camps during WWII continues to be hotly debated within the alternative media sixty-eight years after the war's end. In the case of the Jewish media aka the msm, their ongoing insistence on repeatedly reinforcing their own self-chosen figure of 6 million well after being proven to be historically inaccurate has created greater and greater skepticism on the part of truth-seekers everywhere who, now thanks to the Internet and the freeing up of the facts and the hidden information surrounding this controversy, are realizing that the 6 million lies of the Jews is nothing but Zionist Jew propaganda designed to buttress their failed attempt at mesmerizing and brainwashing the world into believing the greatest lie ever told throughout recorded history.

One of the earliest debunkers of the 6 million myth was British war correspondent and author Douglas Reed. Having lived through WWI and covered WWII in depth Reed was well aware of the historic context in which he lived and wrote. His comments below on the impossibility of ascertaining with any accuracy the actual number of Jews supposedly living in Europe from 1939 until 1945 are taken from Chapter 42 of his 1956 classic, The Controversy of Zion and give the reader a much needed reference point from which to judge just who is more correct when it comes to this ongoing clash over how many Jews died during WWII.]

from
Chapter 42
The Talmudic Vengeance

The trials of “war criminals” formed the peaks of the vengeance and the Everest of them all was reached in the Nuremberg trial of the chief Nazi leaders….

By the choice of the Jewish Day of Judgment for the hanging of the Nazi leaders and German commanders the Western leaders gave the conclusion of the Second War this aspect of a vengeance exacted specifically in the name of “the Jews.” The shape which the trial took showed the purpose of the immense propaganda of falsification conducted during the war, which I have earlier described. “Crimes against Jews” were singled out as a separate count, as if Jews were different from other human beings (and when the judgment was delivered a hundred million human beings in Eastern Europe had been handed over to the general persecution of all men, from which Jews in their proportion suffered in Germany). This particular indictment was made “the crux of the case” against the defendants (Captain Liddell Hart’s words) and was based on the assertion that “six million Jews” had been killed (as time went by the word “perished” was substituted for “killed”). An impartial court would at the outset have thrown out any suit based on this completely unverifiable assertion: At Nuremberg lawyers, who in a private case would have demanded acquittal on the strength of an unproven statement in respect of a decimal point or digit, used this fantastic figure as the basis of their demand for conviction.

I earlier described, with illustrations from Jewish sources, the process by means of which, over the years, the Jews were “singled out” from the mass of Hitler’s victims and their number inflated at will from day to day (Hitler’s book-bonfire became “the burning of Jewish books”; his concentration camps where ninety percent of the inmates were Germans became concentration camps for Jews; a wartime report about the killing of” 150,000 White Russians, Ukrainians and Jews at Kieff” was changed to “150,000 Jews”; and so on interminably).

The statement about the “six million Jews,” allowed to pass without question by the men on the bench, was the end-product of this process. In six years of war the Germans, Japanese and Italians, using every lethal means, killed 824,928 British, British Commonwealth and American fighting-men, merchant sailors and civilians. Assuming that the Germans killed, say, half of these in Europe, they killed (according to this assertion) fifteen times as many Jews there. To do that, they would have needed such quantities of men, weapons, transports, guards and materials as would have enabled them to win the war many times over.

The figure would not even deserve scrutiny if it had not been used to give the Second War the brand of “a Jewish war” and if that, again, did not foreshadow the shape of any third war. Because of that, it may be examined here.

At no time in history, from antiquity to this day, can the number of Judahites, Judeans or Jews, living at any given time, be determined; for that reason the number afflicted in any calamity also cannot be determined, and there are many more reasons why the number of Jewish victims in the Second World War cannot be fixed. The process of mystification begins in Genesis and continues through the Torah (the seventy people taken by Jacob to Egypt, for instance, apparently increased to two or three million within 150 years). At all periods large, and sometimes huge variations occur in the “estimates,” and only estimates are possible, as the present term, “Jew,” is legally indefinable and statistically elusive.

An eminent Jewish authority, Dr. Hans Kohn, in his article on “the distribution of Jews” in the Encyclopaedia Britannica Book of the Year for 1942, writes:

“In view of the fact that in several of the countries where the largest number of Jews were living in 1941 the census did not contain any questions regarding religion … the exact number of Jews in the world in 1941 could not be ascertained. The definition of persons falling under the classification of ‘Jewish race’ is in no way agreed upon … In countries where the census included questions of religious origins, even this religious criterion of Jewish faith is difficult to define exactly. Thus the assumption which generally varied around the figure of 16 million” (for the entire world) “cannot claim any foundation on exact ‘figures. To this uncertainty about the number of Jews in the world was added in recent years a growing uncertainty about their numerical distribution in the different countries and continents. Probably more than 6,000,000 Jews lived in Poland and the U.S.S.R.”

A weaker basis than that even for “estimates” (not to speak of “statistics”) can hardly be imagined, yet in the ensuing period, when all the additional confusions of war and occupation were piled on this infirm foundation, precise numbers of Jewish casualties were produced day by day, circulated by thousands of assiduous propagandists, and at the end declared to amount to six millions!

Dr. Kohn says that “probably” more than 6,000,000 Jews lived in Poland and U.S.S.R. in 1941. In respect of the U.S.S.R. this might corroborate another Jewish authority (Prof. H.M.T. Loewe), who said in the Encyclopaedia Britannica of 1937 that 2,700,000 Jews then lived there. Similarly, four years earlier (1933) the Jewish journal Opinion had stated that the Jewish population of the U.S.S.R. was under 3,000,000; and the Soviet official Encyclopaedia in 1953 stated that “the Jewish population of the Soviet Union in 1939 was 3,020,000.”

This near agreement among four authorities in respect of the period 1933-1941 might lead the reader to think that the number of Jews in one country at least (the U.S.S.R.) was established with reasonable accuracy at a given time. On the contrary, this is a statistical jungle where nothing is ever established. In 1943 the Jewish Commissar Mikhoels said in London (according to the Johannesburg Jewish Times of 1952), “Today we have in the Soviet Union 5,000,000 Jews.” That is two million more than two years before, and if it was true presumably meant that most of the Jews in Poland, after Hitler and Stalin fell out, moved into Soviet territory. However, in the same issue of the Jewish Times a leading Jewish writer, Mr. Joseph Leftwich, stated that the Jewish population of the U.S.S.R. in 1952 was 2,500,000, “a loss since 1943 of 2,500,000.” He asked, “where and how did they disappear?”; the answer, in my judgment, is that most of them disappeared into the statistics.

That is not the end of the confusion in this one section of the question. The Encyclopaedia Britannica of 1937 (in giving the above-cited figure of 2,700,000 Jews in Russia on Jewish authority) said they formed about six percent of the total population. The total population was elsewhere given in the same encyclopaedia as 145,000,000 and six percent of that would be 8,700,000!

The encyclopaedias, statistical yearbooks and almanacs are in this one question all at odds with each other and untrustworthy. I could multiply examples (for instance, the Jewish World Congress in 1953 announced that the Jewish population of the U.S.S.R. was 1,500,000) but wandering in a maze without an outlet is profitless. All published figures are “estimates” made at the estimators’ pleasure, and are without value. A professional accountant might write a book on the efforts of the encyclopaedists to make the post-war figure of Jewish population in the world conform with the pre-war “estimates,” minus six million. Figures are tricky things: a few examples:

The leading American reference yearbook, the World Almanac, in 1947 gave the 1939 Jewish world-population as 15,688,259. In later editions up to 1952 it increased this prewar estimate (without explanation) by a million, to 16,643,120. It gave the 1950 population as 11,940,000, which, if subtracted from the first figure given for 1939, gives a reduction of nearly four millions (though not of six). However, it based even this “estimate” on another estimate, namely, that in 1950 the Jewish population of the U.S.S.R. was 2,000,000. This still left unanswered Mr. Leftwich’s question in respect of Commissar Mikhoels’s statement, that in 1943 the Jewish population of the U.S.S.R. was 5,000,000.

In England Whitaker’s Almanac, of similar eminence, struggled with the same problem. In its 1949 and 1950 issues it gave the 1939 “estimated” Jewish world population as 16,838,000 and that of 1949 as 11,385,200, a reduction of nearly 5,500,000. However, the figures given for Jewish population in separate countries added up to 13,120,000 (not 11,385,200). Incidentally, Whitaker’s in 1950 gave the Jewish population of the U.S.S.R. as 5,300,000, against the World Almanac’s figure for the same year, of 2,000,000.

Both these publications are of the highest repute for painstaking accuracy and the fault is not theirs; in this one matter alone only Jewish “estimates” are available, and for obvious reasons no dependence can be placed on these. I pointed out the discrepancies in a book of 1951 and observed that Whitaker’s in 1952 no longer contained these “estimates of Jewish populations”; apparently it had abandoned the statistical quest as hopeless, and was right to do so. Another encyclopaedia in its 1950 edition also dropped the subject.

Finally, the New York Times, which may be described as the world’s leading Jewish newspaper (it is Jewish-owned and New York is today primarily a Jewish city) in 1948 published what claimed to be an authoritative statistical article, computing the Jewish population of the world (three years after the war’s end) between 15,700,000 and 18,600,000. If either figure was near truth this meant that the Jewish world-population had remained stationary or increased during the war years.

Newspaper articles are soon forgotten (unless some diligent student preserves them) but the great propagandist fabrications are handed on. Thus the historians, those men of precision in other questions, passed on the legend of “mass-extermination” to posterity. At the war’s end Professor Arnold J. Toynbee was producing his monumental Study of History and in its eighth volume (1954) said that “the Nazis … reduced the Jewish population of Continental Europe, west of the Soviet Union, from about 6,5 million to about l,5 million by a process of mass-extermination.” He called this “a bare statistical statement” and then added a footnote showing that it was not a statistical statement: “it is not possible to give exact figures based on accurate statistics and it seemed improbable in 1952 that the necessary information would ever be obtainable.” Professor Toynbee explains that his figure was based on Jewish “calculations, in which there were several possible sources of error.” He concludes that “it might be estimated” that five million Continental Jews had been done to death by the Nazis.

The estimate is historically valueless. The starting-point for consideration of this question is the fact that six million Jews, or anything approaching that number, cannot possibly have been “done to death” or caused to “perish,” for the reasons given at the start of this discussion; the very assertion, made before the Nuremberg court, was an affront to their 825,000 fighting-men, sailors and civilians, killed in all theatres of war, of which only the Western politicians of this century would have been capable.

The number of Jews who were killed or perished will never be known, for the reasons already stated and partly discovered by Professor Toynbee in his footnote to history. The very term “Jew” is indefinable; Jews are often not isolated in statistics; and at no time can the number of living Jews in the world be ascertained with any approach to accuracy. Indeed, any attempt to reach statistical clarity through census or immigration data is attacked as “discrimination” and “anti-semitism.” For instance:

“Immigrants seeking to settle in Australia will from now on not be asked on application forms if they are Jewish, it was made known in Sydney by the executive committee of Australian Jewry, which protested against this practice to the immigration authorities” (the Jewish Times, Johannesburg). In England, “it is impossible, in the absence of official statistics, to do more than make an intelligent guess … the exact number of Jews in Britain remains a mystery” (the Zionist Record, Johannesburg). In America, President Roosevelt was brought under unremitting pressure to abolish the requirement to state “Jewish” on immigration forms, and in 1952 a major campaign was waged by the Anti-Defamation League and the American Jewish Committee against the McCarran-Walter Act because it sought to restore this requirement. This act was in the event passed over President Truman’s veto, but even a rigorous application of the reinstated requirement would not lead to clarification, as applicants, if they wish, may insert “British” or any similar description, instead of “Jewish.”

This state of statistical affairs is now well-nigh universal, so that the whole question is a mystery and has deliberately been made one. None can even guess the number of Jews whose deaths, during the war, were not natural or the result of bombing and the like, but who were done to death by the Nazis. My opinion is that, whatever was the number of Jews in the countries overrun by Hitler, the number of their victims was in roughly that proportion to the total population stricken, Polish, Czech and other. I have found this to be the opinion of all persons known to me who survived the concentration camps and occupations. Having suffered themselves, their feeling for Jewish victims was as strong as for all others, but they could not understand why the one case of the Jews was singled out and the number of Jewish victims monstrously exaggerated.
——-

Filed Under: "Jewish" holocaust, 6 Million Myth, Douglas Reed, Editor's Zone, HOLODOMOR, Jewish Holocaust Industry, Jewish Holocaust Lie, Jewish Media Monopoly, Jews, Jews Behind Bolshevik Revolution, National Socialism, Nazis, Nuremberg Trial, Political Zionism, The Controversy of Zion, The Gulag Archipelago, The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion

Smart Move! Class Action Suit Against BC HYDRO

April 29, 2013 by admin Leave a Comment

BC Hydro has taken the draconian step of cutting off power to a customer who refused to accept a wireless smart meter.

