[Editor’s Note: As I wrote on FB: “I started watching Stefan Molyneux’s latest video titled “The Truth About McCarthyism: Modern Parallels” last night. Due to my lame satellite “High Speed” (not) internet service from Xplornet the video began to “embed” after about 30 seconds and I knew I’d have to wait for awhile before starting to view it without interruptions. So I began reading the comments section and spent about two hours doing that. By that time the video had embedded itself enough that I was able to start viewing it. The kicker is the show is 31/2 hours long! For someone who usually doesn’t watch videos over 15 minutes this was a bit of a radical change for me but of course I’ve studied the history of Joseph McCarthy extensively some years ago and so my interest level was very high. Thus far I’m into it one hour and 20 minutes and barring the odd comments that I might not agree with the overall bulk of Stefan’s presentation is amazingly well done and so I’m willing to post it here for those who take history seriously and wish to understand the 20th century in greater detail. Please share this important information.”]
A Reply and Challenge to Ben Gadd
By Monika Schaefer
Back in December, Ben Gadd responded to the shock expressed by a mutual friend about my expulsion from the Jasper Environmental Associaton (JEA). A small sample from Ben:
Holocaust denial is a federal offense in Canada, a serious crime. It’s hate speech, not free speech. That’s because it’s a particularly virulent lie promulgated by anti-Semites. And anti-Semitism, as we all know, has resulted in the hate-sparked deaths of millions of people over many hundreds of years. Hate crimes of all sorts occur in Canada, and they are not tolerated, especially this one. Nor is the public expression of the hateful beliefs that fuel such crimes…
The following letter by Rocky Notnes seemed like a natural and logical reaction to a situation by a person who apparently is not affected by all the control words which are meant to elicit a certain programmed response. He penned this letter after learning that I had been expelled from the JEA.
December 17, 2016
Dear JEA members
This is Rocky Notnes from the Entrance ranch near Hinton. Some of you will know me through the Alberta Environmental Network over the past 30 or so years.
Some, if not all of you probably also know that I wrote a letter to the Jasper newspapers, which was published in both, defending Monika Schaefer’s right to free speech re the holocaust. So my stand will not be news to you.
When I learned that she was expelled from JEA for her views as well as almost everything else I was quite surprised and disappointed. It seems like JEA have jumped on the anti-Monika bandwagon with most of the people in Jasper in what seems to have become a stampede. It is as if people are trying to distance themselves as if they think they are guilty by virtue of just knowing her.
I have known Monika before and after and I do not see her having changed, other than speaking out on an issue that obviously is taboo! While I am not a “holocaust denier” as it is called now, I find your, and others in Jasper, reaction appalling. It seems to me that if members of the JEA felt so strongly about it they could have issued a statement that they do not support Monika in her views. That’s all. But this is democracy “in reaction”, not “action”!
I feel the same way about Elizabeth May and the Green Party,,, they could have issued a statement disassociating themselves from her views. But to boot somebody out for expressing a view, regardless of the topic, when she has been an upstanding member of the community all her life is, going over the top, in my view.
Regards, Rocky Notnes
The following day this rather patronizing diatribe came from Ben Gadd:
Thanks for writing to all of us, Rocky. I didn’t think I’d ever disagree with you about anything, but in Monika’s case I have to. Hers is not a free-speech issue. Here’s why.
Holocaust denial is a federal offense in Canada, a serious crime. It’s hate speech, not free speech. That’s because it’s a particularly virulent lie promulgated by anti-Semites. And anti-Semitism, as we all know, has resulted in the hate-sparked deaths of millions of people over many hundreds of years. Hate crimes of all sorts occur in Canada, and they are not tolerated, especially this one. Nor is the public expression of the hateful beliefs that fuel such crimes.
If Monika had kept her views to herself, as many anti-Semites do, none of this would have come up. But she hasn’t. In 2013, out of the blue, she sent me a “truther” video blaming the 9/11 attacks on the “Zionists,” i.e. the Jews.
Like other fake news on the Internet, this is a complete fabrication. Go to http://www.debunking911.com for a detailed analysis.
Monika approached other JEA members, too. We didn’t push her away at that point. Some of us took the time to reason with her and direct her to factual sources. I told her that such conspiracy theories are hazardous. They inevitably lead to hatred of whoever is accused of directing the conspiracy. I thought that Monika — the Monika we used to know and love — would realize the depth and danger of the rabbit hole she was going down and quickly reverse her direction.
But she rejected such advice and kept going, deeper and deeper, until now she seems to have reached the bottom, a scary place shared by the likes of Ernst Zündel and James Keegstra (and, alas, Monika’s own brother Alfred). At that point I pushed her away. As has the JEA.
The JEA is a group of like-minded, high-minded folks. We don’t hate anyone. We don’t hate Monika. Rather, our group works together to watch over Jasper National Park and alert the world to activities we see as harmful to this place we love. For that job the organization needs the public on side. And they are. As the polls show, Canadians believe what environmental groups such as the JEA have to say about the value of the park and how it needs to be protected, while Canadians do not buy the commercially-tainted stuff that park exploiters try to sell everyone in their self-promotional ad campaigns. Given the facts, which is what the JEA provides, it’s easy for people to tell the difference between the JEA’s clear and honest position of integrity and some corporation’s clever attempt to get what it wants.
So maintaining our integrity is crucial to the JEA. Opening our membership to vocal haters of any sort, who have accepted obvious lies and seek to spread them, would seriously damage that integrity.
Not only that, any society incorporated in Alberta must exist for a “benevolent, philanthropic, charitable, provident, scientific, artistic, literary, social, educational, agricultural, sporting or other useful purpose” [Societies Act, section 3(1)]. It goes without saying that (a) members should be in agreement with this statement and the goals of the society, (b) that spreading hatred is not included in the statement or in the JEA’s goals, and (c) that anyone doing so cannot be a member.
Monika can go on and on about how she’s the one with integrity, how she’s the victim and those organizations that have rejected her are the haters, but these are just tactics. They are used all the time by people held to account for bad behavior.
A good definition of integrity is “the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles; moral uprightness.” (Just Google the word.) A person of integrity doesn’t try to convince others that dark-skinned people, for example (substitute indigenous people or Muslims or Jews, etc.) are evil and/or subhuman and should be discriminated against. Such beliefs are in themselves evil, because they are lies. These are not honest beliefs. These are falsehoods so easily exposed that they can be accepted only by the willing suspension of disbelief. You have to want to believe them, despite all the evidence. And there goes your integrity.
Worse, hateful beliefs provide excuses to hurt people. Bigoted mistreatment of minorities occurs all the time, even in Canada, and I’m sure that you, as I, abhor it. Anyone engaged in it is not acting with integrity.
And here’s what really hurts me. I think that Monika — pleasant, friendly Monika, the likeable Jasper violinist — is being used by her new anti-Semitic associates to give Holocaust denial a fresh face. They are turning her into something she’s basically not.
I hope that she awakens one morning to the truth about this (the real truth, not the “truther” truth) and disavows both the intellectual poison she has been fed and the whole crowd purveying it. I hope this occurs soon, before it brings her further mental and emotional injury and before the fully committed haters who are manipulating her succeed in recruiting others through her.
If Monika comes to her senses, all she has to do to extricate herself from this mess is to publicly disavow it, even if she’s sitting in prison for breaking the law, which might be the case. She needs to tell everyone that she was misled, that she was wrong, and that she is sorry for the hateful things she has said. If this happens, I have no doubt that she will mean it, and I will forgive her. I think we would all forgive her. We’d give her a hug and welcome her back to the real world.
Believing in Monika and anticipating that she will turn her life around,
My Open Letter to Ben Gadd and the Jasper Environmental Association, January 5 2017 ~ by Monika Schaefer
Happy New Year to you all! Let us hope that this will be the year during which the light of truth becomes ever brighter.
Ben you seem intent on seeing me imprisoned. Let me assure you, that if it should come to that (which I doubt), I would rather be in jail with a free mind, than be a mind-controlled Pavlovian conditioned slave in the Orwellian world of double-speak where peace is war and black is white.
Truth is Hate to those who Hate the Truth.
CIA Director William Casey said in February 1981 in a staff meeting with newly elected President Ronald Reagan, “We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.”
Thank you very much Ben for bringing up 9/11 in your letter. Most people around the world know that was a false flag event and that controlled demolition brought down the three towers. You claim I sent you a video blaming 9/11 on Zionists, therefore anti-Semitic. In fact I gave you the DVD called “Experts Speak Out” by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. Their hallmark is that they investigate the physical aspects of what happened on 9/11, never the “who-done-it”. You reveal your prejudice on that story by implying that ae911truth.org is an anti-Semitic organization. How exactly does their scientific analysis of the chemistry, the architecture, the physics, the thermodynamics etc., add up to anti-Semitism? Who planted that meme into your head?
True, 9/11 was in fact a Zionist operation, therefore the powers-that-be preemptively try to steer people in another direction by using weaponized words such as “anti-Semitic” against anyone who dares question the official narrative.
Would you call me anti-Semitic for pointing out that Israel attacked the USS Liberty in 1967, killing 34 American Servicemen and injuring many more, and tried to blame Egypt? Had they succeeded in sinking the ship, they might have got away with the deception of blaming another country. Blaming a third party for misdeeds is what is called false flag and Israel is very good at it. I would venture a guess that some people in the JEA have never heard of the USS Liberty. That unfortunate “incident” was suppressed by the Johnston administration, and the mainstream media dutifully fell into line.
What about the Zionist bombing of the King David Hotel in 1946, which helped to speed up the establishment of the state of Israel? According to the Jerusalem Post, they rarely call that a terrorist event in Israel, they commemorate it instead.
Is it anti-Semitic to point out these well-documented facts? “Anti-Semitic” is just a Weaponized Control Trigger word which is meant to shut down rational thought and discussion. In fact, former Israeli Minister Shulamit Aloni agrees with my assessment of that. She calls it a trick, “we always use it…”
The Israeli Mossad motto is “By way of Deception, thou shalt make War”. Wouldn’t it be more noble to have a motto about standing up for Truth and Justice and Peace? By way of deception — think about that word!
