http://www.truthtellers.org/alerts/adlcampaignstotrain.htm
ADL CAMPAIGNS TO TRAIN HATE PROSECUTORS

By Rev. Ted Pike

October 11, 2009

For the past ten years, the Anti-Defamation League has introduced its federal hate crime bill into Congress five times – and lost. ADL claims to have the purest intentions—concern that federal power is needed if a state does not have a hate crimes law or is unwilling or unable to punish a hate crime. ADL insisted passage of a federal hate crimes law would change little: the vast majority of prosecutions of hate crimes will be initiated by states.

But in its exultant press announcement yesterday, ADL reveals the real reason it has never given up its struggle to make its hate bill the law of the land: ADL wants an army of “anti-hate” prosecutors who can go after those ADL considers guilty of bias-motivated crimes. After giving itself credit as chief architect of hate crimes laws on the state and federal level, ADL says:

The end of the legislative path for the hate crimes bill also marks the beginning of the next campaign – training prosecutors and law enforcement officials about the new law. ADL stands ready to help lead that continuing effort.

ADL is clearly beginning a second phase – to train lawyers and law enforcement nationwide on prosecuting hate criminals. In ADL-speak, “haters” are those who oppose homosexuality, allege Jews dominate media, government, finance, or are guilty of “strong” criticism of Israel or its leaders.

ADL is already the primary source for hate crimes education for the US Justice Department, FBI and all local law enforcement. In 1990, through passage of its Hate Crimes Statistics Act, ADL granted itself such empowerment. But ADL wants much more.

Entirely staffed by Jews, ADL is headed by a devoutly religious Orthodox Jew, Abe Foxman (See, ADL’s Foxman: Man of Faith?). Like its sister Jewish attack group, the Southern Poverty Law Center, ADL has a focused religious objective: to revive ancient Jewish persecution of Christians, begun 2,000 years ago and recorded in the New Testament. The true intent of ADL’s federal and 45 state hate laws is to empower the legal, systematic, and ruthless persecution of Talmudic Judaism’s greatest rival, Christianity. To this end, ADL now calls for a national “campaign” to train an army of federal and local hate crimes prosecutors.

Already, ADL and SPLC–through their Missouri Police MIA Directive as well as warnings from ADL sycophant Janet Nepalitano and her Department of Homeland Security–stereotype Christian and conservatives as unstable bigots and potential terrorist threats. ADL’s Office of Global Anti-Semitism in the US State Department says anyone who believes the New Testament claim that Jewish leaders masterminded the crucifixion is a “classic anti-Semite.” (See, U.S. State Department Says New Testament is ‘Anti-Semitic’?)

ADL’s new campaign to train an army of prosecutors to enforce the federal hate crimes law will usher in progressive arrest of Christian “haters.”  These could well be destined to occupy FEMA prison camps in the years ahead. Ultimately, many could be delivered up, as Christ prophesied, to be tried, convicted and imprisoned in the courts and synagogues of Jewry (Matthew 10:17). Their “crimes against the Jewish people” would include criticism of matters Jewish (anti-Semitism) and questioning the accuracy of the sacred 6 million figure of Holocaust victims (Holocaust denial). However, most will likely be indicted under Jewish Noahide laws for heresy – the “idolatry” of affirming the deity of Jesus Christ, the second member of the Trinity. (See, Coming Jewish ‘Utopia’ Ruled by Noahide Laws)

The Book of Revelation prophesies that the garments of the Great Harlot (Israel and international Jewish control) will be soaked with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus (Revelation 17:6). (See, Israel: On the Way to Empire in the Mideast)

Jewish world dominion will fulfill Biblical prophesy but also a number of predictions by modern Jewish leaders:

“The Jews energetically reject the idea of fusion with the other nationalities and cling firmly to their historical hope of world empire…” (Max Mandelstam, World Zionist Congress, July 1898.)

“Jerusalem is not the capitol of Israel and world Jewry: it aspires to become the spiritual center of the world…” (David Ben-Gurion, Jewish Chronicle, London, Dec. 16, 1949)

“In Jerusalem,  the United Nations (a truly United Nations) will build a Shrine of the Prophets to serve the federated union of all continents; this will be the seat of the Supreme Court of Mankind, to settle all controversies among the federated continents, as prophesied by Isaiah…” (David Ben-Burion, Look Magazine, Jan. 16, 1962)

“The Jewish people cannot ever be destroyed, but rather they and their G-d of History will emerge in days to come triumphant over the evils and the foolishness of all other nations. Zion will and must emerge as the mount to which all other peoples turn.” (Rabbi Meir Kahane, Jewish Press, Brooklyn, New York, Nov. 9, 1973.)

Will Christian America silently allow President Obama to sign ADL’s hate bill as early as this week, accelerating arrival of the Zionist New World order? Incredibly, all major Christian and conservative organizations remain oblivious to the tactic of pressuring Obama to keep his promise to veto a wasteful defense authorization bill–one that includes $100 billion funding for extra F-35 jet engines. Only the National Prayer Network proclaims that we can still defeat the hate bill through presidential veto.