Last May, a Hydro customer had a wireless smart meter installed on her home despite her refusal. This person suffers from electro-sensitivity and, as a consequence of the radio frequency radiation emitted by the wireless smart meter, her health began to deteriorate.

Despite pleading for months with Hydro to remove the wireless meter and to re-install the analog meter; they refused. Finally, with her health in jeopardy, she ordered a non-radiating analog meter from a company in the US that provides calibrated, tested meters to utility companies. With the supervision of a certified electrician the analog was installed, and the wireless smart meter was returned to Hydro.

When Hydro advised that the analog was not approved by Canadian agencies, the customer located a Canadian analog meter that met all the requirements and then asked Hydro to install it. Hydro refused, ignored her health condition and insisted that she must accept a wireless smart meter or they would cut her power.

On April 17, 2013, Hydro followed through with its threats and cut off its supply of power to her home.

Hydro’s conduct constitutes a violation of our autonomy and our right to determine what potentially harmful emissions do or do not occur from within our own domestic environment; our right to be free from physical intrusion by the state.

Due to Hydro’s actions over the last 2 years, culminating with its cessation of service to a customer for refusing to allow the installation of a wireless smart meter, the Citizens for Safe Technology Society and the Coalition to Stop Smart Meters are filing a class action lawsuit.

We invite participation in the action, subject to Court approval. Further information on the class action and criteria to join can be found at:

www.citizensforsafetechnology.org and www.stopsmartmetersbc.ca
__________________________

Citizens for Safe Technology Society & Coalition to Stop Smart Meters – April 29, 2013

Notice of Class Action Lawsuit against BC Hydro
Invitation for Participation

BC Hydro is a crown utility, an arm of the provincial government that is reaching into the private space of our domestic environment and imposing choices on us that raise serious health concerns.

The World Health Organization/IARC has classified wireless radio frequency radiation, such as that from BC Hydro’s Smart Meters, as a class 2B possible human carcinogen. Regardless, BC Hydro continues to impose, at our residences, the operation of these devices on a 24/7 basis.

BC Hydro’s conduct constitutes a violation of our autonomy and our right to determine what potentially harmful emissions do or do not occur from within our own domestic environment; our right to be free from physical intrusion by the state.

Active plans are in effect to advance this position before the Courts by way of a class action. We invite participation in the action, subject to Court approval, by individuals that meet all three of the following criteria:

You have indicated to BC Hydro in writing (by way of letter or signage) that you do not accept the installation / operation of a wireless smart meter at your home for reasons that include health concerns.

Either a, b, c or d has occurred:

Notwithstanding your written communication referred to above, BC Hydro proceeded to install and operate a wireless smart meter at your home.

Notwithstanding your written communication referred to above, you have received information from BC Hydro setting out its intention to install a wireless smart meter at your home.

BC Hydro has cut off its supply of power to your home as a consequence of your refusal to allow the installation of a wireless smart meter at your home.

BC Hydro has indicated its intention to cut off its supply of power to your home as a consequence of your refusal to allow the installation of a wireless smart meter at your home

At all times during the above-referenced occurrences, you have been a customer of BC Hydro at a residence which you ordinarily occupy.

HOW TO JOIN THE CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT AGAINST BC HYDRO

We need your correspondence with us to be in writing. Please complete the Class Action Registration Form which can be downloaded from citizensforsafetechnology.org and stopsmartmetersbc.ca.

Please send the Registration Form and donation for class action legal fees and administration by cheque payable to Coalition to Stop Smart Meters to the following address:

Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
PO Box 52061
Beacon Ave., RPO
Sidney, BC V8L 5V9

We are accepting donations to fund this civil lawsuit irrespective of participation.

If you have further questions, please contact:

Sharon Noble at director@stopsmartmetersbc.ca

Una St.Clair at una@citizensforsafetechnology.org

Filed Under: B.C. Hydro, Citizens for Safe Technology Society, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters, Sharon Noble, Smart Meters, Una St.Clair

Speak your mind! Gandhi

April 29, 2013 by admin Leave a Comment

Filed Under: Free Speech, Free Speech on the Internet, FREEDOM, Freedom of Expression, Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Thought, Freedom to Protest, Gandhi

Sweden: Bishop (member of billionaire Jewish media dynasty) wants to censor and edit the Christian Bible

April 28, 2013 by admin Leave a Comment

http://blog.balder.org/?p=1565

Jewish Bishop behind Bible falsification
Sweden: Bishop (member of billionaire Jewish media dynasty) wants to censor and edit the Christian Bible
By Balder
April 26, 2013

Bishop Aake Bonnier – Sweden

The Bishop in Skara Stift in Sweden, Aake Bonnier, has become an advocate for falsifying the Bible, since he thinks that the Bible ought to be edited in such a way, that every piece of criticism of the Jews is removed from the Christian Bible.

He allegedly wants to remove the anti-Semitism of Christianity, and he has chosen deception as his tool. That was not very smart, for if one begins with cheating, the project will of course never be accepted.

Aake (Åke) Bonnier was born into the wealthy Jewish publishing family, and he has converted to Christianity, but perhaps he was not all that sincere, taking his latest anti Christian project into account.

Bonnier demands that the Swedish Church stops its alleged Christian misinterpretation of Biblical texts about Jews and Judaism, and cleanse the Christian Liturgy of any type of anti Jewish perspective.

Church to deny difference between Old and New Testament

And even more outrageous, he wants the Church to deny the crucial difference between the Old and the New Testament! This demand practically means that the Church is to give up the meaning of the coming of Christ, the very core event in the New Testament.

That Bishop Aake Bonnier’s project is outrageous and mad, is obvious for many Christian Swedes, but sadly he is protected by his enormous fortune and that of his family; more specifically his family’s influence in the Swedish press has shielded him from a lot of public criticism he otherwise would have been subjected to.

The Church ought to purify itself by excommunicating the false Christian Aake Bonnier, who intends to attack the very soul of Christianity with a forged Bible. But Aake Bonnier’s outrageous attempt to create a falsification of the Bible, sadly enough is not the first time this has been tried.

Quote from Kristeligt Dagblad June 6. 2007:

‘The politically correct Bible, which was published in Germany in the autumn of 2006, is now being heavily criticized by the Evangelical Church in Germany’ [Not to be confused with the American group with the same name].

The character of the Bible and its language makes it unsuitable for services in the Evangelical Church. Martin Luther’s translation will continue to be the most important text during services, the Council of the Evangelical Church said in a press statement, where the Evangelical Church distances itself from the new politically correct ‘translation’ of the Bible.

About 1200 sponsors and the Evangelical Church in Hessen and Nassau have financed the publication of the politically correct Bible. For five long years 52 men and woman have been working on the translation. The result is a text where men and woman are pictured as equal, and where there are no negative depictions of Jews and minorities.

This must be the worst form of deceit known to men. Falsifying the Bible in order ‘to protect Jews and minorities’.

Jerusalem Post – Ovadia Yosef |

This is an excellent example of what kind of evil individuals these politically correct people are. They don’t even stop at falsifying the Bible, the Holy Book, such big and evil heretics and criminals they are, and just because they themselves don’t care about the Word, they think that ordinary Europeans have completely forgotten what the Bible actually says.

In the News Testament of the Christian Bible, there is no doubt that the Jews turned against Christ, and that they are to blame for his death, and no falsifications and fraud can change these facts, whether one likes it or not, and there are millions of Christians all around the world, who know quite well what the Bible says.

—–

By Kaj Vilhelmsen / some minor edits and right hand column additions by Balder

Source:
?Nationaldemokraten 25 april 2013 – Biskop Åke Bonnier bag bibelforfalskning (Kaj Vilhelmsen)

Filed Under: Balder's Blog, Christian Zionists, Christianity, Christians, Editor's Zone, Jewish Bishop Aake Bonnier, Jews

The Real Terror is the Law by John Kaminski

April 28, 2013 by admin Leave a Comment

The Real Terror is the Law

Hear the chant of the mindless monster — ‘USA! USA!’

NOW YOU CAN BE EXECUTED
FOR MERELY BEING A SUSPECT

By John Kaminski
pseudoskylax@gmail.com
https://therebel.org/kaminski

One thing is certain. It is the cops who are committing the crimes.

In the name of terror, they brutalize the public with concocted fantasies and real episodes of self-destructive social sadism.

And in the name of national security, they mislead everyone into believing that crimes are being committed when in reality the cops are creating the crimes themselves, staging “drills” that turn into live events, hiring “crisis actors” to pose as victims, and feeding false information to media maggots ever eager to fan the flames of fear.

Now you can be executed — as we have just learned — for merely being a suspect — with no evidence, no trial, and no finding of guilt, but only by the hysteria generated by the false testimony of the cops amplified and spread throughout the world by corrupt media.

This is how the recently enacted National Defense Authorization Act works in real time.

The cops can commit constant perjury and remain immune from prosecution because the legal system, totally awash in corruption, protects them, while the gullible public, believing what they hear on TV, puts their hands across their hearts and chants “USA USA” without ever really comprehending the deeper reality of what is going on.

This is the new anthem signifying uncritical endorsement of fear and criminal behavior wherever it is heard — “USA! USA!”

It is a blood libel against all of humanity. No one is safe from it, not even the people practicing it for a paycheck nor the social strategists inventing it for purposes of control.

The cops are supposed to protect us, but their mission has curdled. They have turned the law into a weapon of mass murder.

Now, everyone is a criminal and you’re guilty until proven innocent. Babies are being snatched from their parents for not submitting their newborns to poisoned vaccinations. The new Gov. Cuomo in New York has just signed a law that all psychiatric records are now the property of the government.

There is no longer any such thing as doctor-patient confidentiality, which means your life is no longer your own.

Now, they’re creating crimes rather than fighting them, just as doctors now create diseases rather than eliminating them. Can you say “swine flu shot” without choking on the phrase?

Now, when you go to a doctor, you are committing a crime against yourself, by jeopardizing your own freedom by challenging new laws that spawn the real terror in the world. Our demonic President Obama has pontificated that he can kill anyone he wants without a trial at any time for any reason. The day has already arrived when people, especially parents, are being put in jail for refusing vaccines. How much worse can it get?

Be certain that it will.

Some people don’t care. Others are simply not capable of understanding.

The rest of us who are aware to one degree or another endlessly troll the Internet for each new depravity, wondering in astonishment how we could have sunk so far so fast, how we could have permitted all these evil actions and trends to flourish, and grow progressively worse with each passing day.

It’s no exaggeration to say the future of America and the world hangs in the balance. It is the people who don’t care who control the fate of the world.

Those who will decide whether we all live or die are people who really don’t want to know the truth, who don’t care whether the government is killing its own citizens, who just want to be left alone with their addictions, compulsions, and delusions, with their favorite TV shows and self-destructive jobs.

Those who just want to watch football, go shopping, and eat pizza.

Preaching to the choir doesn’t work. It only sinks those of us who are aware more deeply into depression and frustration. Too many of us now realize it is the people who don’t care who matter most. It is up to us to convince them, and we haven’t.

Convince them of what?

That the information they receive shapes their lives, and prejudices every decision they make in their lives with deliberately falsified facts.

The question of freedom in the minds of Americans hangs on the question of whether or not the U.S. government is killing its own citizens to achieve total control of everyone’s mind, thereby eliminating the possibility of dissent. TV news is shaped to the same purpose.

The notion of freedom in America precariously teeters on the question of whether the government is deliberately killing its own citizens to achieve the goals of the rich power brokers.

People who stock up on guns, bulk food and ham radios are just fooling themselves. You can’t win a firefight with the American war machine. And you can’t survive with any degree of health amid a society that has gone totally rancid.

The lady who lost her legs on Boylston Street doesn’t know about Waco. But no lady lost her legs in the staged Boston Marathon massacre. IT WAS A DRILL. She was an amputee hired as a crisis actor, and she did her job well. What a thrill it must be to know she helped the cops make everybody more afraid.

What a sick society. This is the ultimate outcome of not paying attention to the forces who control our lives. This is what happens when we let someone else usurp responsibility for our own lives.

Reality has separated into two parts. It has bifurcated into two levels of consciousness, one that thinks and one that doesn’t. One that reacts to made-up terror dramas and cringes in fear, and one that gathers real facts and ineffectually rails against injustice.

The one thing that is never mentioned is the real cause of all the problems. Because it is against the law to be mentioned, the problems never get solved. The problems only get worse. And the true cause is never identified openly.

For the last two decades, terrorist incidents like blown-up buildings and mass shootings at schools have proliferated. These are what has caused the need for “terror drills” in the first place.

In recent days, after alleged mass shootings at Aurora and Sandy Hook, plus the Boston Marathon bombing, numerous courageous writers have diligently uncovered the scams, pointed out the inconsistencies, and chronicled the shifting cover stories.

But, again, conspicuous by its absence has been any mention of the real cause.

The Jewish penetration and subversion of reality.

(I notice with fear and loathing that Jewish writers have pretty much taken over the opposition, providing Jewish solutions to problems created by Jews in the first place.)