Formerly Jewish Israeli Gilad Atzmon puts it this way: Jewish power is the ability to silence criticism of Jewish Power.
Regarding WW2 history, nobody has been able to answer my question about the basic maths. In Auschwitz alone, the official death count has dropped by almost 3 million, yet the mythical 6 million number remains the same. In January 1933, the Jewish population of Germany was approximately 522,000. More than half emigrated during the following 6 years. It is difficult to imagine how 6 million could have been herded into gas chambers, even when Jewish populations from surrounding countries are taken into account. The numbers simply don’t add up. And how could there have been so many “survivors”, who then collected reparation money, and still collect reparations to this day, if 6 million were killed? And how is it that pre- and post-war population figures indicate no reduction in Jewish numbers – was there a giant unprecedented baby boom the likes of which has never been seen before or since?
The mythical 6 million number appeared many times in the decades preceding WW2.
Are you familiar with the Doctrine of Judicial Notice? This doctrine allows courts to recognize as “fact” matters that are “common knowledge”. This doctrine has been used in the courts to avoid actual evidence which might run contrary to the victor’s version and Hollywood depiction of the so-called Jewish Holocaust. Evidence is not required because “The Holocaust” is self-evident. How is that for circular logic? Articles 19 and 21 of the Nuremberg trials stated as much, and Justice Thomas T. Johnson used the doctrine of judicial notice in the case by Mel Mermelstein against the Institute for Historical Review in 1981.
See this article for a thorough discussion of the Nuremberg Trials and the Holocaust. You might choose to dismiss it as it comes from the Institute for Historical Review, but keep in mind the perverse logic of the doctrine which I explained in the previous paragraph. It is a 2-part article, highly footnoted, and very educational.
To all the people who have actively spurned me, actively expelled me from organizations, actively ostracized me (you figure prominently in the JEA strangely enough), it is especially important for you to spend a little bit of time looking into these matters. Even just reading the one article from the IHR to which I supplied the link above, should give you pause to consider that it might not be me who is so 100% wildly wrong on these very important matters. If you react with the common “I refuse to debate this and I refuse to look at this”, how can you be so sure you are 100% right?
Meanwhile you go along with the casting of stones. Are you afraid to look? Do you actually believe I have lost my sanity, causing me to risk all – and to what end? Or might it occur to you in a tiny corner of your brain and heart and soul that just maybe, just maybe, there is another story here, one which is being viciously suppressed.
The Nuremberg Trials truly can be compared to the witch trials of the Middle Ages. This short video puts the matter into that context.
Ben Gadd, you of all people surprise me the most. The American draft dodger from the Vietnam era, the environmental guru, you always stood up for what you believed in. You always told us: question everything, don’t trust authority, governments lie to us. In that light, your outright dismissal and condemnation of me make absolutely no sense to me.
Your behaviour only makes sense if you were Sayanim. If that is the case, everything makes sense!
The fact that this one event in our history is untouchable should be enough to raise serious questions about it. Why are we not allowed to question and investigate this one event? Might it be because there is something to hide? Might it also be due to a particular group of people benefitting from it?
Voltaire said, “To learn who rules over you, simply ask who you are not allowed to criticize.”
Finally, to answer the question that some have asked me: “To what end Monika?” A world of lies and deceptions is a world of war and turmoil. That is not the world I want to sit idle in and leave it as such for our children and grandchildren. I desire a world of Peace, Light, Love and Beauty. That comes only through charting our course through the world with a map based on Truth.
Some further thoughts, …
Ben Gadd’s letter gave me the opportunity to write my response (above). I provided many links and many documented facts and I asked a few basic questions. None of that was addressed in this following response from Ben which came the very next day. It is interesting to note that instead of answering any questions or addressing any of the issues at hand, Ben uses language that is intended to so intimidate the mind-softened people to not even dare consider using their own brain. He continues to engage in name-calling and to use plenty of Weaponized Control Trigger words.
January 6th, 2017 from Ben:
Monika’s torrent of words leads to her saying this of me:
“Your behaviour only makes sense if you were Sayanim. If that is the case, everything makes sense!”
I had to look up “Sayanim.” It’s Hebrew for “assistants,” and it refers to Jews living outside Israel who assist the Mossad. More generally, it means Israeli secret agents.
Yikes! I’ve been exposed. (But it does remind to me go give my handler a ring. My cheque is late this month.)
All kidding aside, I am not now, nor have I ever been anyone’s secret agent for anything. Monika is just playing the ultimate card in the conspiracy theorist’s deck. Anyone who opposes the theory is part of the conspiracy.
This is paranoid-delusional, I know, but it’s also a bit scary. Anti-Semites can be quite nasty. They have their enemies list, and if I wasn’t on it already I am now. Should the Truthers come to power — a growing possibility in the Age of Trump — I can expect them to come after me.
That’s how hate speech works. The haters find their targets, denounce them and wait for the mob to do the rest.
After I sent that long reply to Rocky back on December 18th, I noted a long gap in new postings to Monika’s website. (Her anti-Semitic “freespeechmonika.wordpress.com” website, not her benign “monikaschaefer.ca” website.) Perhaps she was just taking some time off from her campaign, but I was hoping that she had withdrawn for some reflection on where all this was taking her. I was really hoping that the next posting would be a heartfelt retraction of the venemous stuff she had been saying.
Alas, not to be. At the end of the year Monika was back, attacking Elizabeth May again as some sort of Zionist puppet and telling us that climate change is caused by you-know-who spreading chemicals through the sky in the form of passenger-jet contrails. This is loonie stuff, but loads of unhappy, gullible people looking for someone to blame their troubles on believe it. Intelligent, articulate and reasonable-sounding Monika is clearly a rising star in their world. I haven’t seen a Donate button on her site, but perhaps that will be next.
Whatever, I’m done with this. Rocky, I’ve said my piece. Monika, for the last time, please, pretty-please, realize that the road you are on leads to Holocaust II.
Sincerely, and ‘bye for now,
Ben is right in a way, in that I should have been clearer and simply said that his behaviour is like someone who is a Sayan and not imply (with my word if..) that he might actually be a real live Sayan. He says he is not, so there you have it.
For this he calls me “paranoid-delusional”, while in the next breath, engages in his own “paranoid-delusional” thoughts by saying, … “Anti-Semites can be quite nasty. They have their enemies list, and if I wasn’t on it already I am now. Should the Truthers come to power — a growing possibility in the Age of Trump — I can expect them to come after me.”
Ben, take a big breath, calm down and don’t worry your little PC heart that the knock on the door at 2 or 3 pm is the new Gestapo. (PC does not stand for Progressive Conservative like here in Canada, so just in case you have to look it up – its Politically Correct!) It will just be your neighbour wanting to borrow a cup of sweet lies that you have accepted and stored in abundance. Sweet comfortable lies that I have now thrown in the trash.
Ben then accuses me of being a “hater” and of saying “venomous” stuff. Isn’t this an ironic accusation when all I’m saying with regard to the “Holocaust” is that the German people were NOT guilty of that crime and there is overwhelming evidence to support that position? Now with 9/11, I am accusing organised jewry of carrying out that crime. So, you see, accusations of being a “hater”, etc., cuts both ways and can be used to prevent the truth from coming out. Are the police and courts “haters” when they accuse the Mafia of crimes? Are the police and courts “haters” when they sentence revisionists to years in prison for thinking the wrong thoughts?
Finally Ben ends with this melodramatic flourish, … “Whatever, I’m done with this. Rocky, I’ve said my piece. Monika, for the last time, please, pretty-please, realize that the road you are on leads to Holocaust II.”
Besides begging the very question of “Holocaust I” that is at the heart of the issue at hand, I believe that people like Ben Gadd are unwittingly helping to create a horrifying tyranny that allows no dissent, that crushes anyone who questions what organised jewry says.
So Ben, don’t run away in “outrage”. Perhaps I am wrong, so please engage me in polite and reasoned debate on substantial issues like the “Holocaust” or 9/11.
You never know how minds can be changed.
Freedom’s Light Flickers
December 23, 2016
By Mike Walsh
Summary justice; defence and appeal prohibited. Amazon Kindle Direct Publishing (KDP) now denies access to Mike Walsh Books. This is a stark reminder of the dark labyrinths we are all entering. The flickering lights in the world of ethnic-Europeans are being snuffed out one by one; it is an accelerating process.
“Violence is not necessary to destroy a civilisation. Each civilisation dies from indifference towards the unique values that created it.” ~ Nicolas Gomez Davila.
To paraphrase Martin Niemoller’s quotation:
“First they came for the National Socialists, and I did not speak out. Then they came for the writers, and I did not speak out ~ because I was not a writer. Then they came for the ethnic-patriots, and I did not speak out, because I was a liberal. Then they came for me ~ and there was no one left to speak for me.”
Think not of me but think instead of your own situation and more important think of the future of your family. Read again and again Niemoller’s paraphrased quotation.
When a people’s enemy are this far advanced in controlling the thought processes of their trusting subjects there is neither time nor place for complacency. God helps those who help themselves.
James Larkin, the Irish revolutionary:
“The great only appear great because we are on our knees. Let us rise.”
The Soviet Union’s collapse was not due to its failings or because of negotiations between U.S President Ronald Reagan and Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev. The Soviet Bloc collapsed not because people of the Eastern European States voted against it but because the peoples overthrew their despicable unelected political elites.
The people marched in Romania, Prague, Warsaw and Danzig, Riga and Vilnius, Leipzig and elsewhere. The protestors demanded, threatened and faced down authority, their tormentors, and they defied der lugen presse.
Some died at the barricades, many were arrested but the barricades were built again and again. The betrayed peoples edged closer to the seats of power until they overthrew their regimes and their bootlicking apparatchiks.