ADL now considers passage of the hate bill a virtual reality. It’s not.

The Senate has yet to give final approval, which will probably take place early this week. Pres. Obama still has to sign the defense bill with the hate bill attached. Obama doesn’t like this defense authorization bill. I believe he’s burned that Congress has defied him. It forces him to approve what he has steadfastly vowed he would not approve –thousands of F-35 engines he says squander taxpayers’ money.

It is up to Christian America NOW to exert greater pressure on Obama than is now being applied by ADL. We must demand he stays true to his promise and vetoes the defense bill. If he vetoes it, the hate bill will be dead in this session of Congress. ADL will have to cancel their second “campaign” to create a federally-authorized army of prosecutors against Christians.

Take action NOW! Don’t be distracted by more controversy about healthcare. Pressure Obama to keep his word.

Email these two messages to the President immediately:

Mr. President, I will vote out Democrats at midterms if you sign the freedom-destroying federal hate crimes bill.

Mr. President, I expect you to keep your promise to veto any military authorization bill that wastes $100 billion of taxpayers’ money on unnecessary F-35 jet engines.

Send these two messages in separate emails.  You may cut and paste them in at www.whitehouse.gov/contact .
This week may decide if America still has hope, or will begin descent into impending slavery. The hate bill could be on Obama’s desk by Tuesday.

Your emails should be there first thing Monday morning.

Endnote:

Modern or “rabbinic” Judaism continues unaltered the teaching of the ancient Pharisees who killed Christ. In my 345-page book Israel: Our Duty…Our Dilemma (available at www.truthtellers.org), I thoroughly document that deep within the teachings of the Pharisees, as contained in their Talmud and Kabbalah, is the oft-repeated assertion that Christianity and its belief in “three Gods” is idolatry; if the world were put right, Christians, as heretics and idolaters, should be killed. After the apostle Paul was converted, he realized that a new “age of grace” made obsolete any duty to kill “heretics,” but before that, as Saul of Tarsus, he, in all good conscience as an Orthodox Jew, killed and hailed into prison as many Christians as possible.

For Talmudic Judaism, no new age of grace ended the ancient duty to cleanse the land of idolaters. Instead, Talmudic, kabbalistic literature, (the highest religious and ethical guide to Orthodox Jews) teaches that when the messiah (Antichrist) comes, he and the righteous of Israel will follow the precedent of Joshua and the Hebrews entering Canaan and annihilate all “idol-worshippers” – Christians– from the earth.

If you don’t think Jewish supremacists today are capable of such horror, just remember what Jewish supremacists unleashed in 1917. Conquering Russia, they set in motion the eventual slaughter of more than 100 million Gentiles, many of whom were Christians (See, Jewish Activists Created Communism).

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Let the Anti-Defamation League teach you how they have saddled 45 states with hate laws capable of persecuting Christians, and spearhead attempts to pass the federal hate crimes bill: http://www.adl.org/99hatecrime/intro.asp .

TALK SHOW HOSTS: Interview Rev. Ted Pike on this subject. Call (503) 631-3808.

The freedom-saving outreach of Rev. Ted Pike and the National Prayer Network is solely supported by sale of books, videos and your financial support. All gifts are tax-deductible.

NATIONAL PRAYER NETWORK, P.O. Box 828, Clackamas, OR 97015
www.truthtellers.org

[Editor’s Note: After posting this last night and sending it out to my list I received word from one of my readers that the creator of this petition, Joseph C. Ben-Ami, is connected with B’nai Brith Canada. The following bio is from his website.

Joseph C. Ben-Ami

“Widely regarded as one of Canada’s leading conservative thinkers and strategists, Joseph C. Ben-Ami is the president of the Canadian Centre for Policy Studies. Before joining the Centre, Ben-Ami was Executive Director of the Institute for Canadian Values and, before that, Director of Government Relations and Diplomatic Affairs for the well known Jewish human rights group B’nai Brith. Prior to this he was a policy aid to Stephen Harper, Canada’s current Prime Minister, and Stockwell Day, Harper’s predecessor as party leader. He also served as National Director of Operations on Day’s 2002 leadership campaign. Ben-Ami writes extensively on current affairs and public policy and is a much sought after public speaker and frequent radio and television commentator. A strong and unapologetic defender of conservatism and conservative values, Ben-Ami is known for his clear and independent thinking on issues.”

Bearing this in mind it begs the question as to his motives in creating the petition? Is it designed to furnish B’nai Brith Canada with a list of those who oppose sec. 13 of the CHR Act? Or possibly a poll for the Zionist forces working here in Canada?

Whatever it is I still think it’s a damn good way of determining the efficacy of the Canadian blogging and communication network that exists outside the mainstream Zionist-controlled media.