Few people have actually noticed that ever since the assassination of President William McKinley way back in the year 1900, the real cause of all these tragic public events throughout the 20th century — the passage of the Federal Reserve Act, the Great Depression, both World Wars, Vietnam, Oklahoma City, 9/11 and the endless succession of terror bombings, the constant attacks and obliteration of the Muslim countries, and most recently the Aurora, Sandy Hook and the Boston Marathon sideshows — have all been devised and carried out by the same evil source — cops trained in Israel and soldiers who act without thinking about their immortal souls.

But this source of endless terror is never mentioned, because this same source controls virtually all public media in the world, controls every aspect of it, in ways we still haven’t completely perceived, such as gangsta rap, free sex and the legalization of drugs.

That source is the Jewish mafia, which has perverted our schools, lobotomized our media, perverted our social institutions through non-profit think tanks, and prostituted our children with poisoned drugs and depraved subversive trends masquerading as personal liberation.

And if you do mention it, you probably don’t get published, unless you’re reading discontented sites like this one, hard to find, marginalized, and ridiculed by people who don’t really know what they’re talking about, yet who insist they do, because they got their information from sources who never mention the magic word.

Lawyers collude against their clients, doctors poison their own patients, teachers fill their students’ minds with crap they know is false — this suicidal course was all created by the Jews, just like the erudite commentators who continue to insist Muslims blew up the Twin Towers, white people have plundered the world and deserve to be offed, and you can live a happy life is you just take this bribe, or take this drug, and forget about the rest of it, because there’s nothing you can do about anyway.

Please notice how all the presidential assistants are Jews, how all the lawyers and doctors who craft new laws that threaten our lives are Jews, and how all elected officials are in thrall to the Jews because that’s the only way they can acquire the loans to get themselves elected.

Please notice how all the people on Wall Street who have stolen trillions from the American people are Jews, who read the news on TV and justify government oppression are Jews, and who draw enormous salaries from the government for jobs that don’t really need to exist are Jews or Jew slaves.

Please notice how any news source that forbids the use of the word “Jew” should never be trusted, because it means they are spouting propaganda that has been screened by the Jews, or at least, by not mentioning them, are generally speaking in fear of the Jews.

And most importantly, please notice how any news source that speaks of terrorists as a genuine entity— and specifically the fictional creation known as Al-Qaeda — is simply vomiting Jewish propaganda, because Al-Qaeda is the false flag creation of Zbigniew Brzezinski, the Mossad, and the CIA, and is now successfully spreading to every corner of the world as EITHER the reason for the need for military action by armies that the Jews control, or as allies against countries that the Jews want to destroy.

Such convenient terrorists they are, used to fight EITHER for us or against us, depending on what the situation demands. In Afghanistan, they were the targets of our bombs; but in Libya, they were the deliverers of our bombs.

It’s the people who don’t care who matter most now, because they are the ones who uncritically believe the hip but misleading jargon they hear on TV and give the government the excuse it needs to continue its slick deceptions that sicken the general public and spread profit-making diseases across the planet.

It’s the people who don’t care who control the fate of the world, and it’s up to us who do care to convince them that they must care, that the real terror is the law, and that the real criminals are our leaders, and the cops who follow their criminal orders. Without the people who don’t care realizing their indifference is leading to our destruction, we are unquestionably doomed to a painful and diseased oblivion.

So if you understand this message, get to work, because only numbers — and I’m talking tens of millions of people demanding the trial and execution of all these killer millionaires who fix elections and avoid paying taxes with overseas bank accounts — can at this late date hope to save our world and our lives.

Get the Jews out of government, out of schools, out of our minds. As Ben Franklin predicted so long ago, our children will curse us in our graves if we let the Jews sabotage and destroy our country, which they have already pretty much accomplished.

But as long as we don’t give up our guns, stop going to doctors, and never trust the Jewish-dominated mainstream media, it’s not too late to stop them.

The key is getting the people who don’t care to understand that the future of humanity — the whole shooting match — depends on them waking up to the sorry fact that they are being systematically robbed and killed by organizations that are supposed to protect them and make them healthy, but are doing exactly the opposite.

Given the debauched and debilitated condition of the gullible boobs who populate the United States, I concede this is a tall order. Unfortunately, the only alternative is the Jewish program of mass deception and extermination that is already well under way, and has been for at least a hundred years.
__________

https://therebel.org/kaminski
http://johnkaminski.info/
http://www.rudemacedon.ca/kaminski/kam-index.html
http://web.archive.org/web/20040323232319/http://johnkaminski.com/

Filed Under: 'Al Qaeda', 911, American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), Anti-Defamation League (ADL), B'nai Brith International, Barack Obama, Boston Marathon bombing, Editor's Zone, Free Speech on the Internet, Hate Crime laws, Israeli Terrorism, Israeli War Crimes, Jewish Crime, Jewish Hatred, Jewish Holocaust Lie, Jewish Lobby Groups, Jewish Media Monopoly, Jewish power, Jewish Racism, Jewish Supremacism, Jewish Terrorists, Jews, Jews Behind Bolshevik Revolution, John Kaminski, League for Human Rights of B'nai Brith Canada, Mossad, Oklahoma City bombing, Rothschild Banking syndicate, Rothschild Zionist Criminal Cartel, The Babylonian Talmud, The Controversy of Zion, The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, The Synagogue of Satan, Wall Street, World Zionist Organization, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Zionist Atrocities

Hydraulic Fracturing [“Fracking”] Worldwide by Robin Mathews

April 27, 2013 by admin 1 Comment

Hydraulic Fracturing [“Fracking”] Worldwide.
Jessica Ernst of Rosebud, Alberta. Encana Corporation. Market Manipulation. Derivative Bubbles and The Fracking Wars.

By Robin Mathews
rmathews@telus.net

April 26, 2013

They merge. They interpenetrate. The thread of one weaves into the fabric of the others. “Fracking” operations rush past law, past regulation, past health and environmental concerns. Supporters of ‘quick cash’, gas ‘futures’ pass corporate-written law to silence land-owners, elected councils, voters … you and me.

Narrowly – “fracking” legislation and regulatory behaviour push aside, silence anyone questioning a dangerous procedure. Broadly – they strip away the Rule of Law, disenfranchise populations, ‘despotize’ governments.

In Alberta, Stephen Harper, Alison Redford, Encana Corporation, the newly appointed Alberta Regulator Gerard Protti (enforcing newly written law), and – so far – The Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench Chief Justice Neil Wittmann all merge … interpenetrate to hold off remedial action – to create toxic law, toxic wealth, toxic environment.

People waken worldwide and begin to battle corporations, “regulators”, police forces, legislatures, courts – the dominators determined to engage in “unconventional drilling” (hydraulic fracturing, ‘fracking’). Conflict on the subject continues. France (2011) Bulgaria (2012), and Tunisia have banned hydraulic fracturing (‘fracking’). It continues in Australia, Canada, China, Denmark, Ireland, Netherlands, Poland, the U.S.A., and more.

Hydraulic Fracturing is the intensive assault on shale, and coal beds, through multiple well bores (often invading water tables) to release marketable gas. “Fracking” uses giant amounts of sand, water, toxic chemical-mixes near the surface or miles down to fracture strata – ‘fracking’ – for marketable gas.

Said to be ‘old hat’ (sixty years old), present hydraulic fracturing to release marketable natural gas has new aspects and possesses multiple knowns and unknowns. Hyper-industrialization of agrarian sites: outcomes unknown. Increased earthquake activity: recorded. Unforeseen “leak gas” explosions: recorded. Increased cancer incidence close to oil and gas wells: measured. Ground water sources polluted: common, but extent and health effects unknown. Water Tables lowered: unpredictable but occurring. “Migration”/leaks of gases over time: unpredictable but certain and increasingly frequent. Toxic effects on water, soil, animal life, human health: certain, unregulated, largely unresearched, information repressed.

The commonly named ‘radioactive threat’ is only now starting to be researched. A. Rich, E.C. Crosby, University of Texas [New Solutions, Vol. 23 (1), 117-135, 2013] reveal (in layman’s language) that a cocktail of radioactive agents are set free especially by ‘unconventional’ (‘fracking’) gas operations. Radioactive agents are found in depositories [sludge storage, waste pits, storage pools] – AND in the land no longer used for those purposes.

“Out of Control: Nova Scotia’s Experience with Fracking for Shale Gas”, Report Summary, April 2013” reports that from the few test wells undertaken radioactive materials were found to be present “only several years after drilling and disposal of some of the waste….” (p. 4)

Jessica Ernst (Rosebud, Alberta) reports that sludge from fracking operations is spread on agricultural lands in Alberta.

In Alberta, (using Joyce Nelson’s words) “the government has introduced draconian legislation (Bill 2) that would strip landowners and others of their right to object to any energy project that would adversely and directly affect them.” (Watershed Sentinel, Jan-Feb, 2013) The determined action envisioned in Bill 2 is doubtless a response to Jessica Ernst’s $33 million lawsuit against Encana Corporation and Alberta’s regulator. And so – one may conclude – is the switching of judges on her case. And so is, one may conclude, (what I would call) the concerted delay engaged in by Chief Justice of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, Neil Wittmann. He is the highly dubious present judge on the Jessica Ernst case.

Something is seriously wrong in Canada. And globally. Evidence is mounting of real, multiple dangers in hydraulic fracturing. Legislatures should be restraining, researching, proving, regulating … preventing … at high speed. But legislatures, joining with corporations, courts, security forces are – often – deregulating, erasing evidence, punishing protesters, repressing criticism.

The whole operation world-wide is so dangerous, so untested, so irresponsible, so despotic, that reasons have to be available for largely unresearched, unregulated hydraulic fracturing in the face of its perils.

And reasons are available.

First. Think of Wiebo Ludwig (1941-2012) of Trickle Creek farm, Peace River, Alberta, fighting “Sour Gas” fracking. Sour gas “a potent neurotoxin, has left a legacy of death and destruction….” (Andrew Nikiforuk). Think of the attacks on Sour Gas operations around Trickle Creek. Think of the millions of dollars spent to investigate the attacks on Sour Gas fracking around Trickle Creek.

Think of the threats and attacks in B.C. near Chetwyn against Encana Corporation operations and the millions of dollars spent to investigate.

Think of the RCMP/Encana Corporation, alleged to have created a “false flag” and blowing up an Encana well site to spur on distress – no charges laid. Then think of the millions of dollars spent to investigate, charge, jail, and reinvestigate Wiebo Ludwig. One example of many: “RCMP conducted a four-day [fruitless] search of Trickle Creek (2010) involving over a hundred RCMP officers.” (Wikipedia)

Think of Wiebo Ludwig (but do not speak of him). Think of him driven to desperation by Sour Gas fracking. (But do not speak of him.) Think of his repeated (unanswered) pleas to Alberta government for regulation, for research, inquiry, and investigation of hydraulic fracturing. (But do not speak of him – or risk being accused of sympathizing with lawlessness, terrorist activity.)

Who will speak of the terrorism of Alison Redford, Stephen Harper, Encana Corporation, Gerard Protti and the Alberta Regulators, legislators of Alberta, and – so far – of Neil Wittmann, Chief Justice of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench in openly, or tacitly, or passively accepting and/or furthering what many believe is a ruthless attack on the health, the well-being, the security, the privacy, the property, and the reasonable tranquility of honest, law-abiding, innocent Albertans?

Alberta may be seen as a poster-location for the kinds of violation named above. But – in various ways – such invasions are happening widely on the planet. And there is a reason.

LSE professor Lord (Nicholas) Stern and thinktank Carbon Tracker state in a recent Report noted by Damian Carrington in The Guardian (Apr. 19, 2013) that instead of “reducing efforts to develop fossil fuels, the top 200 companies spent $674bn…in 2012 to find and exploit more….” That is about the sum named in a 2006 report that would “pay for a transition to a clean and sustainable economy”.

Stock markets “are betting on countries’ inaction on climate change”, the Report says. Stock markets are creating a Carbon Bubble not unlike the massive mortgage/derivatives/fake credit scandal of 2008. “If all goes well” – I say – countries will insist on internationally agreed Climate Change targets, and the “Carbon Bubble” will burst because of over-valuation of oil, coal, and gas reserves held by fossil fuel companies. If all does not go well – Climate Change will ramp up beyond control.

It may be fair to say the same kinds of ‘investors’ are engaged in the present Carbon Bubble as were engaged in the 2008 blow-up … criminally irresponsible people willing to cause any kinds of destruction in their drive for wealth. The whole fossil fuels Bubble is being driven by greed … by big, irresponsible money.

To meet only present agreed Climate Change targets, it is estimated that at least two-thirds of present so-called fossil fuel ‘reserves’ will have to remain unexploited. But … instead of diminishing the push presently going on for hydraulic fracturing (‘fracking’), it will probably intensify the push. As long as the pollutions created by hydraulic fracturing, by the huge environmental disruptions involved in its activities, and by the waste dumps it creates – as long as they aren’t registered by the present ‘Climate Change/global warming’ regulation machineries, the obviously destructive and dirty activity will be called “clean”.