“And thus, overcoming our timidity let each man choose; will he remain a witting servant of the lies, or has the time come for him to stand straight as an honest man, worthy of the respect of his children and contemporaries?” ~ Alexander Solzhenitsyn.
One by one hard won valued freedoms we proudly held in trust for our children are sneaked and snatched away. Yesterday and today you can still purchase Mike Walsh Books on Amazon ~ but not from Kindle Direct Publishing. Tomorrow, who knows? Perhaps you will have a contraband copy slipped to you under the counter or mailed in a plain brown envelope.
“Rise like Lions after slumber,
In unvanquishable number,
Shake to earth your chains like dew,
Which in sleep had fallen on you.
Ye are many, they are few.”
~ Percy Byshe Shelley
Let’s not pretend we didn’t see it coming; let us remind ourselves that too few tried to awaken too many whose woeful inertia allowed their civilisation to be overthrown by their indifference. Nature abhors cowardice and is intolerant of the weak.
“For now you remain up there, you cowardly lot paid by the enemies and our people you mock. But one day justice will no longer be forestalled, then the people will judge, and God help you all.” ~ Karl Theodor Korner, German Poet and Soldier.
The thin line between sanity and savagery
Once you cross it you can’t come back
Disturbing similarities of heroes and psychos
This is the reward anybody who joins the American military can expect from following orders without consulting their consciences, to be murdered by your superiors for some crime they are trying to cover up.
They make beating up the world sound like a fun event.
This is the world turned upside down. There’s this ad for the U.S. Navy on TV, with the rich resonant voice of actor Keith David exhorts young men to serve in “a global force for good.”
Millions of faces of murdered innocents forever serve as a silent rejection of this lie.
In a furnished room far from home, the memory of raping and killing terrified women and children confronts the former recruit and now battle-hardened veteran . . . now reduced to unquenchable tears. The excuse of “just following orders” has always been the last refuge of a soldier who knows he’s guilty.
So many kids who were tricked into killing got rewarded for it, but no reward is big enough to anesthetize the gaping sense of horror at the thought you murdered innocent people.
These thoughts come back at night and all too often kill the recipient of them.
Unless you’re a politician who doesn’t give these things a second thought.
We’ve lost our way
Who was it we are trying to defeat? What was it we are trying to accomplish? What do we do when we know our government deliberately creates the enemies it pretends to fight?
And the most wrenching question of all: What does an act of genuine heroism in service to criminal aggression actually mean? Actually, it means nothing, except for the futile waste of the precious gift of life.
I wonder what was on the minds of Seal Team 6 when their helicopter was going down for the last time. I wonder if they knew they were being eliminated because they couldn’t be trusted to maintain the fraudulent story told by Barack Obama about how these Seals murdered Osama bin Laden and dumped his body in the Indian Ocean.
This is the reward anybody who joins the American military can expect from following orders without consulting their consciences, to be murdered by your superiors for some crime they are trying to cover up.
Around the world America is known as the world’s leading killer, a force known not only for killing without reason and always lying about what it does, but also killing its own operatives when they no longer fit into the plan. Google Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods for further details.
It’s a new twist on the curdled Vietnam legend that we had to destroy the village in order to save it. Now that it’s the operating philosophy of Jade Helm, the NDAA Act and the American military, the theorem has evolved into ‘we must kill them in order to protect them.’
Journalism has never reached the goal it professes to aspire to, but it has never been further away from the goal of editorial objectivity because it remains a smug slave to the financial compromises it must endure to survive. This deal with the devil makes it an unreliable source in most situations.
Jewish-inspired American crimes are camouflaged by compliant media that dare not challenge the lies they are told for fear they will lose their access to the politicians who mislead us. Such is the demented condition of the world today. Vampires feeding on corruption.
We invent our enemies
When the United States ran out of national enemies in 1989 with the fall of the Berlin Wall, it began to invent its own terrorists, first by mobilizing Arabs in Afghanistan into the mujaheddin, then turning them into Al-Qaeda to be impossibly blamed for 9/11, and lately turning this well-funded group into ISIS and the “moderate rebels” of Syria who are indirectly supported by Washington through the stooge states of Qatar, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia.
All this political prattle inevitably leads to Russia, one of two major white nation combatants scheduled for annihilation by the Jewish masterminds who seek the destruction of all nations, to the creation of a permanent worldwide prison they will call Jewish Peace.
It will be the ultimate abnegation of humanity, which in its former state used to value conscience and morality, but by now has devolved into a kind of pragmatic treason in all relationships, meaning the chances for cultural cohesion in a society are greatly reduced. Lack of friends makes it easier to turn to Big Brother for help.
Generated by the Jewish psychopaths who run the publishing industry, the lockstep newspaper version is that Russia is always evil and this unfortunate condition may be rectified by bombing them.
Somehow all the newspapers in the country have the same opinion. All news is skewed against Russia, much in the way it was skewed against Germany prior to both World Wars.
It’s amazing. But it is no longer a mystery when you realize one or two people own all the newspapers. Same with TV stations. They all have the same opinion — bomb Russia. And now you know why. All these mainstream media outlets are owned by the same rich white criminals. Well, not exactly white. Jewish. There’s a big difference.
And then there are these heroes we venerate for their bravery and for throwing away their lives after the lies that led them to their deaths. The unctuous words of the people who sent them to hell resonate at the funerals of those who followed orders and gave their lives while murdering people who never needed to die.
War is our default mechanism
We raped Qaddafi in the street and stole his oil and gold, then destroyed his Miracle in the Desert water system. He provided free housing and college to Libyan children, and like Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, what benefits these dictators provided to their people put to shame how little the governments of the West actually provide for their own citizens.
The powers that be don’t like this kind of news getting around, that people outside the control of the Jewish banks live better quality lives than those who pay most of their earnings to shysters who don’t lift a finger. Hitler proved that point before he was destroyed by the Jews that plague all countries with their usury.
The new war that we never hear about is going on in Yemen. Like the U.S. invasion of Syria, it’s all about the Saudis trying to reinstall their puppet who was ousted in the last election. The death toll keeps climbing, Yemeni civil society has been destroyed, and the Saudis use American weapons to resubjugate this geographically strategic country.
I learned a long time ago that the core of America’s profitability has always been armaments. We always had the best weapons, and still do, maybe. But for more than a century now, the crown jewel of American industry has been the manufacture of the tools of war.
The entire economy hinges on ability to make war. The educational system is geared to discovering new military applications. America defends dictatorships, and destroys countries that try to be free and independent.
Warmongers trumpet the virtues of war with no consciousness that most of the victims of war are mothers and their children. Smedley Butler outlined our basic problem 80 years ago. Stifled by corrupt newspapers, the message never reached the general public, or if it did, it was ignored and eventually overwhelmed by the Jewish quest for vengeance that started World War II.
Thinking people all over the world had many hours of their attention consumed by the recent U.S. presidential election. History shows their focus was misplaced, because judging by history it doesn’t really matter who is president or who is not. America the machine keeps rolling on no matter who is president. Presidents who disagree with the powerbrokers who own him are efficiently eliminated by a lone nut with a bonafide mental health history.
The border of madness
Skewered by the conceptual daggers of Jewry, America has crossed the line into madness. No longer do we hear the cherished words freedom and liberty. The powers that be are flooding the civilized world with savages from the wilds of the world to further degrade systems that worked well before this concerted attack on the stability of white nations.
The wars, you know, these are not exhibitions of our bravery or defenses of our liberty. They are brutal onslaughts on victims who are given the bleak choice of obey or die.
The Jews, you must remember, are sworn to kill or enslave everyone in the world, a goal toward which they have made tremendous progress.
You can’t believe what the U.S. government says. One hundred and three treaties signed with the American Indians. The U.S. never kept a single one. The whole world knows this, but America just keeps lying and the world continues to accept those lies because the U.S. has the muscle and the money to castrate any other country.
A country that has that reputation deserves to be destroyed.
It’s the outright lying that gets me the most. The celebrated bloodbaths in Iraq and Afghanistan, all for lies, all for nothing except oil and heroin, the two biggest cash crops in the world. The obliteration of Syria is about an oil pipeline that Israel wants to build. The U.S. policy is to make all of Israel’s neighbors disaster areas, people living in rubble with no hope for freedom.
The deluded populace has yet to realize this is the Jewish plan for the whole world.
Our government would rather kill you than tell you the truth. Just ask an oncologist, or someone who tried to tell you the truth about your government and was forced to leave the country to save his own life.
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.
[Editor’s Preface: The following article, “The Jewish Soul”, is the 45th Chapter of Douglas Reed’s classic work on political Zionism The Controversy of Zion. My reason for publishing it as a stand alone article is primarily due to the critical state of global affairs at this point in world history; a condition which, as Reed outlined in minute detail 60 years ago, is the direct result of the role and intent of the Talmudic mindset of the majority of 20th century world Jewry.
It has become the fashion today among those opposed to the Zionist agenda to lump all Jews into one basket and assume that every Jew is automatically a supporter of Israel and the Talmudic agenda for global governance. Reed’s article gives the reader a glimpse of how the Talmudic tyranny of the Zionists was able to influence not only Jews outside of Israel but also non-Jews into accepting their perception that every Jew ought to be perceived as a Zionist.
Upon reading this chapter it is hoped that the reader will have a better grasp of how the movers and shakers within the Zionist movement were able to utilize their planned scheme for global dominance, i.e., the intentional creation of WWI and WWII and the subsequent creation of their “Jewish” state of Israel as means to their final objective – the destruction of both Christianity and Islam and the final assumption of Talmudic “Law” within the context of a one world totalitarian dictatorship.
Back in November of 1956 when he completed the final draft of his major opus on the subject of the Jews and the influence of the Talmud mindset upon the spiritual and political consciousness of 20th century World Jewry Reed foretold a future that, for those of us living today, is now a clear and present reality.]