If people are too scared to sign their name for a petition to save their freedom of speech then they’ve already succumbed to the wishes of BB (that’s Big Brother or B’nai Brith. Take your pick).

Please try to pass this petition to as many folks as you can. Don’t stall on doing so. Your freedom of expression is in mortal danger at this point in Canada’s history.]

——————–

Joseph C. Ben-Ami
Reflections of an unrepentant conservative

October 15, 2009

As you know, freedom of speech is an essential characteristic of a free society. In Canada, however, this freedom has been under attack in recent years under the pretext of protecting and promoting human rights. Laws that prohibit the free expression of opinion undermine the very foundations of a free and tolerant society and are, therefore, illegitimate and must be abolished.

The Canadian Centre for Policy Studies ( http://www.policystudies.ca/ ) has just launched an online petition calling on lawmakers at all levels of government in Canada to examine legislation within their jurisdiction intended to protect and promote human rights, and to remove those provisions that prohibit or otherwise limit the free and sincere expression of opinion, i.e. section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

Please take a minute to sign this petition yourself and email it to your friends and family for their signature as well. You can do so now by clicking on the following link or by cutting and pasting the url into your browser. You can also post the link to social networking sites like facebook or in any forum you regularly visit.

Let’s see how many signatures we can gather on this important issue.

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/defend-freedom-of-speech-in-canada.html

On behalf of my lovely wife Shastah and myself I want to take this moment to thank everyone who made our trip to the 24th annual George Orwell dinner in Victoria, B.C. a reality.

Travel from our relatively remote area of the province to the island is expensive and it was only due to the generosity of those who donated funds that we were able to attend this important gathering of free speech advocates from across Canada.

This was the second time that we were able to enjoy the fellowship of people on the front lines of those fighting to retain the right to speak out their truths in the face of a brutal and alarmingly dangerous force: the government of Canada and its bureaucratic agent known as the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC).

Due to time restrictions at the moment I cannot elaborate on the meeting but will do so over the next while.

Arthur Topham

Pub/Ed

RadicalPress.com

[Editor’s Note: No sooner had I published my recent article of October 6, 2009 on Harry Abrams and his attempts to vilify me and RadicalPress.com by putting words in my mouth that weren’t mine I learned from FreeDominion.com that co-owner Mark Fournier had made the decision to ban Harry for yet another alleged case of further lying and defamation and alteration of documents designed to make Marc Lemire appear to be an unsavory character.

The following thread from the FreeDominion.com forum will explain the details of why Mark Fournier took such drastic action against B’nai Brith Canada’s B.C. representative for the League for Human Rights.]

——————–
Read the rest of this entry »

                  Douglas Christie - Canadian Free Speech League
___________________________________________________________________________

CANADIAN FREE SPEECH LEAGUE
PO Box 24052
4420 West Saanich Road
Victoria, BC  V8Z 7E7
Telephone 250-590-2979   Fax 250-479-3294

BY EMAIL

nancy.lafontant@chrt-tcdp.gc.ca

October 6, 2009

Nancy LaFontant, Registry Officer
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
160 Elgin Street, 11th Floor
Ottawa, ON K1A 1J4

Dear Ms. LaFontant:

Re:      Harry Abrams and The League of Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada v. Arthur Topham and RadicalPress.com
Complaint No. : 20071016

Hearing

I would like to indicate, on behalf of the Canadian Free Speech League, that the decision of Member Hadjis in Lemire is morally binding and legally persuasive to the argument that the hearing against Mr. Topham should not proceed. This would be a waste of judicial time and contrary to fundamental justice. We are of the view, in light of the Canadian Human Rights Commission’s seeking of judicial review, that the CHRC regards Member Hadjis’s decision as more than just affecting penalty clauses.

Our view is that this matter should be dealt with by a preliminary motion in order to avoid unnecessary waste of time and expense in the defence of the matter and the re-litigation of the constitutional question, which would be inevitably necessary, if this matter were to proceed.

It is unfair in the extreme, for government-funded entities like the Commission and well-funded organizations like B’nai Brith to put private individuals and small-organizations defending free speech to the expense of a full-blow hearing, when the constitutional validity of the enabling legislation is impugned by the Tribunal itself. The principle of stare decisis requires this matter be resolved by a higher authority, if there is any doubt, and there certainly seems to be doubt in the mind of the Commission, considering its decision to seek judicial review.

Our view is that this issue of whether to proceed or not needs a separate hearing as soon as possible. Would the Tribunal please accept this as a motion on our part, accepting the issue of constitutional validity directly: That a date be set for argument about constitutional validity and the existing hearing dates be abandoned.