(But science knows the methane gas leaking and leaking into the environment (almost unmeasured and unrecorded) from oil and gas operations is a potent climate changer! Methane is said to be 25 times more potent in relation to Climate Change than carbon dioxide. Who will bell the leaking methane cat?)

Redneck and Redford governments in Ottawa and Alberta (and elsewhere in the world) will attempt to criminalize any who resist “unconventional gas drilling” (‘fracking’). They will provide aid and comfort to corporations like Encana Corporation, and they will work to undermine courts seeking just adjudication of disputes about injury done from hydraulic fracturing. They will do what they can to push for Liquid Natural Gas pipelines – hoping that a Climate Change clampdown on conventional extractions will raise prices on Hydraulically Fractured Gas.

Here is huge field for environmentalists, many of whom are already engaged in the gigantic task of revealing that – however it may (or may not) register on Climate Change measuring devices – the pollution from unconventional gas drilling (hydraulic fracturing, ‘fracking’) is a very, very Dirty Wildcat. Out of (seemingly) nowhere, in the last twenty years at most, one of the dirtiest “mining” operations in history has come into play and into visibility.

The more governments – like the Redneck government in Ottawa and the Redford government in Alberta – are absorbed into private corporate operations and dictated to by those corporations, the more they will resist just demands by citizens and populations for regulation.

The fight is worth it. The outcome certain. People all over the globe will not, ultimately, permit huge corporations and huge governments to desecrate the planet. “The bigger they are”, remember, “the harder they fall.”
——

Filed Under: Alberta, Andrew Nikiforuk, Editor's Zone, Encana Corporation, Environmental Issues, Fracking, Hydraulic Fracturing [“Fracking”], Jessica Ernst, Neil Wittmann, neurotoxins, Robin Mathews, Trickle Creek Christian Community, Watershed Sentinel, Wiebo Ludwig

The Trial of Guenter Deckert by Sylvia Stolz (English translation by Christine B. Miller)

April 26, 2013 by admin 1 Comment

The Trial of Guenter Deckert

By Sylvia Stolz

Translated from the German language
by Christine Miller

“A prison sentence will not force me into believing.”
~ Guenter Deckert

“When I have doubts I demand the right to express them …They talk about tolerance, but mean the inquisition. … The hunt to find incorrect literature pretending to fight crime. For a short time people can be intimidated by the threat of punishment, but the brain continues to reason.”

Thus spoke Guenter Deckert in his final comment at his sentencing February, 2012 in front of the state court Mannheim. The report of his trial follows.

Since January 2, 2013 Guenter has been in prison on account of aiding and abetting so-called Holocaust denial. We accompanied him on his journey to prison and took leave of him at the Mannheim prison gate.

We expressed our thanks for his courage and his commitment to freedom, justice and truth. We will always remember that. The day will come when the Germans and other people will appreciate his zeal.

He is supposed to be released May 2013. We will be there waiting for him starting at nine o’clock.
Address: Herzogenriedstrasse 111, 68169 Mannheim. Whoever wants to be there and greet him is cordially invited.

The Opinion Terror

By Sylvia Stolz

A prison sentence for doubting the “Holocaust.”

No probation for expressing one’s opinion in these times of alleged “right wing terror.”

In these times of the “resurfacing” of right wing extremism which, without question, is due to the criminal deeds of the alleged “NSU”, Holocaust denial constitutes a considerable danger for public peace.

Guenter Deckert, former high school teacher, on February 2, 2012 was sentenced by the state court of Mannheim to a prison sentence of six months without probation on account of aiding and abetting so-called Holocaust denial. As well, because of the “radical” law and in spite of high evaluations he was dismissed from his high school teaching job in November, 1988 in the State of Baden-Wuertenberg and was denied his pension.

He is charged with having cooperated in the translation into German of the book by Carlo Mattogno, Auschwitz – the First Gassings, Rumors and Reality (December, Castle Hill Publishers.)

On July 28, 2010 Guenter Deckert had been sentenced by the lower court of Weinheim to a prison term of 4 months with probation. The charges were: promotion of incitement of the public by means of Holocaust denial and defamation of the memory of the dead. (&&130 III, IV, 189 STGB-BRD. Aktenzeichen: 2Ds 503 Js 14219/08 – AK 579/09).

The prosecutor appealed and on February 2, 2012 the sentence by the state court of Mannheim was increased to six months without probation. Guenter Deckert’s appeal was thrown out (Aktenzeichen: 12Ns 503 Js 14219/08)

Many people in the BRD (Germany), the BRO (Austria), Switzerland, France, Spain, Greece and other countries have been sentenced because they denied or doubted the Holocaust when defined as systematic genocide. At times very high prison sentences have been handed down. For example the sentence against lawyer Horst Mahler.

The Holocaust is not defined

During his appeal Guenter Deckert wanted to know the concrete facts which he, according to the accusations, deliberately ignored and the truth he contested. He received no answer.

It is especially telling that the so-called “Holocaust” is not legally defined (This is against the principal of the penal law). In the first trial no concrete facts as to the place of the crime, the methods of killing or other proofs, directly or indirectly presented in the findings of other trials, were presented.

Concerning his denial the court pointed to &130 section 3StGB , &6 section of the international penal law which defines genocide as being when a member of an ethnic or religious group is killed with the intent to destroy or partially destroy the whole group. According to &130 section 3StGB i.V.m &6 section VStGB people can be punished who deny that under the rule of National Socialism, without knowledge or intent of the German Reichsregierung, a Jew, by someone or another (even by a none German), had been killed with the intent to partially destroy Jewry as an ethnic and religious group.

“Known to the court” to be challenged”

Guenter Deckert at the beginning of his appeal made the following motion:

“I move for the court to discuss point by point the principles on which the court rests its “known to the court” facts which, since the beginning of the Seventies of the Twentieth Century, generally go under the notation “Holocaust.”

The court should establish if and how far the persons who are called to judge have knowledge of these “facts” or only base their judgment on hearsay or secondary literature.”

Before coming to a decision about this motion the court should take into consideration the resolution by the petition caucus of the German Bundestag (upper house) Pet 12-4-07-45-5699 Deutscher Bundestag 12. election period – print 12/2849.

An excerpt: During a main trial the court is duty bound to discuss those facts of which the court has taken judicial notice in order to give the accused the opportunity to contest them. In addition it has to be acknowledged that “known to the court” does need to exist in perpetuity or has to remain unchanged. New information might have been gotten and new events might have happened which will bring about a different conclusion. If the accused presents such circumstances which in the past have not been mentioned or discussed the “known to the court” can be challenged and new proofs concerning these facts have to be considered. In this way the accused and his defender have the possibility to counter “it is known to the court.”

The decision concerning “it is “known to the court” & 244 lies therefore exclusively in the hands of the court in question and is subject to the principle of independence in respect to judges. It is also possible that in individual cases a different judgment may be the result.”

Judgment based on the media

Concerning “it is known to the court” the following decisions have been made: (…)

The county court Bernau presided over by the female judge Kroh rejected the motion to discuss the principles of “known to the court,” stating that the facts and the legal situation were the same. She simply gave judicial notice that during the National Socialist (NS) period, the genocide of the Jews in gas chambers located in the concentration camps happened.

The 3. Senate of the Bavarian state court rejected the motion concerning “the Holocaust is a fact, known to the court” with the pronouncement that it does not have any doubts as to the reality of the Holocaust, referring to the accessible and common information in words, pictures, and sound. (decision 1/14/2011, Bay AGH II – 27/09). The motion of the defense to challenge which material the senate based its certainty of “known to the court” was denied citing material in newspapers, on TV, in reference and history books (decision 2/8/2011).

The judiciary degrades itself to a grotesque caricature if it bases its judgments on the media and TV. Judiciary contains the word justice. It does not deserve its name.

No actual facts

It is worthy of notice that the so-called Holocaust is not legally defined and facts are avoided. In & 130 StGB-BRD which is used to convict “Holocaust deniers” the so-called Holocaust is not defined. It is not even mentioned.

The sentencing of Guenter Deckert in the first instance at the local court in Weinheim contains no determination of the crime of “Holocaust denial”. In other words there is no determination of the Holocaust in regard to the place of the crime, the methods of killing, the number of the dead, the time frame, the perpetrators, the bodies, no deposition taken of the witnesses, no proof of the intent by National Socialism to completely or partially exterminate the Jews. There is no determination about decisions, planes, orders or documents not even in the form of references to other judicial sentences.

In addition there is no determination of the knowledge the accused had, or is supposed to have had, or must have had, or could have had.

As long as the courts do not name the location on which the mass murder was suppose to have happened; as long as the courts do not describe how the killing was done; as long as the courts do not mention any proofs; a judgment that mass murder has occurred is not possible. The same is the case for “it is known to the court.”
Without submitting proof as to actual facts a sentencing for Holocaust denial is not valid.

Without the determination of what knowledge of the so-called Holocaust the accused had or could have had, the charge that he acted against his better knowledge is void.

If the above mentioned points are not addressed a sentencing for the denial of the Holocaust is arbitrary and a corruption of the law.

A defense is not possible

The refusal by the judiciary to bring up for discussion the principle of “it is known to the court that the holocaust happened” makes any defense impossible. Not knowing the concrete facts on which the accusation is based emasculates the defense. The law used to sentence an accused without the defense being able to challenge “it is known to the court” defeats the ends of the law.

“The Holocaust as fact is known to the court.” Which facts however the court knows are not stated.

For example: Dr. Martin Broszart, director for the federal Institute fuer Zeitgeschichte published the following: “Neither in Dachau, nor in Bergen-Belsen, nor in Buchenwald were Jews or other inmates gassed.” (Die Zeit, 8/19/1960, p 16). On the other hand there are publications which talk about the gassings in Dachau, Bergen-Belsen and Buchenwald. Which of the two is, according to the judiciary, “…known to the court?” Is it “known to the court” that inmates were gassed at Dachau, Bergen-Belsen and Buchenwald, or is it “… known to the court” that nobody was gassed at Dachau, Bergen-Belsen and Buchenwald? Both cannot be “… known to the court.”

An entire event such as the so-called “Holocaust” can only be undisputed (facts known to the court) when the individual events are undisputed (facts known to the court).

The history Professor Dr. Gerhard Jagschitz of the Institute for Contemporary History at the University of Vienna wrote the following expert opinion: “Substantial doubts about the trials in question have been raised by the presentation of expert opinions to national and international courts. The relentless repetition of judgments using “ facts known to the court,” namely that the Jews were killed by gas in the concentration camp of Auschwitz, will not be enough on which to base sentencing in a democratic nation which is supposed to be founded on justice and right.” (letter to the state court Vienna, 1/10/l991, AZ:26b Vr 14 184/86)

The Ruhr –Nachrichten (Bochum) No. 277 (11/29/2005) printed a citation by the Israeli writer and musician Gilad Atzmon: “The historiography known to us about WWII and the Holocaust is a complete falsification initiated by the Americans and Zionists.”

Is the Holocaust indisputably “a fact known to the court” or is it indisputably “a fact known to the court” that the Holocaust is frequently challenged and therefore can not be “a fact known to the court?”

It is therefore illogical to call a certain alleged historical event which is frequently contested as “a fact known to the court”, a concept which the authorities then use to persecute and penalize the “deniers.”

Abuse of procedural rights

After reading the motion Guenter Deckert wanted to know what he has to accept as “facts known to the court.” The prosecutor, Andreas Grossmann replied (11/14). “That you will find out during sentencing.” During the sentencing however nothing was said.

The chairman, Ross, decreed to postpone the decision concerning the motion. He said: first principles have to be established. Prosecutor Grossmann remarked (January 13, 2012) that the motion only will be dealt with after the pleading. The purpose became obvious when (January 13, 2012) the motion was denied. In the meantime Guenter Deckert took up his case again. In order to show that the “facts are known to the court” must be fully discussed he described in detail circumstances and facts which made him doubt the “Holocaust.” For example he mentioned Dr. Benedikt Kautzky who, for seven years, was in German concentration camps among others, in Auschwitz-Birkenau, and who wrote that in no camp did he ever see a gas chamber.

The chamber denied the motion to discuss “facts are known to the court“ (chairman – Roos, jurors-Wolfgang W. and Helmut M.) using, among other arguments, the reason, “the Holocaust defined as mass killings of Jews especially in the gas chambers of the concentration camps during WWII is “a fact known to the court” (January 13, 2012). The Holocaust as historical event is considering evidence beyond discussion.”

“The facts are known to the court” is not to be discussed because “the facts are known to the court” is a circular argument incompatible with logic and beyond reason and the principles of justice.

The resolution goes on to accuse Guenter Deckert of abusing procedural rights. The need for proofs is not applicable since Guenter Deckert’s demands in that regard, during the main trial, are only designed to involve the court in order to spread his revisionist ideas. This is obvious from his presentation in which he declared that “facts known to the court” needs to be discussed.