THE JEWISH SOUL
By Douglas Reed
The first fifty years of “the Jewish century” have had their natural effect on the Jewish soul, which once again is in violent unrest. They have made chauvinists of a mass of Jews who, a hundred and fifty years ago, seemed committed to involvement in mankind. They are once more in captivity (the recurrent “captivities” of the Jews were always captivity by the elders and their creed of exclusion, not by alien taskmasters). In the Zionist captivity, and under the pressure of the elders, they have been made into the most explosive force in recorded history. The story of this century, of its wars and revolutions and the denouement yet to come, is that of Talmudic chauvinism, which has its roots in Deuteronomy.
The very word, chauvinism, means an extravagant emotion; Nicolas Chauvin was the Napoleonic soldier whose bombastic and unbridled fervour for his Emperor brought patriotism into disrepute even at a period of patriotic ardour. Nevertheless, the word is inadequate to describe the effect of Talmudic Zionism on the Jewish soul; no word exists, other than “Talmudism,” for this unique and boundless frenzy.
In 1933 Mr. Bernard J. Brown wrote, “Being consciously Jewish is the lowest kind of chauvinism, for it is the only chauvinism that is based on false premises.” The premises are those of the Talmud-Torah; namely, that God promised a certain tribe supremacy over all enslaved others in this world, and exclusive inheritance of the next world in return for strict observance of a law based on blood sacrifice and the destruction or enslavement of the lesser breeds without this Law. Whether Talmudic chauvinism or Zionist chauvinism (I believe either term is more correct than Mr. Brown’s “Jewish chauvinism”) is or is not “the lowest kind” of chauvinism, these fifty years have shown that it is the most violent kind yet known to man.
Its effect on the Jewish soul is reflected in the changed tone of Jewish literature in our time. Before adducing examples of this, an illustration of its effect between one generation and the next may be given by briefly citing the cases of two Jews, father and son. Mr. Henry Morgenthau senior was a notable Jew of America who became an ambassador. He was the product of Jewish emancipation during the last century; he was what the Jews today might have been, but for Talmudic chauvinism. He said:
“Zionism is the most stupendous fallacy in Jewish history. I assert that it is wrong in principle and sterile in its spiritual ideas. Zionism is a betrayal, an Eastern European proposal, fathered in this country by American Jews … which, if they were to succeed, would cost the Jews of America most of what they have gained of liberty, equality and fraternity. I refuse to allow myself to be called a Zionist. I am an American.”
In the next generation the name of the son, Mr. Henry Morgenthau junior, became inseparably associated with the founding of the Zionist state (his father’s “stupendous fallacy”) and with the Talmudic vengeance in Europe. In the sequel the son might prove to be one of the men most responsible for bringing about the consequences which the father feared.
Dr. Weizmann records the great part played by the junior Mr. Morgenthau in the backstage drama in New York which culminated in the violent establishment of the Zionist state and an American president’s “recognition” of the deed. In Europe he fathered (through the “Morgenthau Plan” de) the bisection of the continent and the advance of the revolution to its middle. Some passages in that plan (initialled by Messrs. Roosevelt and Churchill, who both repudiated it when the damage was done) are of especial significance, namely, those which propose that “all industrial plants and equipment not destroyed by military action” (in Germany) “shall be … completely destroyed … and the mines wrecked.” The original source of this idea of “utter destruction” apparently can only be the Talmud-Torah, where it is part of the “Law of God.” The Zionist state itself, as I have shown, was founded on a deed of “utter destruction,” and thus of literal “observance” of this Law, at Deir Yasin.
But for Zionist chauvinism and the Western politicos who served it in the office of “administrators,” the son might have been another such man as the father, and this particular illustration is valid for a great mass of Jews and the change which has been produced in the Jewish soul. When Jews of great name lent themselves to such undertakings, and proved able to command the support of American presidents and British prime ministers, the Jewish masses were bound to follow. This general trend is reflected in the growing literature of Talmudic chauvinism.
Up to the middle of the last century distinctively “Jewish” literature was small and was in the main produced for and read in the closed communities. In the general bookshops Jewish writers held a place roughly proportionate to their numbers in the population, which was the natural thing, and in their works did not in the rule write as “Jews” or dwell on the exclusively Jewish theme. They addressed themselves to the general audience and avoided the chauvinist appeal to Jews, as well as anything that non-Jews might regard as blasphemy, sedition, obscenity or slander.
The transformation that has come about in the last fifty years reflects equally the spread of Talmudic chauvinism and the enforced subordination of the non-Jewish masses to it. Today books by Jews and non-Jews about Jewish things, if they were counted, might be found to form the largest single body of Western literature, outside fiction, and the change in tone and standard is very great.
As it has come about gradually, and critical comment today is in practice virtually forbidden as “anti-semitic,” the change has not been consciously remarked by the mass of people. Its extent may be measured by this comparison; a good deal of what is contained in the literature of Talmudic chauvinism today (a few examples follow) would not have been published at all fifty years ago, as offensive to the standards then generally accepted. Fear of critical and public anathema would have kept publishers from issuing many of these works, or at all events from including in them the most flagrant passages.
The starting-point of this process, which might be called one of degeneration in Jewry, was possibly the appearance in 1895 of Max Nordau’s Degeneration, which struck the keynote for the chorus to come. This book was in effect an epistle to the Gentiles, informing them that they were degenerate, and it enjoyed great vogue with fin de siècle “Liberals,” as the accumulating mass of kindred literature has enjoyed among their kind ever since. Jewish degeneracy was no part of its theme, and the author would have seen Jewish degeneracy only in opposition to Zionism, for he was Herzl’s lieutenant, and the man who at the Zionist Congress after Herzl’s death foretold the first World War and the part played in it by England in setting up the Zionist “homeland.” Degeneration was significant both in time and theme; it appeared in the same year as Herzl’s The Jewish State and this was also the year of the first revolutionary outbreak in Russia. The revolution and Zionism are both essential to the Deuteronomic Talmudic concept, and both movements, in my estimate, were developed under Talmudic direction.
After Degeneration followed the full tide and spate of Talmudic-chauvinist literature. An example from our time is a book published in New York in the year, 1941, when Hitler and Stalin fell out and America entered the Second War. Germany Must Perish!, by a Mr. Theodore N. Kaufmann, proposed the extermination of the German people in the literal sense of the Law of the Talmud-Torah. Mr. Kaufmann proposed that “German extinction” be achieved by sterilizing all Germans of procreation age (males under 60, females under 45) within a period of three years after the war’s end, Germany to be sealed off during the process and its territory then to be shared among other people, so that it should disappear from the map together with its people. Mr. Kaufmann calculated that, with births stopped through sterilization, the normal death rate would extinguish the German race within fifty or sixty years.
I feel sure that public abhorrence would have deterred any publisher from issuing this work during the First War, and possibly at any previous time since printing was invented. In 1941 it appeared with the commendation of two leading American newspapers (both Jewish-owned or Jewish-controlled). The New York Times described the proposal as “a plan for permanent peace among civilized nations”; the Washington Post called it “a provocative theory, interestingly presented.”
“The hatred evinced was not limited to Germans; it extended to Arabs and for a period to the British; as it had earlier been directed against Spaniards, Russians, Poles and others. It was not a personal thing; being the end-product of Talmudic teaching it ranged impartially over all things non-Judaist, taking first one symbolic enemy and then another from a world where, under the Levitical Law, all were enemies.”
This proposal was more literally Talmudic than anything else I can find, but the spirit that prompted it breathed in many other books. The hatred evinced was not limited to Germans; it extended to Arabs and for a period to the British; as it had earlier been directed against Spaniards, Russians, Poles and others. It was not a personal thing; being the end-product of Talmudic teaching it ranged impartially over all things non-Judaist, taking first one symbolic enemy and then another from a world where, under the Levitical Law, all were enemies.
The growth and open expression of this violent feeling, no longer held in bounds by the earlier need to take account of generally-accepted standards in the West, explains the misgivings expressed by Mr. Brown in 1933, by the Rabbi Elmer Berger in the 1940’s, and by Mr. Alfred Lilienthal in the present decade. Its reflection in the Jewish published word justified their anxiety. In one book after another Jewish writers with introspective writings examined “the Jewish soul” and at the end came up with expressions of contempt or hatred for somebody or other of non-Jews, couched in chauvinist terms.
Mr. Arthur Koestler, describing his scrutiny of Judaism, wrote, “Most bewildering of all was the discovery that the saga of the ‘Chosen Race’ seemed to be taken quite literally by traditionalist Jews. They protested against racial discrimination, and affirmed in the same breath their racial superiority based on Jacob’s covenant with God.” The effect of this “bewildering discovery” on this particular Jewish soul was that “the more I found out about Judaism the more distressed I became, and the more fervently Zionist.”
The presumable cause (“reason” cannot be used to describe so illogical a reaction) of this strange effect on Mr. Koestler is indicated by his two hundred pages of complaint about Jews being persecuted in and driven from Europe. He avoided this complaint of justice by his assumption that the Arabs, who were not to blame, should suffer, depicting an Arab family (persecuted in and driven from Palestine by the Zionists) in these words: “The old woman will walk ahead leading the donkey by the rein and the old man will ride on it … sunk in solemn meditation about the lost opportunity of raping his youngest grandchild.” In this depictment the acts of persecution and driving-out are made to appear respectable, others than Jews being the sufferers, by the attribution of a revolting thought to the victim.
The change in the tone and standards of Jewish literature in our time is again shown by the writings of Mr. Ben Hecht, some of which were earlier quoted, including his complaint that if Jesus had only been made into mincemeat, instead of being dignified by crucifixion, Christianity would never have taken shape. I doubt whether newspapers or publishers at any previous period would have given currency to words which patently had only the purpose of offending others.
Mr. Hecht once wrote, “I lived forty years in my country” (America) “without encountering anti-semitism or concerning myself even remotely with its existence.” Therefore Mr. Hecht logically intended to live nowhere else. Nevertheless, when the Zionist state was being set up, he wrote that every time a British soldier was killed in Palestine “the Jews of America make a little holiday in their hearts.”