Yours truly,
Douglas H. Christie
General Counsel
DHC/kmg

cc
Arthur Topham
Daniel Poulin
Anita Bromberg
Harry Abrams
Marvin Kurz
Paul Fromm
Danielle Desrosiers

Harry Abrams: Big Mouth Singer or Just a Gaby Haas Wannabe?
By Arthur Topham
October 5, 2009

“There is nothing that the International Jew fears so much as the truth, or any hint of the truth about himself or his plans.”
~Henry Ford Sr.,The International Jew, Vol. I, p. 200. originally published in The Dearborn Independent.

Back in the 70s when the kids were in their early years the grandparents used to buy them the latest plastic Fisher-Price toys. Their parents, being Hippies, weren’t into plastic so whenever they got something brand new from the grand-folks they usually took a shine to it. One toy in particular that I’ll always remember with fondness was a musical one that sang songs. It consisted of a number of variously-colored, bright plastic heads all lined up in a couple of rows like a chorus of singers and when you pushed the right button their mouths would all suddenly open in unison and a particular electronic sound/song would blare forth. I believe it’s brand name was “The Big Mouth Singers.”

Well, after reading some of Harry Abrams’ postings on FreeDominion.com, where he has taken up residency since July 22, 2009, I’m beginning to think that he and B’nai Brith Canada may possibly have been the prototype the creator of this delightful toy had in mind.

Read the rest of this entry »

[Editor’s Note: RadicalPress.com was just notified by Marc Lemire of this latest decision by the Canadian Human Rights Commission to file an application today (Oct.1, 2009) for a Judicial Review of the Warman v. Lemire decision of Sept. 2, 2009.

As in my previous post regarding the Commission’s decision to persevere in recommending that the hearing between B’nai Brith Canada and RadicalPress.com proceed, this new development is but further evidence of the viciousness of this Bolshevik group of malcontents who refuse to accept the wishes of the Canadian public.

Judging from the context and wording of this Judicial Review application I would venture to guess that it was written in full by B’nai Brith Canada and given to the Commission to rubber stamp.

I feel bad for Marc Lemire and Barbara Kulaszka as this will mean having to strap on their guns once again and join in the battle that doesn’t appear to be ending soon.

God grant them courage to continue on!]

http://www.chrc-ccdp.ca/whats_new/default-en.asp?id=570

What’s New

01/10/2009

Judicial Review Application in the Warman v. Lemire case

On Thursday, October 1, 2009, the Canadian Human Rights Commission applied for Judicial Review of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal’s decision in the Warman v. Lemire case before the Federal Court.

The Commission applied for Judicial Review so that technical but important legal issues raised by the decision can be clarified. These issues go beyond this particular case and could have an impact on other administrative tribunals. As a result, the uncertainty created by the decision is not in the public interest and merits a binding decision by a higher court.

The application is based on two grounds. It is the Commission’s view that:

The Tribunal erred in law when it found that the manner by which the applicant exercises its statutory mandate could render section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act unconstitutional; and

The Tribunal’s findings of unconstitutionality also resulted from the adoption of subsections 54(1)(c) and (1.1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act, subsequent to the Supreme Court of Canada’ s decision in Canada (Human Rights Commission) v. Taylor, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 892. The Tribunal erred in law when it refused to apply section 13 of the Act because a refusal to apply subsections 54(1)(c) and (1.1) would have provided a sufficient remedy in respect of this ground.

The Commission endorses the Tribunal’s narrow interpretation of section 13, which is consistent with the Supreme Court and Tribunal’s jurisprudence as well as with the Commission’s 2009 Special Report to Parliament. The Commission accepts the Tribunal’s finding that the penalty clause is unconstitutional. In fact, the Commission itself has recommended that this provision be repealed in its Special Report to Parliament.

The Commission is a servant of Parliament and considers that Parliament’s statutes must be applied unless they are found to be unconstitutional. In this case, it is the Commission’s view that the Tribunal went too far in refusing to apply section 13 in its entirety when the constitutional concern could be remedied by refusing to apply the penalty clause in 54(1)(c).

————

THANKS TO MAIKERU OF FREEDOMINION.COM FOR THIS APT IMAGE

A New Day or the Same Old Shit?
By Arthur Topham
October 1, 2009

The decision on September 30th, 2009 by the Canadian Human Rights Commission to obstinately forge ahead with the Harry Abrams & B’nai Brith Canada v. Arthur Topham and RadicalPress.com sec. 13(1) “hate crime” hearing was, given all the past machinations by this quasi-judicial state policing organ, practically a foregone conclusion.

Still, one member on www.FreeDominion put it into a rather succinct and poignant context by posting the above image; one which basically symbolizes the mindset of this government appointed bounty-hunting group who, over the past decade or so have ridden roughshod over the sacred rights of all Canadians in their endless quest to appease the politically correct crowd of foreign lobbyists such as B’nai Brith Canada and the Canadian Jewish Congress better known today, thanks to Ezra Levant and the blogosphere, as Canada’s “Official Jews” or “OJs” for short. Sort of brings to mind OJ Simpson for some reason.