According to the court it is an abuse of the justice system when an accused, before being sentenced, tries to move the court to examine the facts of which he is accused.

The resolution furthermore implies that the chamber considers the discussion which forms the basis of the accusation as “court research” to which the accused is not entitled.

The court in this resolution has obviously ignored the laws of reason.

On one hand the court looks at the motion to discuss “the Holocaust, a fact known to the court” (contrary to what Guenter Deckert has said) as a move for proof, on the other hand, in contradiction to this, as a motion to obtain “court research”. The motion however implies neither one nor the other.

Historical facts are deliberately ignored

The resolution further states that Guenter Deckert deliberately ignores historical facts and obstinately refuses to accept the truth.

Reacting to the resolution (January 13, 2012) Guenter Deckert moved (February 2, 2012) that the chamber communicate the following:

According to the court’s knowledge “the ‘Holocaust’ is a fact” in which concentration camps and gas chambers existed.

According to the court’s knowledge in what ways did additional killings take place?

According to its knowledge what were the number of victims?

According to the court’s opinion which facts of the so-called Holocaust have I ignored and accepted?

Since the prosecutor and the court have not produced any facts in regard to the accusation I cannot know which facts I supposedly ignore.

I made the motion to discuss the principles of the “Holocaust is a fact known to the court” in order to be able to defend myself against the accusation of Holocaust denial. I stated in detail that the court is duty bound to discuss their determination that the “Holocaust is a fact known to the court.”

In addition I have pointed out that there is no concrete definition of the so-called Holocaust.

Furthermore no determination has been made about which knowledge of the so-called Holocaust I had or was supposed to have had or could have had.

In the resolution of January 13, 2012 the so-called decision does not contain any determination to the circumstances and “it is known to the court,” nor are there any references.

Without defining the deed in question a sentencing for Holocaust denial is not possible.

Without determining which concrete knowledge the accused had about the so called “Holocaust”, or could have had, an accusation to have acted against his better knowledge is void, and therefore a sentencing for denying the truth is not possible.

What is “fact known to the court”

During my argument I presented facts which show that there is a need for a discussion about “fact known to the court.”

“Known to the court” are historical facts which by means of historical research are considered proven and everybody therefore without specific knowledge can inform himself from history books, encyclopedia and similar reference books (Alsberg/Nuesse/Meyer, proof in a trial, 5. edition, Carl Heymanns publishing house, Berlin 1983, p.539.

The acceptance of “the fact is known to the court” rests on the preliminary condition that the fact is not challenged (vglAlsber/Nuesse/meyer, a.a.O., p. 568.

If however in historiography the truth of an event is contested it does not become accepted knowledge just because much has been written about it and disseminated (Alsberg/Nuesse/Meyer, a.a.O.,P. 540).

In my motion to discuss “the Holocaust happened is known to the court” I cited examples of publications, especially non revisionist publications which prove that the Holocaust historiography is not in agreement, does not speak with one voice, is not unchallenged, and contradicts itself. The Holocaust therefore cannot be claimed as “a fact known to the court.”

A sentencing for denying the Holocaust on the basis of “the Holocaust is known to the court” is therefore not possible. I made the motion not in order to spread revisionism, as maintained by the chamber, but for the simple reason that I have been accused of Holocaust denial and that I want to use my right to defend myself.

To dismiss my motion because I intended for the court to deal with “the Holocaust is known to the court” is arbitrary. Before sentencing it is an essential duty and the task of the court to deal with the underlying facts.

It is factually and judicially not understandable why in a trial for Holocaust denial a motion is supposed to be abusive which is meant to bring clarity in regard to “a fact known to the court.”

“Fact known to the court” is in need of discussion

When a French historian, Jacques Baynac, a proponent of the Holocaust writes that for the existence of the Nazi gas chambers only the lack of documents, traces and other material proofs can be confirmed (Le Noveau Quotidien de Lausanne, Switzerland , September 2, l996, p.16 and September 3/l996, p.14) then this means that there is a need to discuss “the Holocaust is known to the court.”

Michel de Bouaerd, professor for history and dean of the faculty for the Arts and Sciences at the University of Caen (Normandy) states that the documentation concerning the Holocaust is rotten, that the documentation about the system of the German concentration camps is permeated by a mass of invented stories, relentless repetitions of falsifications, especially in regard to numbers, and confusion and generalizations (Ouest-France v. 2-3 August l986, p. 6). This again proves that there is a need to discuss “the Holocaust is known to the court.”

Historian Professor Ernst Nolte seconds the need for a discussion of “fact known to the court. “The testimony of witnesses rests to a large part on hearsay and mere surmises; the testimony of the few eyewitness are in part contradictory and create doubts in regard to their veracity.”

The director of the Yad Vashem memorial, Shmuel Krakowski, in the same vain states (Jerusalem Post, August 17, l986): “Most of the 20,000 witnesses’ testimony concerning the Holocaust are unbelievable, falsified, cannot be verified, or in other ways are not true.”

On January 13, 2012 during a pause in the proceedings (around 16:30) the chairman Ross directed the following words to me: “You would be surprised at the knowledge of history by the jurors.” But judges have to make an unencumbered decision, based on their conviction which they formed during the proceedings in question (& 261 StPO). In addition “facts known to the court” in order to be useable have to be introduced during the main trial in order to give the participants the opportunity to take a position.

It would therefore be useful if the members of the chamber would reveal their knowledge of history to the accused before they convict him on the basis of this knowledge.

If not it will remain obscure on which facts the members of chamber base their views. It (the Holocaust) is supposed to be a wrong removed from common categories and therefore &130 StGB is an exception to the prohibition of having a special law. (motion of cessation of the trial on account of the special law & 130 which is contrary to the German basic law. The motion was denied January 13, 2012)

Permanent misjudgment

The chamber misrepresents my motion. It considers it a motion for proof which is obvious from their choice of words. “The chamber is supposed to furnish proof,” “makes proof unnecessary.” “proof is also inadmissible,” “a motion for proof is inadmissible (p.2 of the resolution).”

But it is unequivocally clear that the motion was not a motion for proof.

The motion to discuss the principle of “the Holocaust, a fact known to the court” does not mean, that the Holocaust did not happen (p. 2 of the resolution), but was a motion to examine the facts on which “fact known to the court” are based.

The chamber maintains that I contested “facts known to the court.” The chamber is mistaken. I did not contest facts, but demanded the discussion of facts.

What is a circular argument?

A circular argument is to deny the motion for discussion of the principle of “fact known to the court” with the argument that a discussion is not necessary since the Holocaust is “a fact known to the court.” (p.2 of the resolution.)

The chamber misunderstands not only the meaning of a “circular argument,” but also the concept of “an established fact known to the court.” What is frequently contested can’t be “an established fact known to the court” since “an established fact known to the court” is defined as undisputed, unchallenged (see above).

It is a circular argument if I would say “the holocaust is not “a fact known to the court” because “it is not known to the court.” It is, however, not a circular argument if I say: “the Holocaust is not fact known to the court” because “known to the court” is equivalent to conformity and indisputability. The historiography of the Holocaust is not in conformity and is not unchallenged. The resolution stated by the chamber shows a lack of capacity to reason.

It is inconsequential if it happened or not

My motion of January 13, 2012 in which I stated that the incriminating book is scientifically correct was denied. The following reason was given: It does not matter if the book is scientifically correct. I am guilty since I assisted in the formation of the book.

It looks as if the chamber agrees with the view of the Mannheim court who convicted Ernst Zuendel. “It does not matter if the Holocaust did or did not take place.” The “tageszeitung (February 9, 2007, p.6)” writes about the Zuendel trial: “At the end the court denied all the motions with the lapidary reason (a shock to some of the antifascists among the audience): “It does not matter one wit if the Holocaust did or did not take place. Its denial is punishable under German law. Only this is what counts.”

Letter to Chief Judge of British Columbia from Jim Townsend

April 24, 2013 by admin Leave a Comment

Letter to Chief Judge of British Columbia

Wednesday, April 17th, 2013

Office of the Chief Judge of British Columbia

Mr. Chief Judge,

I am in receipt of the response penned by your boy Gene Jamieson.

He does not appear to have understood my complaint or who I complained about. He mentions ‘the Honourable Judge M. McKimm’. Never met the guy. I am complaining about the black robed dead beat Mayland McKimm who used his position of authority to knowingly and with absolute malice of forethought aid and abet crimes against me with his court.

The fairy tale is that we go to court for Justice. The poster of Justice Blindfolded, deaf and mute as a post in the lobby shows how laughable that contention is.

It is not that everyone in your court conspired to pervert the course of justice. The Right Honourable Judge Klinger put the kybosh on the plans to send me to prison for being the victim of RCMP grow operators committing crimes against me to protect their grow operations out past my mining claim on North Fork Road. But Judges Takahashi and Burdett also happily jumped on the band wagon to try to railroad me and between them and McKimm had me serve a sentence without trial or conviction.

After a protracted harassment campaign to drive me from my mining claim, RCMP Henry Proce had his informant Bruce Prebushewski try to murder my family in a drive by shooting. My wife and I know this because Henry mocked us about it and told us no one would ever do anything about it. He even mocked me as I was lead out of the court in chains and asked how the system was working for me. Bruce’s uncle Arne Gatzke also showed up the next day and told me his nephew Bruce did it.

Bruce Prebushewski has shot through another disabled persons home a few months ago and then a few weeks ago was arrested for being over twice the legal limit with a loaded rifle making death threats to his uncle. Being as how his grandfather is the local alderman who fully supports the grow operations being overseen by Henry Proce, needless to say Brucey is walking around free. Good work fellas. Yeah that’s what we pay you for.

After the attempt to murder us my disability worker cut off my disability cheque saying he was investigating the drive by shooting. I wanted to know how he even knew about it since it hadn’t even made the papers yet at that time. When he instead turned around and made phoney accusations about us, I wrote a letter of complaint about him to the Ombudsman about his suspicious knowledge of the drive by shooting. In short, I wrote a petition to my government for redress. For my pains, Sgt. Wendland had me arrested and charged with uttering threats because he ‘had his panties in a knot’. Seriously, check the transcripts where the arresting officer admits this on the stand in front of the Right Honourable Judge Klinger. The charges were laid to cover up my complaint. The Ombudsman said they would not investigate because the RCMP had charged me. Convenient.

When I then complained to the RCMP Complaints Commission about Wendland and Proce, Wendland and Proce simply turned around and laid more charges of uttering threats against me USING THE SAME EVIDENCE THEY USED IN THE FIRST CHARGE that was supposed to be evidence that I uttered threats to Pat Clemens and was somehow now two years later evidence that I had uttered threats to the police officers that were trying to cover up their informants attempt to murder us. Since that was the second set of charges and I was already charged of course I had to go to jail. The RCMP are well aware of how to manipulate the system to get away with their crimes.

Your Vernon court officers are crooked as Hell and readily aid and abet RCMP crimes and lies about the victims they drag into court. I was arrested the first time in order to prevent me from attending Supreme court to get my mining claims back. Since I was in jail, I sent my wife to represent me but they would not allow her to speak to the case saying it had been adjourned indefinitely by mutual consent. Whose consent? Neither I, nor my wife consented to it. I was not given a bail hearing. Duty Counsel Bill Furman appointed himself my counsel against my wishes and had a private ex parte hearing with JP Dalene Krenz instead. They sent my wife and daughter upstairs to sit and wait in court all day for my hearing and left me in a prison cell. My wife and daughter left at the end of the day wondering why I did not have a hearing.

After nearly a month I finally managed to get a bail hearing. Ever heard of the JIR? Ask Gene about it and he will tell you that I am supposed to have a bail hearing within three days. Unfortunately a friend put up some money for a lawyer who was a dead beat and I believe decided to conspire with the Crown. She grabbed two thousand dollars of my funds for a bail hearing in which she did nothing to defend me or protest the allegations against me. I should never have had to put up any money for bail, should never have been under house arrest and above all, should never had my charter right to freedom of speech limited, especially without the benefit of a trial or conviction. Of such despotism rebellions are made. Judge McKimm simply granted everything the Crown Prosecutor Pontius, who did nothing but lie his face off, asked for.

While I was under house arrest, CRA seized my disability cheque. That is not legal and is outright theft, a criminal code violation against us that left myself and my disabled wife in the high alpine fifty miles from our nearest neighbour without even the basic necessities of life. I believe this attack was initiated by Proce. CRA files obtained under FOIA show that while he had me in jail and court under phoney charges that he was telling CRA lies about us. They did give us our money back when public outrage and many phone calls to them forced them to give it back. But I went to jail for making the video about the crimes being committed against us.

Are Canadians Really That Stupid? by Arthur Topham

April 24, 2013 by admin 3 Comments

by
Arthur Topham
April 24, 2013

I think about this often – the fact that the vast majority of Canadians can’t seem to figure out that their legal system is still grafted on to that of a foreign nation, i.e. Great Britain.