Deep, if not enlightening insight into the development of the Jewish soul during this century is given by the books of a Mr. Meyer Levine; these also contain things which, in my estimation, would not have found print in earlier times. Mr. Levine’s In Search shows what Mr. Sylvain Lévi meant when, at the 1919 Peace Conference, he gave warning against the “explosive tendencies” of the Eastern Jews.
Mr. Levine, born in America of immigrant parents from Eastern Europe was reared to hatred of Russians and Poles. He seems to have found little to please him in “the new country” where he was born and when he grew to young manhood busied himself in agitation among the Chicago workers.
He tells of half a lifetime of tortured efforts to escape from Jewishness and to immerse himself in Jewishness, alternately. If some Jews believe themselves unchangeably distinct from all other mankind, Mr. Levine gives two glimpses which make the reader feel that this belief is the product of a strained, almost mystic perversity. He says he finds himself constantly asking himself “What am I?” and “What am I doing here?,” and asserts that “Jews everywhere are asking the same questions.” Subsequently he related some of the discoveries to which this self-scrutiny led him.
Describing the Leopold-Loeb murder in Chicago (when two young Jews, of wealthy parents, killed and mutilated a small boy, also a Jew, from motives of extreme morbidity) he says, “I believe that beneath the very real horror that the case inspired, the horror in realizing that human beings carried in them murderous motives beyond the simple motives of lust and greed and hatred, beneath all this was a suppressed sense of pride in the brilliance of these boys, a sympathy for them in being slaves of their intellectual curiosities; a pride that this particular new level of crime, even this should have been reached by Jews. In a confused and awed way, and in the momentary fashionableness of ‘lust for experience,’ I felt that I understood them, that I, particularly, being a young intellectual Jew, had a kinship with them.”
On another occasion he describes his part (he calls it that of “a volunteer aid,” but the-term “agitator” might be fairly applicable) in the Chicago steelworkers strike of 1937, when strikers and police came into conflict and shots were fired, several persons being killed. Mr. Levine, as “a volunteer aid,” had “fallen in alongside” the strikers’ procession and he “ran with the others” when the firing began. He was not a steelworker or striker. Subsequently he and others, apparently also volunteer aids, organized a mass meeting. At this he showed slides made from newspaper-pictures from which he had removed the descriptions. He accompanied these pictures with a recital of his own, in words chosen to give the pictures an inflammatory interpretation, different from that of the original captions. He says:
“So strange a roar arose that it seemed to me as though the vast auditorium was a cauldron of rage, overturning upon me … I felt I could never control the crowd, that they would burst through the doors, rush out and burn the city hall – the impact of the pictures was so enraging … In that instant I experienced the full sense of the danger of power, for I felt that a few words would have unleashed violence beyond what we had seen on Memorial Day … If I had sometimes felt unincluded as a stranger, artist and Jew, I knew that universal action exists … I felt that perhaps one of the reasons for the social reformism of the Jew is the need to melt himself into these movements that engulf his own problem.”
Once again, the words recall Mr. Maurice Samuel’s lament or menace, (whichever was intended) of 1924, “We Jews, the destroyers, will remain the destroyers forever.” Only in the incitement of others, Mr. Levine appears to say, could he, the “stranger,” feel himself “included,” or “his problem” engulfed. The incitement of the unreasoning, stupid “mob” is the theme that runs through the “Protocols” of 1905. In the passage quoted Mr. Levine seemed to imply that he could only feel involvement in general mankind when so inciting a mob.
His later travels were made in the same spirit. In his youth Zionism was almost unknown and in 1925, when he was twenty, it was still “a question that had scarcely penetrated to Jews born in America … It was something that occupied the bearded ones from the old country and if an American Jew happened to be dragged to a Zionist meeting he found that the speakers talked with Russian accents, or simply reverted to Yiddish. My own family, indeed, had no interest in the movement.”
As in the case of the Morgenthaus, father and son, one generation saw the change. Mr. Levine’s parents, migrants from a country of alleged “persecution,” were content to have found another where they prospered. The son was not content. Soon he was in Palestine, and developed vengeful feelings towards the Arabs of whom he had never heard in his youth. He tells, as a good jest, of an incident in a Zionist settlement when an Arab, coming across the fields, humbly asked for a drink of water. Mr. Levine and his friends pointed to a barrel, at which the Arab thankfully drank while they laughed; it was the horse-water.
Ten years after that he was in Germany and played his part in the Talmudic vengeance there. He was an American newspaper correspondent and describes how he and another Jewish correspondent roamed about Germany as “conquerors,” armed (illicitly), in a jeep, looting and wrecking as they pleased. He then says that the passive submission of German women to the “conquerors” thwarted the furious desire to rape them and “sometimes the hatred in a man rose so high that he felt the absolute need of violence.” In this mood, his companion and he swore that “the only thing to do was to throw them down, tear them apart,” and they discussed “the ideal conditions for such a scene of violence; there would have to be a wooded stretch of road, little traffic, and a lone girl on foot or a bicycle.” The pair then made “a tentative sally” in search of these “ideal conditions” and at length found a lonely girl and “the conditions, all fulfilled.” (He says the terrified girl was spared at the last and wonders if the reason, in each man, was that the presence of the other embarrassed him).
Mr. Levine began his book of 1950, “This is a book about being a Jew.” It and the many like it account for the anxiety expressed by the rare Jewish remonstrants about the development of the last fifty years, for they testify to the degeneration of the Jewish soul under the stress of Talmudic chauvinism. The only thing proved by the book is that at its end Mr. Levine knew as little as at the start of his quest about what “being a Jew” meant (presumably he would not wish the above-quoted passages to be taken as supplying the answer). Hundreds of others on this same elusive and unproductive theme have appeared; so might an electric eel devour its own tail in search of the source of its peculiar sensation, and come to no enlightening conclusion. A book by a Jew on being a human being among other human beings was by the mid-century rare.
The accumulating literature of incitement and hatred, of which a few examples have been given, and the virtual suppression of objection to it as “anti-semitism,” give the 20th century its distinctive character; it is the age of Talmudic chauvinism and Talmudic imperialism. Our present situation was foretold nearly a hundred years ago by a German, Wilhelm Marr.
Marr was a revolutionary and conspirator who helped the Jewish-led “secret societies” (Disraeli) prepare the abortive outbreaks of 1848. His writings of that period are recognizably Talmudic (he was not a Jew); they are violently anti-Christian, atheist and anarchist. Later, like Bakunin (Marr was a similar man) he became aware of the true nature of the revolutionary hierarchy, and in 1879 he wrote:
“The advent of Jewish imperialism, I am firmly convinced, is only a question of time … The empire of the world belongs to the Jews … Woe to the conquered! … I am quite certain that before four generations have passed there will not be a single function in the State, the highest included, which will not be in the hands of the Jews … At the present moment, alone among European states, Russia still holds out against the official recognition of the invading foreigners. Russia is the last rampart and against her the Jews have constructed their final trench. To judge by the course of events, the capitulation of Russia is only a question of time … In that vast empire … Judaism will find the fulcrum of Archimedes which will enable it to drag the whole of Western Europe off its hinges once for all. The Jewish spirit of intrigue will bring about a revolution in Russia such as the world has never yet seen … The present situation of Judaism in Russia is such that it has still to fear expulsion. But when it has laid Russia prostrate it will no longer have any attacks to fear. When the Jews have got control of the Russian state … they will set about the destruction of the social organization of Western Europe. This last hour of Europe will arrive at latest in a hundred or a hundred and fifty years.”
The present state of Europe, as it has been left by the Second War, shows this forecast to have been largely fulfilled. Indeed, only the full denouement remains, for its complete fulfilment. As to that, Marr may have seen too darkly. The history of the world thus far knows no irrevocable decisions, decisive victories, permanent conquests or absolute weapons. The last word, so far, has always proved to lie with the New Testamentary dictum: “The end is not yet.”
However, the last stage in Marr’s forecast, the third act in the 20th Century drama, is evidently at hand, whatever its outcome and whatever its subsequent aftermath, and in preparation for it the Jewish soul has been made captive by Talmudic chauvinism once again. Mr. George Sokolsky, the notable Jewish diarist of New York, observed in January 1956 that, “There was considerable opposition” (to Zionism) “inside world Jewry, but over the years the opposition died down and where it still exists it is so unpopular as generally to be hidden away; in the United States opposition to Israel among Jews is negligible.”
The few warning voices which are still being raised, like Jeremiah’s of old, are nearly all those of Jews. The reason is not that non-Jewish writers are worse informed, shorter sighted or less courageous; it has long been the unwritten rule that Jewish objectors may within limits be heard, as they are of “ourselves,” but that objection from non-Jews must not be tolerated.[*] In the condition of the Western press today, in the third quarter of the 20th century, this rule is enforced almost without exception.
On this account the few warnings here quoted are Jewish ones. Mr. Frank Chodorov told the American Government (Human Events, March 10, 1956) that in the Middle East “in reality it is not dealing with the government of Israel but with American Jews … It is a certainty that many good, loyal Americans of the Jewish faith would welcome a showdown, not only to register their loyalty to this country and against world Zionism, but also to loosen the grip the Zionists have on them.”
Similarly, Mr. Alfred Lilienthal (Human Events, September 10, 1955) echoed the despairing plea of the late Mr. James Forrestal eight years before; as the shadow of the 1956 presidential election fell across America he, too, begged the two great political parties, when they joined conflict, “to take the Arab-Israeli issue out of domestic politics.” Both these Jewish warnings appeared in a Washington newsletter of repute but small circulation; the mass-circulation newspapers were closed to them.
Other latterday Jewish remonstrants raised the ancient cry of a coming “catastrophe.” In 1933 Mr. Bernard J. Brown had seen disaster coming: “Never in the history of the human race has there ever been a group of people who have enmeshed themselves into so many errors and persisted in refusing to see the truth, as our people have done during the last three hundred years” (the period which saw the emergence of the Talmudic “Eastern Jews” and the victorious Talmudist war against Jewish assimilation).