I suppose one could also have used the album cover from the old British rock group “Blind Faith” as well as it too exemplifies this pig-headed, mulish refusal to recognize the obvious fact that Canadians are not in the least impressed with government agencies and highly suspect legislation that strips them of their fundamental Charter rights to freedom of speech, especially legislation that with the recent Hadjis decision of September 2, 2009, clearly shows that sec. 13(1) is an unreasonable infringement of Canadians’ rights to freedom of speech as written into our Constitution.

The Commission’s dogged refusal to see the light on sec. 13(1) is reason enough to expect Canadians to grit their teeth and growl in indignation. Such chutzpah on the part of these Bolshevik Cheka baboons to expect approval from the public for their highly suspect actions given the recent Hadjis decision in the Warman v. Lemire case.

Some recent comments from other victims and commentators on this draconian, unconstitutional legislation include:

Ezra Levant:

“P.S. Here’s proof of how malicious the CHRC is — and how disrespectful they are of Hadjis, Lustig and the CHRT. They are still prosecuting section 13 cases, even though the law has been declared illegal. They are literally using a law that is not functional, to censor Canadians in disregard of our Charter.

That’s malicious prosecution territory; that’s abuse of office territory; that’s piercing the corporate veil and suing Lynch and her mob personally territory. I have no idea who has given them that legal advice, but if I were a section 13 victim still being hounded by Lynch, I’d sue her and every staffer involved personally for illegal conduct. Here’s what I mean: [quotes Poulin’s letter of Sept. 30. Ed.]

Disgusting. And as a former member of the B’nai Brith Youth Organization and a former camper at Camp B’nai Brith in Pine Lake, Alberta, I’m embarrassed that an organization I once loved would be party to such an un-Jewish, un-Canadian, illiberal prosecution. Jews using the state to bully their political enemies into silence: are they trying to take the bookburner title away from Burny and the CJC? Book burners: they’ve already got the right initials. I can’t think of a more effective way to promote hatred against Jews than to have Jews as the public face of bullying censorship. All this, after B’nai Brith itself tasted, first-hand, the unfairness of HRC censorship complaints at the hands of radical Islam.

Fire. Them. All.

And then Sue. Them. All.”
—————————-

Jay Currie:

“What strikes me as interesting here is that the CHRC seems to take the position that Hadjis’s decision in Lemire was strictly with respect to the unconstitutionality of s. 54(1)(c). Certainly Hadjis’ words can be construed in that manner:

However, I have also concluded that s. 13(1) in conjunction with ss. 54(1) and (1.1) are inconsistent with s. 2(b) of the Charter, which guarantees the freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression. The restriction imposed by these provisions is not a reasonable limit within the meaning of s. 1 of the Charter. Lemire

Whether that is what Hadjis actually meant is a whole other question. His analysis of Taylor turns on the remedial and conciliatory assumption made by Dickson in Taylor. As I wrote earlier, the Warmanization of the Commission, its transformation into a prosecutorial entity when it came to “hate speech” cases, lies at the root of Hadjis decision.

But what is equally interesting here is that the Commission seems to be signaling that it will not appeal Lemire but rather try to brazen it out in Topham.

Which will be interesting as Topham and the intervenors are like to raise the constitutional issue at every turn.”

BlazingFurCat:

[In comments section writes:]

“You are right CHRC is a 4 letter word now, however we have to drive a stake through Section 13’s heart as Jenny is in full Vampire Zombie mode.”

———————

Upon receiving word from Daniel Poulin, Counsel for the damned CHRC, I wrote the following reply which was sent off to the Tribunal and all parties very early this a.m. It basically summarizes my position with respect to both the Commission and the Complainants. Please pass this information along to your friends and associates. Thank you.

October 1,  2009

Nancy Lafontant
Registry Officer
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Nancy.Lafontant@chrt-tcdp.gc.ca

Dear Nancy Lafontant,

RE: Harry Abrams and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada v. Arthur Topham and the RadicalPress.com
File Number: T1360/9008

In an email to all parties sent September 30, 2009, Commission counsel Daniel Poulin states:

“Dear Tribunal and Parties,

We write further to the correspondence that has been exchanged by the parties in regards to the impact of the Warman v Lemire decision recently rendered by the Tribunal.

It is the position of the Commission submits [sic] that the Tribunal should proceed on hearing the matter pending before it in the present case. Consequently, the matter should neither be adjourned sine die or simply dismissed.

In Warman v. Lemire, the Tribunal found that the penalty provision in s. 54(1)(c) was not a reasonable limit on freedom of expression under the Charter.  In the instant case, the Commission will no longer be seeking a penalty under 54(1)(c) of the Act as was originally included in its Statement of Particulars.  The Commission therefore respectfully submits that the Tribunal ought to proceed with a hearing of the Complaint to determine if section 13 has been infringed, and if so, to exercise its discretion under s. 54(1)(a).