Given the fact that I’m facing the prospect of having to defend myself against spurious, malicious lies given to Canada’s RCMP “Hate Crime Unit” headed by Cst. Terry Wilson from the Surrey, B.C. precinct by two of the most chronic and overly zealous Zionist zealots who have ever slithered about upon Canadian soil (Harry Abrams and Richard Warman) – fabricated falsehoods that have morphed into criminal charges of a nature that could result in my having to spend two years in a federal penitentiary, I have good reason to contemplate the nature of how Britain is mixed up in this sordid conspiracy.

Now I can understand quite easily that any Canadian citizen who feels they are being unjustly treated should have the right to go to the authorities and state their concerns. This seems to me to be both a wise and fair right in any democratic nation and the only sensible alternative to prevent a citizen from having to take the law into their own hands for their protection and safety.

Even in the case of these two reprehensible, low-life, malevolent troglodytes I have no beef with their right to seek redress for their imagined persecution and hurt feelings. But what I do object to though, in the most fervent and strenuous manner possible, is the fact that I am being forced to argue my case and defend my rights in a supposed Canadian court of law where the pathetic plaintiff’s in this charade are able to have the queen of a foreign country act on their behalf and attempt to prosecute and find me guilty of supposed “hate crimes” against people of the Jewish faith as well as citizens of yet another foreign country, to wit, Israel.

Of course I am referring here to what in Canadian legal jurisprudence is referred to as the “Crown”. In Black’s Law Dictionary the term “Crown” is referred to as “the sovereign power in a monarchy, especially in relation to the punishment of crimes.” To be even more specific the “Crown” is the representative in England of the Rothschild banking cartel that owns and controls the independent state known as the “City of London” and whose public representative is Regina or what Canadians think of as the “Queen of England”.

Now in jolly ol’ England where they have had kings and queens for thousands of years one can easily imagine that their legal system would have the right to use that term and to employ it in any manner they so desire.

There is also a Latin term used in English law which is “Regina” and according to Black’s Law Dictionary it means, simply, “the queen”. Again, fine and dandy for all those who live in Great Britain and wish to be ruled under such conditions.

But I don’t live in England. I live in what is purported to be the sovereign country known as Canada. As I understand it I also live in an independent nation that has its own Constitution and Charter of Rights and Freedoms. So the obvious question that arises when I look at the legal documents which are before me is: why am I being prosecuted by “Regina” the queen of England and why is the “Crown” involved in my case?

Why, instead, is not the Canadian Legal System taking me task for alleged breaches of the Canadian Criminal Code instead of the queen of a foreign nation? In fact, how can it even be a legal possibility that “Regina” is against me and bringing forth an action against my person on behalf of two Canadian troglodytes when “Regina” is not even a Canadian citizen nor a bona fide representative of Canada?

Are Canadians really that stupid and dumbed down to the point where this glaring contradiction doesn’t register upon their critical thinking abilities?

If, in fact, we are indeed an independent and sovereign nation then why are we still using such legal terminology in our judicial processes? Why do we act as if we are independent and yet still keep using “the queen” and the “Crown” to represent what ought to be the highest and most legally authoritative designations within Canada’s legal institutions? It’s incorrect. It’s wrong; both legally and morally, and it begs the ultimate question as to the absolute legality and authority of all that purports to be Canada’s legitimate constitutional right to exist!

For Canadians to merely shrug (as Canadians are wont to do) and attempt to dismiss this crucial point as mere linguistics or sophistry on my part is not acceptable. The actual and true legitimacy of Canada as a sovereign and independent nation among other nations of the world depends upon our recognition within our legal system of the FACT of our sovereignty and that FACT must be reflected in the stated reality that Canada’s courts are being represented by Judges and lawyers who are beholding only to Canada and its Constitution.

As the justice system now exists it clearly points to a condition wherein Canada does not actually have a true and independent existence nor does it have a legitimate constitution, i.e., one that has been certified and sanctified by a vote of the whole population of the nation via a plebiscite. If it did we would not still be represented in our independent courts by “Regina” and the “Crown” but by Canada and its appointed representatives.

Is it really that difficult to comprehend or are Canadians just too stupid to see the contradiction?

—

Filed Under: Abrams/BBC v. Arthur Topham & RadicalPress.com, Arthur Topham - Editor & Publisher, B'nai Brith Canada, BC HATE CRIME TEAM, Canada, Canadian Charter of Rights & Freedoms, Canadian Human Rights Act, Canadian Human Rights Commission, Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, Canadian Identity/Sovereignty, Canadian Judicial System, Canadian Politics, Canadians, Charter of Rights and Freedoms, City of London, Cst Normandie Levas BC HATE CRIME TEAM, Det-Cst Terry Wilson BC HATE CRIME TEAM, Editor's Zone, Harry Abrams, Queen of England, Richard Warman, Rothschild Banking syndicate, Rothschild Zionist Criminal Cartel, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, The Radical Press

Palestine: Jewish Settlers Occupy Christian Monastery, Raise Israeli Flag

April 22, 2013 by admin Leave a Comment

Israeli Settlers Vandalize MonasteryLatrun Trappetist Monastery West Bank

http://nsnbc.me/2013/04/22/palestine-settlers-occupy-monastery-raise-israeli-flag/

Palestine: Settlers Occupy Monastery, Raise Israeli Flag
April 22, 2013

IMEMC, - On Friday, April 19, a group of extremist Israeli settlers occupied a Christian Monastery in a Palestinian village, near the central West Bank city of Ramallah, and raised an Israeli flag over it.

Speaking to the Maan News Agency, Father Aziz Ra’ey stated that the setters forced their way into the monastery and the chapel in the Palestinian village of Taybeh, near Ramallah, and raised an Israeli flag.

The latest attack is part of what became repeated incidents of assaults and acts of desecration carried out by extremist Israeli settlers against Islamic and Christian holy sites, and graveyards, in different parts of occupied Palestine.

On December 12 2012, a number of extremist Israeli settlers wrote, on Wednesday at dawn, racist graffiti attacking Christianity and Jesus Christ on the walls of a monastery in occupied Jerusalem.

The graffiti written on the walls of the monastery included “Price Tag”, (a reference to the idea that Palestinians must all ‘pay a price’ for the dismantling of illegal settlement outposts by the Israeli military), and several insults against Jesus Christ.

The settlers also punctured the tires of three vehicles parked near the monastery.

In September of 2012, extremist Israeli settlers burnt the main gate of the c west of Jerusalem, and wrote racist graffiti against Jesus Christ and against Christianity.

On Tuesday at dawn, June 19: A number of extremist Israeli settlers burnt a local mosque in Jaba’ Palestinian village, in occupied East Jerusalem, and defaced some of its walls.

Local sources reported that the settlers wrote racist graffiti on some of the walls of the mosque, including the “Price Tag” graffiti.

On February 20, 2012, settlers spray-painted racist graffiti on a church in occupied East Jerusalem in the third such incident since January 2012.

The graffiti also included “Death to Christians” and the phrase “price tag” was found on the walls of the Baptist Narkis Street Congregation. Furthermore, residents of the area found their car tires slashed.

Wednesday January 4th 2012, settlers set fire to two Palestinian trucks and spray-painted anti-Arab, racist graffiti.

In February, the bilingual school Hand In Hand and the Monastery of the Cross were vandalized, and graffiti promoting violence against Christians was found on its wall.

On December of 2011, the settlers carried out four attacks against mosques in several parts of the occupied West Bank, and set ablaze five Palestinian cars near the central West Bank city of Ramallah.

In an attack targeting several mosques, the settlers spray-painted slogans including ‘Price Tag’. They also burnt copies of the Quran.

In mid-December of 2010, a group of fanatic Israeli settlers burnt a mosque in Borqa village, east of the central West Bank city of Ramallah, and wrote racist graffiti on its walls.

The attack came only one day after a similar arson attempt targeted the historic mosque of Okasha in Jerusalem. Before setting parts of the mosque ablaze, the settlers spray-painted racist graffiti targeting the Palestinians and the Muslim prophet.

Via International Middle East Media Center IMEMC
———-
About the Author

Saed Bannoura – Saed Bannoura, born 1973 in Palestine, is a prolific Palestinian journalist, who is working for the International Middle East Media Center IMEMC. After having been shot multiple times by an Israeli death squad, Saed Bannoura is confined to using a wheelchair. Saed Bannoura is a tireless activist for Palestinians rights. His work and the work of his colleagues at the independent Palestinian news agency IMEMC are setting today´s standards in independent reporting and media ethics, to a degree that most major “purportedly independent” news agencies have problems following the standards set by IMEMC. Saed Bannoura´s articles are published in media worldwide, including on nsnbc ìnternational. IMEMC´s website is located at www.imemc.org

Filed Under: Christianity, Christians, International Middle East Media Center, Islam, Israel, Israeli Terrorism, Israeli War Crimes, Jesus Christ, Jewish Crime, Jewish Israeli Settlers, Jewish Racism, Jewish Supremacism, Jewish Terrorists, Jews, Latrun Christian Monastery, Muslims, Palestine, Political Zionism, Ramallah, Saed Bannoura

What’s Up with Bill C-304?

April 20, 2013 by admin Leave a Comment

http://humanrightscommissions.ca/index.php/home/181-whats-up-with-bill-c-304 Screen Shot 2013-04-20 at 11.42.24 AM
What’s Up with Bill C-304?

Many of our readers are quite familiar with Bill C-304, that freedom-enhancing bill sponsored by Mr. Brian Storseth that seeks to repeal the censorship powers of the Canadian Human Rights Commission and Tribunal. It passed through the House of Commons relatively easily and moved on to the Senate. That was (at time of writing) 314 days ago. As we reported back in February, the Bill is still languishing there in the Senate, stuck at the “second reading” stage. So what’s going on? As Connie Fournier over at Free Dominion notes, controversial 400+ page omnibus budget bills sail through the Senate in 11 days! The gun registry bill passed in 49 days. What gives? Why is a so-called “Conservative” dominated Senate holding up a free speech bill when 99% of the Conservative membership voted in favour of free speech at the latest policy convention? Is there maybe a link here with the fact that under the Conservative government, funding for the Canadian Human Rights Commission has actually increased? We hope not.

Senate of Canada

Here are two things you can do:

1. Below is a sample letter for Senators that you can copy and paste into your email browser. We recommend that you edit the letter to make it as personal as possible. Then select the Senators that are in your province (see the list below for B.C., Alberta, Manitoba and Ontario as well as a complete list of all Senators). Copy their email addresses into your “to” field. Create your own subject line. Send off the email. Also, consider calling a few of them to chat directly about this issue and why it matters to you!

2. Below the Senate letter is a sample letter for the Prime Minister. Send that email to the Prime Minister as well, but also (and this is key!) follow up with a phone call afterwards. Just tell whoever answers the phone exactly what’s in the sample letter. The contact information is listed below the sample letter.

That’s it! You’ve just contributed to the preservation of freedom in this country! Thank you.

Sample Senate letter:

Dear Honourable Senator,

I’ve just learned about Bill C-304, the free speech bill. The Bill seeks to ensure freedom of expression for all Canadians by repealing section 13 (the censorship provision) of the Canadian Human Rights Act. This Bill needs to pass through the Senate soon. I understand that it has been stuck in the Senate for over 300 days already!

Some people argue that section 13 is necessary to protect vulnerable groups. However, the evidence is quite the opposite. The section has been abused by a select few for their own purposes and financial gain. And real instances of hate speech are already prohibited in the Criminal Code, which has the proper legal safeguards for fair trials.

Honourable Senator, it is obvious to me that section 13 has to go and that Bill C-304 should pass. Please vote for it and ask all other Senators to do the same.

Thank you for your service to this country.

Sincerely yours,

Sample Prime Minister letter:

To the Right Honourable Stephen Harper,

Dear Prime Minister,

I’m sure you are familiar with Bill C-304, the free speech bill. You have consistently voted for it in the House of Commons. In fact, 99% of the membership of your Conservative Party also favour the bill. This is why I am contacting you: I am very confused as to why your so-called “Conservative” Senate appointees are holding this bill up. The anti-censorship bill has been stuck in the Senate for well over 300 days now. Is there anything you can do to encourage them to get this necessary bill passed? For the sake of freedom, please have the Senate pass this bill like they did your omnibus bills.

Sincerely yours,

Contact information for Prime Minister Harper

Telephone: 613-992-4211

EMail: stephen.harper@parl.gc.ca

Senators: BC
campbel@sen.parl.gc.ca
jaffem@sen.parl.gc.ca
martin@sen.parl.gc.ca
neufer@sen.parl.gc.ca
rainen@sen.parl.gc.ca

Senators: Alberta

Doug Black, email: doug.black@sen.parl.gc.ca
Elaine McCoy, email: mccoye@sen.parl.gc.ca
Grant Mitchell, email: mitchg@sen.parl.gc.ca
Claudette Tardiff, email: tardic@sen.parl.gc.ca
Betty Unger, email: ungerbe@sen.parl.gc.ca
Scott Tannas, is a recent appointee and has no email address yet. His fax is 1-613-943-2280.