Fifteen years after that warning Jewish remonstrants were pronouncing the word which it only implied: “catastrophe.” Rabbi Elmer Berger wrote in 1951, “Unless Americans of Jewish faith and a great many Americans of other faiths who have been misguided into supporting Zionism return to the fundamentals both of American life and of Judaism we are headed for something of a catastrophe.”
“This claim of the right of American Jews to refuse amalgamation is building towards a crisis which may have lamentable consequences. Already it is becoming clear that every time Israel gets in a jam (and many of its policies, especially with regard to economics and immigration, seem almost designed to produce jams) American Jews will be expected to high-pressure the United States government to step in and straighten matters out. Zionist leaders have not hesitated to carry this sort of thing to the extremes of political blackmail. This can continue for a little while because of our peculiar electoral system … but New York is not the United States, and if this sort of strong-arm intervention in behalf of a foreign state keeps up, look out for an explosion.”
– Dr. Paul Hutchinson, editor of The Christian Century
The foreword to Rabbi Berger’s book was written by a non-Jewish authority, Dr. Paul Hutchinson, editor of The Christian Century. He was more explicit: “This claim of the right of American Jews to refuse amalgamation is building towards a crisis which may have lamentable consequences. Already it is becoming clear that every time Israel gets in a jam (and many of its policies, especially with regard to economics and immigration, seem almost designed to produce jams) American Jews will be expected to high-pressure the United States government to step in and straighten matters out. Zionist leaders have not hesitated to carry this sort of thing to the extremes of political blackmail” (this was written many years before ex-President Truman in his memoirs confirmed the fact). “This can continue for a little while because of our peculiar electoral system … but New York is not the United States, and if this sort of strong-arm intervention in behalf of a foreign state keeps up, look out for an explosion.”
These warnings, though clear to Jews, might produce in non-Jewish minds the false impression that “the Jews” are headed towards “a catastrophe” of their own making; that in that event Talmudic chauvinism will recoil on their own heads; and, schliesslich, that they will then only have themselves to thank. The smug and the rancorous, especially, might fall into this delusion.
Delusion it would be. That recurrent phenomenon of history-as-it-is-written, “the Jewish catastrophe,” is invariably the small Jewish share in a general catastrophe, the proportion being, say, around one percent of the total woe. The monstrous prevarication of the Second War about the “six million Jews who perished” does not change that enduring truth. The catastrophe which has been brewed in these fifty years will be a general one, and the Jewish share of it will be fractional. It will be depicted as “a Jewish catastrophe,” as the Second War was so depicted, but that is the false picture shown on the lighted screen to “the mob” in its dark room.
Jews often, and quite genuinely, cannot envisage a calamity involving Jews, and no matter how many more non-Jews, as anything but “a Jewish catastrophe.” This is a mental attitude deriving from the original teaching of the Talmud-Torah, wherein the chosen people alone have true existence and the others are shadows or cattle. Mr. Karl Stern’s book, Pillar of Fire, provides an illustration.
Mr. Stern (a Jew who grew up in Germany between the wars, went to Canada and there was converted to the Catholic faith) says that there was in the Jewish youth Movement in Germany in the 1920’s “a general mood which seemed to point at events which later came to pass. Latent in the situation were sorrows, questions and doubts pointing towards the great Jewish catastrophe – or rather the great European catastrophe with which the fate of the Jews was interwoven in so mysterious a fashion.”
In this passage the truth appears in an obvious, corrective afterthought, which would not occur to or be expressed by the run of Jewish writers. Mr. Stern’s is an exceptional case, and when he had written the words “the great Jewish catastrophe” he saw their untruth and qualified them; nevertheless, even he left the original statement to stand. The influence of his heredity and upbringing were still strong enough in him, a Catholic in North America, to form his first thought in those terms: the ordeal of 350,000,000 souls in Europe, which has left nearly half of them enslaved, was “the great Jewish catastrophe.”
In a different case Mr. Stern would be the first to object to such a presentation. Indeed, he relates that he was offended by reading in a Catholic paper the statement that so-many members of the crew of a sunken British submarine were “Catholics.” He was affronted because one group of the victims was singled out in this way; “I do not understand why anyone would care for such statistics.” And yet: “the great Jewish catastrophe …”
The “catastrophe,” involving all, which has been prepared in these fifty years, will not be distinctively Jewish in the predominance of Jewish suffering, but in its domination, once again, by “the Jewish question,” by the effort to subordinate all the energy generated to aims represented to be Jewish, and in the use of the Jewish masses to help detonate it. The Jewish mass, or mob, is in one respect different from any other mob, or mass: it is more prone to surrender itself to chauvinist incitement, and more frenzied in this surrender. The Jewish Encyclopaedia, in a small section devoted to the subject of hysteria among Jews, affirms that their tendency towards it is higher than average. As a layman, I would hazard the guess that this is the result of the centuries of close confinement in the ghettoes and of Talmudic absolutism in them (for today we have to do almost exclusively with the “Eastern Jews” who but yesterday lived in those confines).
I have given some examples of this rising wave of chauvinist hysteria from literature accessible to the general reader. This shows the results, but not the root cause. To locate that the reader needs to do something more difficult; namely, attentively to follow the Yiddish and Hebrew press, in the original or in translation. Then he will receive the picture of an almost demoniac scourging of the Jewish soul so that it shall never find rest and he might conclude that nowhere outside Jewry is anything so anti-Jewish to be found as in some of these utterances, which show a scientific mastery of methods of implanting and fostering fear.
Before studying the examples which follow the reader might consider that the great mass of “explosive Eastern Jews” is now in America. This fact, more pregnant with possible consequences than any other of our day, seems scarcely to have entered the consciousness of the Western world, or even of America. The extracts which now follow show what is said in Hebrew and Yiddish (that is, outside the aural range of the non-Jew) among the Jewish masses, and the effect produced on them within the short space of five years.
Mr. Willian Zukerman, one of the most notable Jewish diarists of America and of our time, in May 1950 published an article called “Raising the Hair of the Jewish People” (South African Jewish Times of May 19, 1950; I imagine it also appeared in Jewish publications in many countries). He began by saying, “A great debate is on in the Zionist world. As yet it has not reached the non-Jewish, or even English-Jewish press; but it is raging in the Hebrew newspapers in Israel and in the Yiddish press in America and in Europe … it reveals, as nothing else has done in recent years, a cross-section of Jewish thought and emotions in the period following the emergence of Israel.” The debate, he explained, was “on the question of Chalutziot; organized and prepared emigration of Jews to Israel from all over the world – but particularly from the United States.”
At that time (1950) Mr. Zukerman wrote with only an undertone of foreboding. He quoted Mr. Sholem Niger, “dean of Yiddish literary critics and essayists,” as attacking, not “the campaign for emigration of American Jews to Israel,” but “the manner in which it is being presented to American Jews …” This, said Mr. Niger, was entirely negative, being anti-all others rather than pro-Israel: “the nationalists conduct a campaign of negation, vilification and destruction of everything Jewish outside Israel. Jewish life in the United States and everywhere else in the world is depicted as contemptible and hateful … Everything Jewish outside Israel is declared to be slavish, undignified, suppressed and dishonourable. No Jew with any self-respect can live fully as a Jew in the United States or anywhere else except in Israel is the major contention of the nationalists in this debate.”
Another favourite technique in selling Chalutziot to American Jews (the article continued) “is to undermine Jewish morale, faith and hope in their American home; to keep Jews constantly on edge with the scare of anti-semitism; not to let them forget the Hitler horrors and to spread doubts, fear and despair about the future of Jews in America. Every manifestation of anti-semitism is being seized upon and exaggerated to create an impression that American Jews, like the Germans under Hitler, stand on the brink of a catastrophe, and that sooner or later they, too, will have to run for safety.”
Mr. Niger quoted as example from an article by “a leading Israeli Zionist, Jonah Kossoi, in a highly literary Jerusalem Hebrew journal, Israel”:
“Upon us, Zionists, now lies the old responsibility of constantly raising the hair of the Jewish people; not to let them rest; to keep them forever on the edge of a precipice and make them aware of the dangers facing them. We must not wait until after the ‘catastrophe’ because if we do, where will we take the hundreds of thousands of Jews needed to build up our State? … Not in the future, but right now is the time for Jews to save themselves …”
The reader will see: the “catastrophe” is a political necessity, or an inevitability; and from these extracts he may begin to understand why the Jewish Encyclopaedia records a tendency towards hysteria among Jews. Mr. Zukerman said that this “extreme form of Chalutziot propaganda is the most prevalent one in Israel now.” He quoted a “more moderate form of the theory” expounded by Mr. L. Jefroikin, editor of the Zionist Kiyum in Paris. Mr. Jefroikin, said Mr. Zukerman, “while he subscribes to the truth of every word of the nationalistic theory that no Jew can live a full and dignified life anywhere else but in Israel, and while he too says that ‘American Jews live in a fool’s paradise,’ nevertheless admits that in their present state of mind American Jews will never agree that the U.S.A. is to be placed in the same category as Germany and Poland and that they would not consent to regard their home as a place of transit for Israel. He concludes, therefore, that American Jews should be propagandized to become only ‘Lovers of Israel,’ not actual Israelis in body and soul.”
The effect of this “propaganda” carried by Zionist emissaries from Israel into the United States, may next be studied in some remarks printed eighteen months later (December 1951) in the Intermountain Jewish News of Denver, Colorado. Its editor, Mr. Robert Gamzey, was critical of the action of the Jewish Agency and the World Zionist Congress for allocating $2,800,000 to promote Chalutziot in the United States. He said he knew “from personal experience in Israel of the widespread erroneous attitude there that America has no future for the Jews and that anti-semitism dooms U.S. Jewry to the fate of German Jews.” He added, “It is inconceivable therefore that the sending of Israel emissaries here to encourage American youth to settle in Israel would be conducted in any other way but to deride and deprecate the future of American Judaism.”