Yours truly,

Daniel Poulin

Legal Counsel

Canadian Human Rights Commission”

Allow me to state to the Tribunal at this pivotal juncture in the current proceedings that the decision by the Commission to pursue this case in the face of the recent Hadjis decision of September 2, 2009 concerning Warman v. Lemire, although it comes as no surprise to the Respondent, nonetheless is still a shocking indictment of the maliciousness of this quasi-judicial organization.

There are definite reasons why the Commission is persisting in its attempt to carry on with this case which need to be addressed again at this time.

The peculiar and possibly precedent-setting nature of the Harry Abrams and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada v. Arthur Topham and the RadicalPress.com complaint makes it an extraordinary benchmark case and is therefore being assigned significant importance by both the Commission and the Complainants. It is the sense of the Respondent (expressed to the Tribunal on numerous previous occasions) that the outcome of this particular case will have far-reaching effects upon any future cases of its kind should the now discredited section of the CHR Act continue to remain in force.

Of paramount importance to the Complainants, who it must always be recognized are acting not on behalf of Canada but on behalf of a foreign nation-state, i.e. Israel, is the critical need to establish in Canadian law a special precedent that will potentially prohibit every Canadian from publishing on the Internet any material critical of the Zionist policies of the Israeli state;  policies now recognized around the world as being fundamentally racist, supremacist and apartheid in nature.

This malefic condition, contained in the actual wording of the complaint itself, where it is clearly stated “and/or citizens of Israel,” is vital to the B’nai Brith International agenda now being fervently and feverishly pursued throughout all Western democracies under various guises. Its tell-tale identifying mark is detectable by the common thread of “hate” linking them all together.

In essence, this case reflects not only B’nai Brith Canada’s determination to maintain their present (unwarranted) status within Canadian society as one of its most powerful foreign Zionist lobbyist groups (again exemplified in the pro-Zionist foreign policies of the current Harper Conservative government) but of even greater importance for them, of fulfilling their hidden, seditious agreement with this foreign nation to maintain and enforce, via this now unconstitutional section of the Canadian Human Rights Act, their longstanding ability to control the essential freedoms of all Canadians presently guaranteed by Canada’s Constitution Act of 1981.

The whole of the content on RadicalPress.com complained of by B’nai Brith Canada exemplifies the position that I have steadfastly maintained regarding the extremely dangerous, supremacist political ideology known as Zionism. It is for this reason and this reason alone that B’nai Brith Canada is using and abusing sec. 13(1) of the CHR Act in order to accomplish what they obviously believe to be a political fait accompli based upon this despicable, anti-democratic, anti-Charter legislation.

In a truly free and democratic society (one not dominated by these special foreign Zionist lobbyists), those supporting and professing to believe in such a heinous, racist ideology would be forced to defend their position via logic, reason, intellect, open debate and actual evidence rather than resorting to such unscrupulous totalitarian tactics as feigning being “minority” victims of “hate” and “anti-Semitism” and attempting to use the now discredited sec. 13(1) of the CHR Act to escape the necessity of defending their political doctrines via a free exchange of ideas by having the state intervene on their behalf under false pretenses.

The Commission, by its overt, stubborn refusal to acknowledge the obvious, i.e., the unconstitutionality of sec. 13(1), has revealed itself to be what most critics of this section have deemed it to be – a willing, colluding, malicious participant and supporter of the harshest, most repressive piece of legislation ever to have graced Canada’s once proud legal tradition of fair and just jurisprudence. This revelation alone ought to give the Tribunal cause to pause and reconsider the Commission’s unfortunate, misguided and unconstitutional decision to persist in its frivolous folly.

The Hadjis decision has made it abundantly clear for all reasonable Canadians that sec. 13(1) is unjust, irrational, anti-democratic, vindictive and counter to Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I trust that when the Tribunal rules on my motion to dismiss this vexatious, spiteful attack upon my basic human rights that it will see fit to rise above the transparent, ill-conceived and antiquated arguments of both the Commission and the Complainants and rule in favour of true democracy and freedom of speech in the same honorable and expedient manner as that displayed by Member Hadjis.

If there is any further formality that you require, please let me know as soon as possible.

Sincerely,

Arthur Topham pro se
Publisher/Editor
——————-

Arthur Topham is the Publisher and Editor of RadicalPress.com. He is currently involved in a free speech battle with the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada.

He is also in extremely dire need of financial support to sustain this battle with the forces of repression and censorship as he is not able to work during this period of intense litigation with the Canadian Human Rights Commission and the CHR Tribunal. Any donations therefore would be most welcome. Please see the following url on the Home Page (upper right hand corner) http://www.radicalpress.com/?page_id=657 regarding donations. Also there is a “DONATE” button there for Paypal or here at https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=4466120 . Feel free to use any of them if you can help out. Thanks.

Arthur welcomes all feedback to his articles and can be reached at radical@radicalpress.com .