Senators: Manitoba
buthjo@sen.parl.gc.ca
chapum@sen.parl.gc.ca
johnsj@sen.parl.gc.ca
plettd@sen.parl.gc.ca
stratt@sen.parl.gc.ca
zimmer@sen.parl.gc.ca

Senators: Ontario
atauls@sen.parl.gc.ca
braled@sen.parl.gc.ca
poulim@sen.parl.gc.ca
coolsa@sen.parl.gc.ca
eatonn@sen.parl.gc.ca
egglea@sen.parl.gc.ca
finled@sen.parl.gc.ca
fruml@sen.parl.gc.ca
harbm@sen.parl.gc.ca
kennyco@sen.parl.gc.ca
lebrem@sen.parl.gc.ca
mahovf@sen.parl.gc.ca
meredd@sen.parl.gc.ca
munsoj@sen.parl.gc.ca
mcgeed@sen.parl.gc.ca
ngoth@sen.parl.gc.ca
runcib@sen.parl.gc.ca
kfl@sen.parl.gc.ca
setha@sen.parl.gc.ca
smithd@sen.parl.gc.ca
whitev@sen.parl.gc.ca

Senators: All of Canada
brownb@sen.parl.gc.ca
fairbj@sen.parl.gc.ca
mccoye@sen.parl.gc.ca
mitchg@sen.parl.gc.ca
tardic@sen.parl.gc.ca
ungerbe@sen.parl.gc.ca
campbel@sen.parl.gc.ca
jaffem@sen.parl.gc.ca
martin@sen.parl.gc.ca
neufer@sen.parl.gc.ca
rainen@sen.parl.gc.ca
buthjo@sen.parl.gc.ca
chapum@sen.parl.gc.ca
johnsj@sen.parl.gc.ca
plettd@sen.parl.gc.ca
stratt@sen.parl.gc.ca
zimmer@sen.parl.gc.ca
dayja@sen.parl.gc.ca
kinsen@sen.parl.gc.ca
smithc@sen.parl.gc.ca
mocklp@sen.parl.gc.ca
poirir@sen.parl.gc.ca
ringup@sen.parl.gc.ca
stewac@sen.parl.gc.ca
wallaj@sen.parl.gc.ca
bakerg@sen.parl.gc.ca
doylen@sen.parl.gc.ca
fureyg@sen.parl.gc.ca
mannif@sen.parl.gc.ca
marshe@sen.parl.gc.ca
comeag@sen.parl.gc.ca
cordyj@sen.parl.gc.ca
cowanj@sen.parl.gc.ca
greens@sen.parl.gc.ca
mercet@sen.parl.gc.ca
moorew@sen.parl.gc.ca
ogilvk@sen.parl.gc.ca
olived@sen.parl.gc.ca
patted@sen.parl.gc.ca
sibnic@sen.parl.gc.ca
atauls@sen.parl.gc.ca
braled@sen.parl.gc.ca
poulim@sen.parl.gc.ca
coolsa@sen.parl.gc.ca
eatonn@sen.parl.gc.ca
egglea@sen.parl.gc.ca
finled@sen.parl.gc.ca
fruml@sen.parl.gc.ca
harbm@sen.parl.gc.ca
kennyco@sen.parl.gc.ca
lebrem@sen.parl.gc.ca
mahovf@sen.parl.gc.ca
meredd@sen.parl.gc.ca
munsoj@sen.parl.gc.ca
mcgeed@sen.parl.gc.ca
ngoth@sen.parl.gc.ca
runcib@sen.parl.gc.ca
kfl@sen.parl.gc.ca
setha@sen.parl.gc.ca
smithd@sen.parl.gc.ca
whitev@sen.parl.gc.ca
callbc@sen.parl.gc.ca
pdowne@sen.parl.gc.ca
mikeduffy@sen.parl.gc.ca
hublee@sen.parl.gc.ca
boisvp@sen.parl.gc.ca
brazep@sen.parl.gc.ca
carigc@sen.parl.gc.ca
champa@sen.parl.gc.ca
dagenj@sen.parl.gc.ca
dallar@sen.parl.gc.ca
dawsod@sen.parl.gc.ca
debanp@sen.parl.gc.ca
tessil@sen.parl.gc.ca
fortis@sen.parl.gc.ca
frasej@sen.parl.gc.ca
hervic@sen.parl.gc.ca
lacomd@sen.parl.gc.ca
joyals@sen.parl.gc.ca
maltag@sen.parl.gc.ca
massip@sen.parl.gc.ca
nolinp@sen.parl.gc.ca
rivarm@sen.parl.gc.ca
jcrivest@sen.parl.gc.ca
seidmj@sen.parl.gc.ca
vernej@sen.parl.gc.ca
wattc@sen.parl.gc.ca
andrer@sen.parl.gc.ca
dyckli@sen.parl.gc.ca
merchp@sen.parl.gc.ca
tkachd@sen.parl.gc.ca
wallinp@sen.parl.gc.ca
langd@sen.parl.gc.ca

Filed Under: Bill C-304, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Canadian Human Rights Act, Canadian Human Rights Commission, Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, Canadian Senate, Connie Fournier, Conservative Party of Canada, Editor's Zone, FreeDominion.ca, MP Brian Storseth, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Sec. 13(1) CHRA, Sec. 319(2) CC "Willful Promotion of Hatred", Sec. 319(2) Criminal Code of Canada, Stand Up For Freedom Canada

Radical Press: Legal Update #11 by Arthur Topham

April 19, 2013 by admin 3 Comments

April 19, 2013

Dear Free Speech Advocates and Radical Press Supporters,

It’s been quite awhile since my last update which went out in late February. My apologies to all of you who have been left wondering what’s been going on with my legal battle with the Jewish lobbyists here in Canada.

A rather long string of unforeseen events, most notably the death of my lawyer Douglas Christie back on March 11th, 2013, threw a monkey-wrench into the whole process. Then, just prior to the Easter long weekend in March, I came down with a rather wicked, unrelenting “bug” that knocked the wind out of my sails for a few weeks. Only recently have I been able to regain my course.

Of course, there being no rest for the wicked, all of my personal issues, including the passing of Doug Christie, didn’t slow down the onerous movement of the wheels of justice here in Zionist Occupied Canada.

As such I’ll do my best to be concise as possible and try to outline where my case stands at present.

Last Tuesday, April 16th, 2013 I appeared once again in provincial court in Quesnel. Prior to this date I had been in the same courtroom back on Tuesday, April 2nd, 2013 to attend what was originally supposed to be a hearing to deal with matters pertaining to the upcoming Preliminary Hearing on my Sec. 319(2) Criminal charge that had been scheduled to begin June 3 – 6, 2013.

Upon the death of Mr. Christie I wrote to Crown Counsel Jennifer Johnston on March 12th, 2013 and informed her that because of this unfortunate event I would not be prepared to deal with anything at that time.

When I did appear on the April 2nd I informed Judge Morgan of my situation and the fact that I was without legal counsel. At the same time I advised the Judge that I was planning to submit what is known as a Rowbotham application to the court – a Rowbotham application being a legal document wherein an accused person who has been refused legal aid and who cannot afford a lawyer and who is facing a criminal charge that could include a jail sentence if found guilty can apply to the court to have the government appoint a lawyer if the case is deemed serious enough and the applicant (accused) can show that they aren’t in a position to afford a lawyer nor are they capable of defending themselves due to the complexity of the case.

Judge Morgan then gave me 14 days to prepare the Rowbotham application and set the next date for Tuesday, April 16th, 2013.

Still reeling from the viral infection I did my best to get all the paperwork done by the 16th. For the most part it was complete but in the interim period, on the advice of a lawyer, after reading through some of my previous correspondence with former counsel Doug Christie, I decided to make a second application to the court for an order wherein the Crown would have to furnish me with what is known as “particularization” of the Information. Allow me to explain what that is.

When Crown eventually got around to releasing Disclosure (basically their evidence) of the information surrounding the sec. 319(2) Criminal charge against me on January 31st, 2013 (after an eight and a half month delay!), it became fairly evident that they had scrapped together as much miscellaneous documentation that they could possibly come up with (My immediate impression was that he who had the most pages, regardless of their relevancy, would win ). Disclosure showed that there was over a 1,000 pages of purported evidence that my lawyer was then going to have to wade through.

Given this fact Doug had expressed to me some time after receiving the Disclosure disks that it would be extremely difficult to determine how long a potential trial might take considering that the over 1,000 pages of disclosure contained no real indication as to which of my writings they intended to focus on at trial. If they planned to go through it all and Doug had to raise defences of truth, fair comment, etc. over and over for everything that I’d ever written, (not to mention other writers included in the Disclosure) a four-week trial wasn’t that unrealistic. Thus the need to seek particularization of the disclosure.

On April 10th, 2013 I made an Application to a Judge for the following order: “Particularization of Information” and I based my reasons on the following statement:

“The Crown has provided over 1,000 pages of disclosure, including a broad array of material written by myself (the accused). The Crown has failed to indicate which of this material constitutes “willful promotion of hatred” within the meaning of Section 319(2), and which of the alleged hateful material is not covered by one of the defences in Section 319(3). Without specifics as to which of my writings are alleged to be hateful, it is impossible for me to make an accurate time estimate as to the length of the trial, or indeed to make full answer and defence.”

Part of the reason for making this application was the fact that in order to complete the Rowbotham application it was necessary for me to indicate the duration of any potential trial in order to get an estimate of the cost for hiring a counsel for that period.

Judge Morgan wasn’t present on the morning of April 16th and I appeared before a Justice instead. She asked me if the Rowbotham application had been filed yet and I informed her that it had not but that it would be completed that same day. She then told me that it was the intent of the court to go ahead and set a new date for the preliminary hearing regardless of whether I had counsel or not. Crown also indicated that the likelihood the original dates set for the preliminary hearing would still work were unlikely. The Justice then informed the Crown that unless a date was set soon it would mean a rather long delay again because at that point the earliest a preliminary hearing might be heard was already November or December of 2013.

Following this discussion the Justice then moved on to my most recent application of April 10th and instructed me to come to her office at 1:30 pm that same day and she would then tell me what the dates would be for a hearing for the “particularization” application and for the preliminary trial.

As I had all the documents with me to complete the Rowbotham application I spend the remainder of the morning completing and filing it. Part of that procedure entails sending both a sworn Affidavit and also what is known as a “Notice of Application and Constitutional Issue” to three separate parties, the Crown Counsel, the Attorney General of Canada and the Attorney General of British Columbia.

By my afternoon appointment with the Justice I had all these documents filed and sent off. In the process I also filed another document with the court registry. This one was called a “Memorandum of Argument Regarding Indictment”. Basically it is a document that argues the reasons (as stated in case law) for why particularization of the Disclosure is vital to my defence.

Now, speaking of my Defences in this case I will quote below precisely what these are as they appear in the Canadian Criminal Code. This is where the chutzpah of those who have been instrumental in the laying of this specious charge will be most clearly evident, given that a jury of twelve of my peers would have to unanimously agree that none of the defences listed below, were relevant. Further information on the actual nature of the Section 319(2) charge I’ll deal with in future posts.

Under Section 319(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada we see the following:

Defences
(3) No person shall be convicted of an offence under subsection (2)
(a) if he establishes that the statements communicated were true;
(b) if, in good faith, the person expressed or attempted to establish by an argument an
opinion on a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text;
(c) if the statements were relevant to any subject of public interest, the discussion of
which was for the public benefit, and if on reasonable grounds he believed them to be
true; or
(d) if, in good faith, he intended to point out, for the purpose of removal, matters
producing or tending to produce feelings of hatred toward an identifiable group in
Canada.

When I met with the Justice at 1: 30 pm on April 16th she had some new information to add to what she’d told me earlier in the morning. I’m presuming this had to do with the fact that in the interim period I had filed the Rowbotham application as well as the additional “Memorandum of Argument Regarding Indictment”. The Justice told me that they weren’t clear at this point regarding the Rowbotham application and they were therefore assuming that once the Attorney General of B.C. received the application that the AG’s office would then send me further instructions as to what additional information I must furnish the court with in order that a hearing on the Rowbotham application might then be set. the Justice appeared to think that I would receive these instructions and be able to respond to them by the 16th of May, 2013 and so she set that date for my next appearance; one which would also include speaking to my April 10th application regarding “Particularization of Information”.

I trust that all my readers have this clearly in their minds by now.

I’ll summarize this update with one final editorial comment. By all appearances it would seem that there will be a concerted and determined effort on the part of the Crown aka Attorney General of B.C. to have this Rowbotham application quashed or denied. Why? Well, from speaking with other counsel who are in the know, it seems that the government really doesn’t like it when an innocent and financially challenged person is accused of a criminal offence and then displays the audacity to expect that the Crown would ensure that they have professional legal counsel in order to deal with all the spurious and specious accusations made against them. Unfortunately, for them, they have to deal with both the Constitutional Question Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 68, Section 8; and the Constitution Act, 1982, Part 1, Sections 7, 11 (d) and 24(1), both of which protect my inherent right to a fair trial and defence.