These forebodings of 1950 and 1951 were justified in the next five years, when “the campaign” and “the emissaries” from Israel succeeded in injecting “the nationalistic theory,” as above expounded, into the minds of the Jewish masses in America. Thus in 1955, Mr. William Zukerman, who in 1950 had been but faintly alarmed, was greatly so. He wrote (Jewish Newsletter, November 1955, reprinted in Time Magazine of New York, November 28):
“There cannot be the slightest doubt that a state of mind very much like that of Israel now prevails among American Jews. There is a fanatical certainty abroad, that there is only one truth and that Israel is the sole custodian of it. No distinction is made between the Jews of the world and Israel, and not even between the Israeli government and Israel. Israeli statesmen and their policies are assumed to be inviolate and above criticism. There is a frightening intolerance of opinions differing from those of the majority, a complete disregard of reason, and a yielding to the emotions of a stampeding herd.
“There is only one important difference between the Israeli and the American Jews. In Israel, the outburst of emotionalism, as far as one can judge from outside, has a basis in reality. It wells from the hidden springs of a disillusioned people who were promised security and peace and find themselves in a war trap. The American-Jewish brand of hysteria is entirely without roots in the realities of American-Jewish life. It is completely artificial, manufactured by the Zionist leaders, and foisted on a people who have no cause for hysteria by an army of paid propagandists as a means of advancing a policy of avowed political pressure and of stimulating fund raising. Never before has a propaganda campaign in behalf of a foreign government been planned and carried out more blatantly and cynically, in the blaze of limelight and to the fanfare of publicity, than the present wave of hysteria now being worked up among American Jews.”
These two quotations, separated by five years, again portray the degeneration of the Jewish soul under the tutelage of Talmudic Zionism. They also bring this tale of three wars to the eve of the third one, if “eve” is the apt word. In fact the third war began when the fighting in the Second War ended and has been in unbroken progress, somewhere or other in the world, ever since. It needs only a puff from any bellows to ignite it into another general war.
The process could have been, and possibly still could be halted by two responsible statesmen, one on either side of the Atlantic, speaking in unison, for it is in essense the biggest bluff in history. Today such mortal salvation seems too much to hope for and the writer probably does not exaggerate in opining that only God, who has done much bigger things, could avert the third general war. Unless that happens the concluding decades of this century foreseeably will see either the fiasco or the transient triumph of Talmudic chauvinism. Either way, in failure or success, the accompanying “catastrophe” would be that of the non-Jewish masses and Jewish suffering would be a minute fraction of it.
Afterwards, as the world obviously will not accept the Talmud, the Jews would at last have to accept the world as it is.
Merkel’s Germany: The Normalization of Insanity
BLOOD ON HER HANDS
Angela Merkel’s days appear to be numbered. For Germany’s sake, let’s hope they are. This woman has been a walking timebomb for her country. Indeed, many Germans are gradually coming to the realization that their hitherto highly respected Chancellor is not quite sane.
Merkel has recently been coming in for some withering criticism over her “open door” immigration policy that allowed more than a million “refugees” into Germany last year. The backlash against Merkel was brought to a head a few days ago when the driver of a truck, an asylum seeker, ploughed into a crowded Christmas market in Berlin, killing 12 shoppers and seriously wounding 48.
Merkel’s opponents have wasted no time blaming Merkel for the Christmas carnage, better known now as the “Berlin bloodbath.” It is hard to see who else could be blamed.
It was Dutch Freedom Party leader Geert Wilders who declared that Merkel had “blood on her hands“, blaming Europe’s “cowardly leaders” for the “tsunami” of Islamic terrorist attacks all over Europe.
The far-Right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party was equally harsh and forthright in its denunciation of Merkel, saying it held the German Chancellor “personally responsible for what had happened”.
Merkel acknowledged a few days ago that it would be “particularly sickening” if it turned out that the atrocity had been planned by a Muslim asylum seeker who had taken advantage of “Germany’s generosity”. Visiting the scene of the crime in Berlin, she said: ‘This is a very difficult day. Like millions of Germans, I am outraged, shocked and deeply saddened by what happened.”
“I am outraged, shocked and deeply saddened by what happened.”
If you are not amused by the picture I have posted above and think I am being flippant and disrespectful to the most powerful woman in Europe, I plead “Not Guilty”. The reason I say this is that the manic expression on Merkel’s face is a perfect match for the mental derangement many people believe Merkel is suffering from, particularly in her own country which she has managed to ruin beyond recognition.
Please note that top German psychiatrist and best-selling author Hans-Joachim Maaz has declared Chancellor Merkel clinically insane — i.e., “completely irrational” and a “danger to Germany“.
The tide is rapidly beginning to turn against Merkel. Robert Fico, Slovakia’s prime minister, said a few days ago: “The cup of patience is beginning to spill over and Europe’s public will rightfully expect rather stronger anti-migration measures.” Polish premier Beata Szydlo chipped in: “Europe must take effective action to protect its citizens.” Even John Bolton, tipped to become Donald Trump’s deputy secretary of state, made deprecating noises about Merkel’s role in exposing Germany and the rest of Europe “to the risk of terrorism”. Trump himself, over a year ago, went on record as saying that Merkel was “ruining” Germany.
Merkel has come under intense pressure recently to admit that her open-door policy for migrants had been an unmitigated disaster. She apparently still persists in believing that Germany, and indeed the whole of Europe, has a moral obligation to open its doors to the entire populations of Africa, Asia and the Middle East — in short, anyone with a sob story.
In the summer of 2015, Merkel declared fatuously that there were “no limits” on the number of asylum seekers Germany was ready to accept.
THE FACE OF A PSYCHOPATH?
Merkel’s bizarre immigration policies are thought to have led to more than one million migrants entering Germany last year, most of them currently unemployed and with lots of time on their hands to engage in acts of petty vandalism and sexual assaults on women — every single day of the year. (See here)
Marcus Pretzell, a prominent German politician, has rightly described the victims of the Berlin bloodbath as “Merkel’s dead”. Frauke Petry, chairwoman of the Alternative for Germany party, added that Germany was “no longer safe”. Meanwhile, British terror expert Anthony Glees, who heads the Centre for Security and Intelligence Studies at the University of Buckingham, opined that Merkel would face “enormous repercussions” if the attacker turned out to be an asylum seeker.
That was a few days ago.
We now know the truck killer behind the Berlin bloodbath was in fact an asylum seeker in Germany.
His name: Anis Amri, age 24, a “refugee” from Tunis. Already known to the German authorities and classified as “highly dangerous”, Amri had initially been denied asylum but nevertheless granted “toleration” papers, allowing him to stay on in Germany indefinitely “for unknown reasons.”
According to Italian newspaper Il Tempo, Amri was gunned down yesterday in Milan.
Conflicting reports, however, provide different stories. The Germans insist Amri is still hanging out somewhere in Berlin. Other accounts state that a man of identical appearance had been spotted somewhere in Denmark.
We see through a glass darkly; murk abounds.
All this is irrelevant to the central issue: who is to blame in large part for the migrant crisis?
If Angela Merkel, widely perceived to be a tool of international Jewry, is not to be held responsible for helping to flood Europe with millions of hostile invaders from the Third World, it is hard to see who else is to blame. Make no mistake. Merkel has her accomplices. And all these accomplices of Merkel and her puppetmasters, who have opened the floodgates to immigration, are the Enemies of the European People.
They are guilty of White genocide.
VIDEO : 6 mins
Dr Lasha Darkmoon (b.1978) is an Anglo-American ex-academic with higher degrees in Classics whose political articles and poems have been translated into several languages. Most of her political essays can be found at The Occidental Observer and The TruthSeeker. Her own website, Darkmoon.me, is now within the top 1 percent of websites in the world according to the Alexa ranking system.
Thinking about the “Holocaust” is a crime—interview with Alfred Schaefer By Jonas E. Alexis VeteransToday
Thinking about the “Holocaust” is a crime—interview with Alfred Schaefer
By Jonas E. Alexis on December 9, 2016
The awakening masses understand the facts and will not tolerate the lies or those who protect the lies.
Alfred and Monika Schaefer
…by Jonas E. Alexis and Alfred Schaefer
Alfred Schaefer: I was born Jan 30 1955, and grew up in Canada, thinking that there could not possibly be anything in all the world that could ever threaten us. We were 5 children, my older brother who is a doctor but a complete zombie, my younger sister who pretends not to understand that this is important, then Monika, who understood immediately and you know her, and my youngest sister who died aged 26 in a mountaineering accident.
Only recently did I figure out that the strife, that the “easy go lucky” hippy movement created for us in the family, came from the “demoralization” that was happening to our entire western society.
We thought that this was all a natural development, never ever suspecting that the entire rock and roll and hippy scene in that era was manufactured by the same forces that are now trying to enslave us. This was all part of the subversion, driving a wedge between the disciplined and cultured older people, and ourselves. We thought they were just old fashioned, and we were so cool.
But, the discipline from our parents did save us from completely failing, and we did have a lot of fun with them doing a lot of hiking and camping and stuff like that. After high school I tried university, but quit that after a couple of months. The next year I attended a technical college. I took a two year “Electronics Engineering Technology Course” in the Northern Alberta Institute of Technology.
After graduating from that, in Edmonton Alberta, in 1977, I went to work for IBM as a “repair man”, fixing photo copiers and typewriters and small computer systems. I did that for three years, with the intention of saving enough money to go on a big bicycle trip.
I spent one year on a bicycle circling the USA, going down the west coast in the autumn of 1980, then across to Florida in the winter months, dipping into Mexico on the way across. Then, up the east coast and across to Edmonton.
The following year I went to Europe, and spent the next 4 years riding and jobbing and helping some Germans that I met, take trucks and busses down from Germany through the Sahara, to Burkina Faso, Togo, Niger, and Mali, to sell them. I did this 5 times with these people, until I realised that if I don’t settle down in a normal life soon, that it may never be possible and I may end up in sorry shape.