For the Full Monty on the complaint case involving RadicalPress.com and B’nai Brith Canada please see: http://www.radicalpress.com/?page_id=995

Epilogue

Six long months went by before we obtained our passports. We immediately notified our relatives in America, but letters seldom arrived in those days and there was no certainty that they would receive our messages. However, fate bestowed a small favor on us. A small American war vessel arrived in Novorossiysk. In those days, American ships frequently docked with food provided by United States relief agencies, headed by Herbert Hoover, later to become president. It was customary for the crews of these ships to visit the city. The very first evening, a group of these sailors came into one of the coffee shops, but the proprietor knew no English. As I chanced to be there with some friends, I approached the sailors and asked them in English what they wanted. “Whiskey,” they said, but I informed them that no vodka was served there, only coffee – excellent Turkish coffee. The sailors were delighted to find someone who spoke their language and invited me to be their guest. They wanted to know how I had learned to speak English, and when I told them that I had come from Chicago, where our son had been born, they promptly adopted me as one of their own.

Read the rest of this entry »

Chapter 31

In Novorossiysk, I was happy to find Bessie and our son, Leon, safe and sound. Having no position of any kind, despite the fact that I was well known among the “masters” of the city and had some friends among them, I was unable to find suitable lodgings and had to burden some of our personal friends. Before long however, “party people” who harbored human feelings toward us helped us obtain an apartment, furniture and the essential household appliances necessary to make our existence livable.

Read the rest of this entry »

Chapter 30

Standing there bemused near the Tsentro-Pechat offices, I might have remained lost in thought indefinitely had not someone behind me laid a hand on my shoulder. When I turned, I recognized an emigre from the United States with whom I was well acquainted. He was  not personally active in the anarchist movement but helped whenever he could. He was, I knew, occupying a high post with the Bolsheviks, though I did not know the precise nature of his work.

Read the rest of this entry »

Chapter 29

Since I had decided to make the tour, in keeping with the advice of the Head Commissar, I made up my mind to make the trip as carefree as possible, and to take advantage of the opportunity to visit all the attractive spots in the Caucasus which the poet Lermontov had described so beautifully. The majesty and natural glory of the towering Caucasus Mountains and the contrast with the breathtaking valleys combined to form a solid picture of glorious nature which seemed quite indifferent to the misdeeds of the puny human beings around them, who seemed so intent on defacing this glorious spectacle.

Read the rest of this entry »

Chapter 28

The following day I submitted my report on the organizing tour and, after my aides had extended to me their cordial thanks, my official duties were disposed of and I went in search of several of my comrades. When I arrived at the home of one of them he advised me that my colleagues were eagerly awaiting my return and that one comrade in particular, who I knew quite well, wanted to see me. He would not disclose her name but said that he would arrange a rendezvous with her and assured me that I would recognize her. I was to come to his home the next morning to obtain the address. He also told me that Emma Goldman and Alexander Berkman were in Moscow and gave me an address where I could find them.

Read the rest of this entry »

Chapter 27

We were pleasantly surprised to come across our old time friend Semke Friedman in Moscow. We had been good friends in Chicago and had not seen him for some time. Short of stature, a garment worker by trade, Semke was the kind of person who could not endure any injustice, and he would relentlessly pursue anyone he judged guilty of a grave wrong. Despite this fixation, he had all the qualities of a devoted friend and we deeply appreciated his friendship with us. His devotion to our cause was equally intense, and he demanded a like attachment from others. Friedman had been among the first of our comrades to leave Chicago for Russia. For a brief period of time he served in Makhno’s army. Following one major battle with the White Army, Makhno’s staff was obliged to evacuate its positions and transfer to another locality. Only small detachments remained in the city and there was grave peril for anyone returning there. In spite of this, Friedman insisted on coming back, afraid some important materials had been left behind. He did find two large envelopes and when he arrived back at the new headquarters and they were opened, it was found that a very large portion of the partisan treasury had been recovered.

Read the rest of this entry »

Chapter 26

Notwithstanding the fact that I was active in our movement, I faithfully discharged all the missions connected with my official post. The Bolshevik officials in Moscow were quite pleased with my organizational effort, and particularly with the fact that from time to time I would bring sorely needed foodstuffs. This was especially true of the Chief Commissar, who had a weakness for delicatessen which, to some extent, could still be procured in Krasnodar. My superiors were eager for me to undertake an organizational tour from Moscow to Batum on the Black Sea, the most remote area in the Caucasus. Since this journey was to take no less than four months, it would have been impractical to take along the family. In addition, I was beginning to entertain serious doubts that the political situation would change for the better, though there was a brief period of improvement when Lenin came out with his now famous “New Economic Policy,” later known as NEP.