So it goeth out here in Lotus Land as of April 19th, 2013 as the free speech advocates continue their struggle to rid our nation of foreign Zionist interlopers hell-bent on destroying our country, our institutions and our democratic way of life by entrenching their heinous “hate crime laws” in our judicial system so as to cover up their own misfeasance and seditious actions against Canada.

Stay tuned folks!

For Justice and Freedom of Speech for Everyone,

Arthur Topham
Publisher & Editor
The Radical Press
“Digging to the root of the issues since 1998″

———

PLEASE NOTE: More than ever, now that my former lawyer Douglas Christie has died, I am dependent upon financial help to carry on.

I would ask readers to give serious consideration to helping out by either sending a donation via PayPal using either a PayPal account or a credit card or else sending a cheque or Money Order or cash to me via snail mail at the following postal address. Please don’t make the cheque out to “RadicalPress” as that account is no longer available to me.

Arthur Topham
4633 Barkerville Highway
Quesnel, B.C
Canada
V2J 6T8

Thank you!

Filed Under: "hate speech", Attorney General of British Columbia, Attorney General of Canada, Constitutional Question Act, Crown Council Jennifer Johnston, Det-Cst Terry Wilson BC HATE CRIME TEAM, Douglas H. Christie, Editor's Zone, Free Speech on the Internet, Harry Abrams, Hate Crime laws, League for Human Rights of B'nai Brith Canada, Legal Update, Political Zionism, Quesnel BC, Radical Press Legal Update, RCMP Corruption, Richard Warman, Rowbotham application, Sec. 13(1) CHRA, Sec. 319(2) CC "Willful Promotion of Hatred", Statement of Particulars

Paul Fromm on the Demise of Free Speech in Canada by Prof. Kevin MacDonald

April 18, 2013 by admin Leave a Comment

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2013/04/paul-fromm-on-the-demise-of-free-speech-in-canada/
Paul Fromm on the Demise of Free Speech in Canada

By Kevin MacDonald
April 13, 2013

Paul Fromm, a pro-White activist who writes for his CAFE (Canadian Association for Free Expression) website, has an article on a recent ruling by the Canadian Supreme Court that once again indicates the power of the cultural left at the highest reaches of Western societies “The Whatcott Decision – A Grim Day for Christians and Freedom of Speech“). The case involves a $15000 fine (plus court costs likely to be north of $150,000) imposed on an evangelical Christian who distributed leaflets containing criticism of homosexuality based on Biblical teachings.

Some excerpts and comments:

The decision is pure cultural Marxism. It reflects the triumph of *Frankfurt School* social science which has captured most Western universities. While economic communism collapsed and was defeated, cultural communism was spread by the *Frankfurt School*. Basically, it sees the world divided up into two classes: oppressors – those would be White Christians, and especially sexually healthy White males – and the oppressed – those would be women, homosexuals, Jews, and certain other racial minorities. To overthrow the “oppressors” and to establish universal equality – not of opportunity but results – the *Frankfurt School* targeted loyalty to family, country and religion. There began a concerted campaign of “deconstruction” whereby political heroes, cultural heroes – the dismissal of traditional English literature as the writing of dead, White males – and traditional Christianity were mocked and attacked. These ideas have captured the upper echelons of Canada’s judiciary and bode poorly for freedom of speech.

The Whatcott decision holds that in human rights cases:

· Truth is no defence;?

· Intent is no defence;?

· No harm needs to be proven to have been caused to a “vulnerable” minority;

· A minority is designated as “vulnerable” not because of any evidence – the court admits concrete evidence is often lacking, but on the mere say-so of a human rights commission or court;

· Christians are not protected from hatred as they are not a “vulnerable minority.”

The Court depicts Mr. Whatcott as having the power to intimidate homosexuals. The reality is far different:

Well, where’s the evidence that in the decade since Mr. Whatcott handed out his flyers critical of homosexuals, that “dialogue” was shut down and homosexuals were unable to respond? For nearly 20 years, the powerful homosexual lobby has been pushing for same sex marriage – a revolutionary anti-family retreat from tradition. In 2001, Parliament overwhelmingly voted to endorse the traditional definition of marriage – one man and one woman. The lobby continued its pressure, apparently not intimidated or silenced by the lonely Mr. Whatcott’s leafleting. A cowardly Jean Chretien referred the “question” as to whether the traditional definition of marriage, accepted by almost all but the fringiest elements of Christianity, and by Judaism, Islam, and Hinduism, was “discriminatory” to the judicial revolutionaries on the Supreme Court. They collapsed and gave the homosexual lobby what it wanted. Canada has same-sex marriage.

Despite being a Catholic, Liberal Premier Dalton McGuinty of Ontario forced even Catholic schools to promote the homosexual agenda in the schools and have Gay-Straight Alliance Clubs, even though the practice of homosexuality violates Catholic teaching. (So much for religious freedom!) The homosexual agenda has triumphed in almost every battle. It successfully pressured to have “sexual orientation” added to the privileged groups protected by Sec. 319 of the Criminal Code, Canada’s notorious “hate law.” In fact, there’s no evidence that Mr. Whatcott’s pathetic little leafleting operation ever intimidated any homosexual from promoting his cause. The only one excluded from the debate is Mr. Whatcott! Mr. Whatcott and strong critics of the homosexual agenda are all but excluded from the mainstream media. Pro-homosexual commentators bray their views from the CBC and the Globe and Mail is virtually a mouthpiece for the homosexual lobby. The only voices marginalized are critics of the homosexual agenda.

Fromm targets the Frankfurt School, a Jewish intellectual movement discussed in Chapter 5 of The Culture of Critique:

Despite calling themselves a “School of Social research,” the Frankfurt School feared any objective research that might challenge their ideology. Like the Supreme Court, they defined the world ideologically, and facts would not be allowed to get in the way:

The Frankfurt School never set out to find out the truth about human behavior and institutions. Instead, its members viewed empirically oriented social science as an aspect of domination and oppression. Horkheimer wrote in 1937 that “if science as a whole follows the lead of empiricism and the intellect renounces its insistent and confident probing of the tangled brush of observations in order to unearth more about the world than even our well-meaning daily press, it will be participating passively in the maintenance of universal injustice.” Rather than find out how society works, the social scientist must be a critic of culture and adopt an attitude of resistance toward contemporary societies.

The unscientific nature of the enterprise can also be seen in its handling of dissent within the ranks of the Institute—a trend that is a common feature of Jewish intellectual and political movements Erich Fromm was excised from the movement in the 1930s because his leftist humanism opposed the authoritarian nature of the psychoanalyst-patient relationship. This was not compatible with the pro-Bolshevik stance championed at the time by the Horkheimer-Adorno line: Fromm “takes the easy way out with the concept of authority,without which, after all, neither Lenin’s avant-garde nor dictatorship can be conceived of. I would strongly advise him to read Lenin…I must tell you that I see a real threat in this article to the line which the journal takes. (See Chapter 5 of The Culture of Critique.)

One of the most shocking revolutionary conclusions of the Court is that truth should not be a defence, at least in human rights cases: “The lack of defences is not fatal to the constitutionality of the provision. Truthful statements can be presented in a manner that would meet the definition of hate speech, and not all truthful statements must be free from restriction. …

Fromm emphasizes the Jewish role in this decision:

Finally, and this is a delicate topic in oppressive, minority-ruled Canada, let’s look at the makeup of the six judge panel who heard this crucial case about the rights of Christians. Three, yes three, or fully one half of the panel were Jews. Under the regime of employment equity, a Canadian version of anti-White “affirmative action”, invented by, guess who? Madame Justice Rosalie Silberman Abella, who was on the panel, “systemic discrimination” is evidenced by an over-representation or under-representation of a group. It must be remembered that Jews, at about 310,000, constitute less than one per cent of Canada’s population, but made up half of panel in Whatcott! Did their personal views interfere? Ironically, had Justice Abella applied her own “employment equity” she’d have removed herself from the panel in Whatcott as her minority was already heftily over-represented.

The author of this freedom trashing opinion was Mr. Justice Marshall Rothstein of Manitoba. His biography on the Supreme Court website notes: “He served as an adjudicator under the Manitoba Human Rights Act from 1978 to 1983 and as a member of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal from 1986 to 1992.” In other words, he was, for more than a decade, part of the whole repressive “human rights” industry he was now being invited to critique. In his case, there was more than a “reasonable apprehension of bias.” Perhaps, no surprise he found state censorship and strong criticism of privileged minorities perfectly justified in a “free” [do words mean nothing!] and “democratic society.”

At least two Liberal senators, Robina Jaffer and Jim Munson (a former journalist happily at ease with state censorship), in speaking against Bill C-304, which would repeal Sec. 13 (Internet censorship) of the Canadian Human Rights Act quoted Justice Abella and her emphasis on“vulnerable minorities”: to wit: “In a 2009 speech entitled Human Rights and History’s Judgment, Justice Rosalie Abella said: We were supposed to have learned three indelible lessons from the concentration camps of Europe. First, indifference is injustice’s incubator. Second, it’s not just what you stand for, it’s is what you stand up for. And third, we must never forget how the world looks to those who are vulnerable.’” Justice Abella was also part of the human rights industry having served on the Ontario Human Rights Commission. Her biography on the Supreme Court website notes: “She married Canadian historian Irving M. Abella on December 8, 1968.” Irving Abella is a past president of the Canadian Jewish Congress, a pro-censorship intervener in Whatcott. The CJC has been a long-time and strident supporter of anti-free speech “hate laws”. Again, one might wonder why Justice Abella did not recuse herself from this case is there is more than a “reasonable apprehension of bias.”

It is certainly true that the organized Jewish community has been a strong voice supporting laws curtailing free speech, not just in Canada, but throughout the Western world (see “The Hate Crimes Prevention Bill: Why Do Jewish Organizations Support It?“). Irving Abella’s book was cited in my chapter on the Jewish role in promoting immigration. Although the chapter emphasizes the Jewish role in altering U.S. immigration policy in favor of non-Whites, the Jewish community played a similar role throughout the West, including Canada:

In the case of Canada, Abella (A Coat of Many Colors: Two Centuries of Jewish Life in Canada; 1990, 234–235) notes the important contribution of Jews in bringing about a multicultural Canada and, in particular, in lobbying for more liberal immigration policies. Reflecting this attitude, Arthur Roebuck, attorney general of Ontario, was greeted “with thunderous applause” at a 1935 convention for the Zionist Organization of Canada [dedicated to a Jewish ethnostate] when he stated that he looked “forward to the time when our economic conditions will be less severe than they are today and when we may open wide the gates, throw down the restrictions and make of Canada a Mecca for all the oppressed peoples of the world” (in M. Brown 1987, 256).

Abella also co-authored a book, None Is Too Many that was critical of Canada for not admitting Jewish refugees in the World War II era. The title comes from a statement of a senior Canadian immigration official that summed up Canadian policy.

Thus we have Jewish activists involved in academic research on Jewish issues. And perhaps more importantly, Jewish activists are involved in court decisions that reflect consensus views within the Jewish community on issues related to free speech, multiculturalism, and immigration. The hostile elite in action.

—–

Filed Under: "hate speech", "Jewish" holocaust, Abrams/BBC v. Arthur Topham & RadicalPress.com, Anti-Defamation League (ADL), B'nai Brith Canada, BC HATE CRIME TEAM, Bill C-304, Bill Whatcott, C.B.C./Canadian Broadcasting Corp., CAFE - Canadian Association for Free Expression, Canada's Queer Community, Canadian Catholic News, Canadian Charter of Rights & Freedoms, Canadian Council for Israel and Jewish Advocacy (CIJA), Canadian Human Rights Act, Canadian Human Rights Commission, Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, Canadian Jewish Congress, Canadian Jewish Lobby, Canadian Judicial System, Catholic Activists, Catholic Insight magazine, Chabad Lubavich Cult, Conservative Party of Canada, Editor's Zone, Free Speech on the Internet, Freedom of Speech, Globe and Mail, Harry Abrams, Hate Crime laws, Hate laws, Jewish Censorship, Jewish Crime, Jewish Freemasons, Jewish Hatred, Jewish Holocaust Industry, Jewish Lobby Groups, Jewish Media Monopoly, Jewish Racism, Jews, Justice Marshall Rothstein SCC, Kevin MacDonald, League for Human Rights of B'nai Brith Canada, Madame Justice Rosalie Silberman Abella, Marxism, Marxist Frankfurt School, Paul Fromm (CAFE), PM Stephen Harper, Political Zionism, Roman Catholics, Sec. 13(1) CHRA, Sec. 319(2) CC "Willful Promotion of Hatred", The Controversy of Zion, The Holy Bible, The Occidental Observer, The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, Ukrainian Holocaust