Read the rest of this entry »

Chapter 25

The Soviet  powers, particularly the Cheka, had grave suspicions that our comrades were maintaining a liaison with Makhno’s partisan army. Actually the Bolsheviks sought to avoid major battles with this army. It was a curious situation. Some of our comrades reasoned that since the Bolsheviks were preoccupied with attempting to liquidate Wrangel’s army in the Crimea, and since they had plenty of political problems elsewhere, they would refrain from a frontal attack on Makhno’s forces.

Read the rest of this entry »

Chapter 24

I learned that Bessie, with the aid of a group of other women whose husbands were also absent from Novorossiysk, had organized a Red Cross unit to hep political prisoners, as well as those who were sentenced to the etap – that slow, lingering “exile on foot.” The municipal administration, as well as the Allied forces, knew of the existence of this unit but looked the other way, and the women met no interference in their undertaking. On my arrival, I met my old friend, the Bolshevik Tolmachov, who was shortly afterwards named by Moscow as the Commissar of the Tchernomorsky and Kubansky regions.

Read the rest of this entry »

Chapter 23

Early in April, when the severe frosts began to abate, I decided to leave Ekaterinburg. For a period of seven months I had become intimately involved with our group and with the community and the comrades were reluctant to see me leave. Nor did they have any idea who would take over as “chef” for the group. Apart from our own group, we had a number of friends among the left social revolutionaries; one family in particular, a mother with four daughters proved to be a highly interesting group and we spent many congenial hours at their home.

Read the rest of this entry »

Chapter 22

On Monday, September 19, 1919, we decided to leave Moscow, and that day will remain fixed in my memory until I draw my last breath. Our train was to pull out at 6 in the evening, so we came down to the depot an hour ahead of time. Aron Baron accompanied us to the station. We entered our coach and began to arrange our baggage and personal effects in our compartment. Suddenly the door swung open and we were confronted with eight uninvited guests; one of them showed us a Cheka identification card. They immediately went into action. First they turned their attention to Comrade Baron, frisking him from head to foot and minutely examined every scrap of paper they came across. They found nothing incriminating on his person and allowed him to step out of the compartment. My turn was next and with me also everything was in order and they allowed me to leave the compartment. When I emerged from the coach I could see that it was surrounded by armed Cheka members. I stood alongside of the coach waiting; every minute seemed like an eternity. The thought kept driving at me that possibly they had found some illegal article on my comrades. My eyes were glued to the door of the coach. A full twenty-seven Chekists came out of the coach, and then their chief apologized to me, saying it was all due to a misunderstanding.

Read the rest of this entry »

Chapter 21

Day after day, more new comrades were arriving in Moscow, particularly from the Ukraine, and I began to feel that the Bolsheviks would not be able to hold on to that territory very long. This feeling pervaded our commissariat also; but since I was an “outsider” and not a member of the party, the matter was not discussed in my presence. Because of all this, I was wondering why Balabanova was so resolved to visit Kharkov and Kiev. When I returned from my visit to the Taratutas, I received a phone cal1 from Balabanova, asking me to come and see her in her rooms. When I arrived, she informed me that she still had some preparation to make for her journey, but that she should be able to leave before the end or the week and that she would apprise me of the exact date of our departure.

Read the rest of this entry »

Chapter 20

Angelica Balabanova was a woman of medium height, with a gracious smile, who radiated kindness through a gentle and winning voice such as one seldom encounters anywhere.

Read the rest of this entry »

Chapter 19

We reached Kharkov on the morning of the second day. When all my passengers had left the coach, I approached the station officials and requested that they uncouple my coach and have it placed in a suitable spot so that I could have the literature removed. This operation was accomplished quickly and we were placed in a spot where it was easy to leave the station.

Read the rest of this entry »

Chapter 18

When I returned to Moscow, I immediately set about acquainting myself with the activities of our movement there. I had known since the beginning of 1918 that the Bolsheviks were engaged in a covert campaign against the anarchist movement, under the pretext that they were combatting “bandits” and “criminal elements.” It was under these subterfuges that the organized military pogroms against the anarchist groups in Moscow had been carried out. For two full days there had been a genuine military contest waged, during which a violent assault had been launched on the “Anarchia” house and its periodical. A second house which the anarchists used as a headquarters suffered the same fate.

Read the rest of this entry »

Chapter 17

I saw that I would have ample time at my disposal and decided that this would be my chance to acquaint myself more thoroughly with our movement in Moscow. But before that I still had the task of delivering the two boxes of food I’d brought from Kharkov to Peter Kropotkin.

Read the rest of this entry »

Chapter 16

On the morning following the conference, I had a chat with Joseph Goodman about the matter of literature. I told him I would need both money and a trustworthy comrade to assist me. Goodman assured me that he had everything arranged; the money was ready and he had secured the services of a reliable young comrade to aid me. He then told me he had another job for me and hoped I would be willing to accept it. He said that two of the comrades from Nestor Makhno’s army who had been at the conference wanted to speak to me. Just as he was telling me this the two comrades walked into the bookstore and the four of us went into a back room.

Read the rest of this entry »