So, in 1985, I applied to work as a technician for IBM in Munich. It was a supremely lucky break for me that this effort succeeded, and the two years that I intended to work in Munich turned into a “lifer”. I got a job that I did not even dare to apply for, namely working on the large systems as a technician.
As the technology evolved and the technical skills were less and less in demand, I changed my line of work within the company, which also meant moving several times. I spent 3 years in Boulder Colorado on an assignment for the European countries in the IBM printing systems development lab.
All of these experiences gave me the necessary base for doing what I am now doing for the “truth movement.”
Then, this summer, a series of amazing coincidences once again set the stage. Monika and Tony Hall came for a visit, and that visit resulted in the “sorry mom” video, as well as the CODOH video and so much more. It was a life changing visit for all of us. I am not superstitious, but I do feel that this much good fortune obligates, otherwise, it is all wasted.
My last video summarises my “truther” career, more or less, as I had taken a short scene from my very first video which was the “9/11 Gatekeepers and Controlled Opposition”. This video resulted from me becoming uncontrollably enraged after seeing the video posted by Kevin Barrett on Veterans Today where Noam Chomsky dismisses that student in Florida with his question on WTC7. Remember, Chomsky was like an ikon for us, a guru. When I saw that video, it blew out all my fuses.
It was information that I gleaned from Kevin Barrett’s dialog with Chomsky that enabled me to get though to Chomsky. That idiot Chomsky replied to me, after I wrote him what I thought of his treasonous behaviour. He probably could not stand the fact that some little shit can be so outright brazen and challenge him on this, and he wrote back to me. This went back and forth several times.
Jonas E. Alexis: You have argued that people can face numerous consequences if they “commit the crime of thinking” in Germany. Whatever happens to the German intellectual tradition? What would thinkers like Kant and Hegel say of Germany’s thought police today? Explain those issues for us.
Alfred Schaefer: Our forefathers would turn over in their graves if they were to witness what we are living today, not only in Germany but throughout the European and “western” countries.
The “re-education” that was imposed upon what was left of the German people after the genocidal wars against Europe, what we call “WWI and WWII”, continued the destruction of independent thinking.
The suppression of independent thinking was already well advanced in those countries that were tricked into fighting these totally senseless wars which only the perpetrator of this conflict benefitted from. That winner was international Jewry.
The entire official narrative of those wars, is nothing more than the interpretation that the perpetrators have presented us. They gloat about their ability to do this in the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion”. See Protocol #7 under the subtitle “Universal War.”
This power, their control over the media, gives these people the ability to channel and mould our thinking to serve their interests. Without the hatred incited against Germany well before the start of these genocidal wars, they never would have taken place. They resulted in the extermination of countless millions of the best people, the flower of the European people, a genetic degradation, as well as the wholesale destruction of irreplaceable historical culture. Dresden comes to mind here.
This follows the instructions in the Protocols that calls for the total and utter destruction of those who do not subordinate themselves, including any memory of them. The destruction of cities like Dresden was intended to help erase the memory of the Germanic people as it was perhaps the most beautiful city in the world for its cultural heritage. It was overflowing with refugees fleeing the onslaught of the Jewish Bolsheviks from the east, when it was firebombed in a true holocaust.
Dresden had no military value targets whatsoever. For a description of this barbarity, the book by Thomas Goodrich titled “Hellstorm”, is a sobering account. Producer Kyle Hunt has also made this into a film, which the Jews unsuccessfully tried to sensor from the German people.
Our world today would be very different indeed had we not been tricked into these suicidal struggles, going back to even before the French Revolution in 1789.
A good contemporary example of how the interpretation of events creates a narrative that has very little to do with reality, is the official version of 9/11, and how 19 Muslims with box cutters hijacked 4 airliners to pull that off. Since this event took place in our lifetime, it is easier to understand. It can be used as a blueprint to illustrate how these lies are implanted into our collective psyche, even though any human being with a functioning brain, knows that this official story is totally false.
After that event took place, only the false narrative is ever repeated, over and over again. Any and all people who are dependent on the Jewish money system lose their ability to survive if they utter one word about what happened on 9/11 that deviates from the official lies.
This process, imposed on a population over a span of several decades or generations, makes any other narrative appear wrong or even insane, simply because everyone is repeating the same lies.
For the “party line” to succeed in becoming the “truth”, all dissenting “opinions” must be subdued. To accomplish this, both carrots and sticks are employed. Carrots may come in the form of promotions, payoffs, or being puffed up and glorified in the media. Sticks may come in the form simple censorship, deleting data from the internet, or hysterical attacks of denunciation or death.
These include the ultimate: “holocaust denier”, “anti-Semite”, “conspiracy theorist” or any of the other meaningless control trigger words. These control trigger words activate a carefully engineered program that has been installed in our minds over a long period of time.
The ability for an “enemy within the gates” to trigger programs residing within our minds, would vindicate Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), who singlehandedly set the stage for German philosophy in the nineteenth century, in his understanding of the human mind. Kant held that any object given to the human mind is subject to the means by which the mind receives it.
All of our lives our minds have been subjected to a barrage of messages that have been “interpreted” for us, as “reality”. In other words, the mind receives certain messages over and over and over again, from all directions, imbedding the Jewish fantasies into our minds until we believe them to be reality. Whether it is “Anna Frank’s” phony dairies, or the fiction “Schindler’s List” turned into fact by presenting it as such, to the children in our schools.
Just recently a friend of mine, a woman from Kenya, dropped by to discuss politics with me. Naomi worked as an Au Pair for the neighbours before studying in Munich. She watched my “Police Raid” video and was delighted that it really told the truth. Then she confessed that she was warned by her friends in Kenya about 8 years ago, before coming to Europe, to be on her guard so as not to get “brainwashed” when in Europe. Her friends expressed concern that she may also get “brainwashed” during her stay in Europe if she is not careful.
She explained the extreme frustration that her German boyfriend and herself are experiencing now with fellow Germans who seem not to be able to understand that the imposed beliefs of the “Holocaust”, and many other beliefs are “brainwashing”. When a woman from Kenya laments about the “saturation brainwashing” throughout the “western” countries, this gives us an alarming indication about the condition of our “intellectual tradition”.
In your question you mention Hegel. We often talk about the Hegelian dialectic, where two contradictory ideas or entities are mixed together resulting in something different from either of the two initial starting points.
In today’s world of fear and lies, with the perpetrators protected behind a shield that the incessant application of trigger control words provides them, they are now setting up numerous Hegelian dialectic’s that will destroy us, and we are not able to recognise or resist this process because of the condition of our compartmentalised and fragmented minds. Any recognition of the Hegelian dialectics is instantly countered with the application of control trigger words.
For example, if a European notices that most of the “refugees” are tough looking military aged fighting men, this observation is silenced with the simple term “Racist”, or “Neo-Nazi Racist”, and the military aged fighting men can go about destroying and raping without too much interference.
Those foreigners who came here years ago understand the lethal situation that this represents. Another example that Naomi, the woman from Kenya, gave me makes this clear. A fellow Kenyan who has also been in Germany for many years told her the following story.
He observed how two African “refugees” stole a telephone from an unsuspecting European. He confronted these two “refugee” men, and lectured them about how harmful this behaviour will be for them. They should give it back and claim that they saw it fall to the ground. So what did they do? Rather than take his advice, they beat him up for trying to discipline them.
Obviously those people who understand what civilization is all about, and still have a functioning brain, are very alarmed about the Hegelian Dialectics they see being set up.
Here are several of the Hegelian Dialectics:
1 – ) The “ruling elite” pretends that the lies are truth. Their decisions are based on pretending that the lies are truth.
1 + ) The awakening masses understand the facts and will not tolerate the lies or those who protect the lies.
2 – ) Third world “refugees” flooding into our European countries expecting to enjoy all the fruits of the civilisation we have built and inherited from our forefathers.
2 + ) European citizens who worked all their lives understand the injustice of having the invaders take it away from them. Their sense of justice has been utterly betrayed. The invaders are immune to prosecution while indigenous Europeans are held to account for the smallest of infractions.
3 – ) Jewish financial criminals stand well above the law for multi billion dollar theft and mass murder.
3 + ) Normal working people can no longer get by with regular work and pay.
4 – ) People speak one “language” in public or at work. (the lies, ignorance)
4 + ) People speak another “language” at home or with friends whom they trust. (the truth)
5 – ) Intellectually weak minded people unable to discern fact from fiction. Easily directed like controlled and programmed laboratory rats. Many feminized men and gender confused people in this category.
5 + ) The exploding numbers of people decontaminating themselves from the lies. Initial confusion turns to rage.
6 – ) Our money is a fiat money based on a foundation of lies and deceit. Promissory notes based on lies.
6 + ) All fiat money collapses eventually, there are no exceptions to this rule. Our survival depends on our ability to migrate from the present expired and toxic system to a new system for exchanging real value for real value.
To prevent a catastrophic explosion destroying our civilisation we need to understand these processes and reverse them before they implode in a “Supernova”.
In my video titled “Police Raid and my Confession by Alfred Schaefer” I tried to deconstruct the trigger control words, as this is an essential first step in regaining the ability to think independently. The trigger control words separate the compartments of the fragmented mind that no longer communicate with each other.
The compartmentalisation of the mind produces results similar to a physical lobotomy. In my video I refer to this condition as “induced mental illness”, which can be treated by careful exposure to truth and reason.
The purpose of these trigger control words is to prevent us from understanding and stopping the Hegelian Dialectics that will explode on us, unless they are reversed and dismantled.
Kant and Hegel would be alarmed to see that the descendants of their beloved society have unlearned how to think at all.
Jonas E. Alexis: You said that “The German ministry of forbidden thought” sent their agents to search your house and steal things you had in your computer. Describe this for us in detail. In the process, tell us whether they had any legal right to do so. In your opinion, was there any organization behind this?
Alfred Schaefer: The actual trigger for the “Kriminal Polizei” to come to raid our house, was the video that I had uploaded on the 17th of June 2016 with the title “Sorry Mom, I was wrong about the Holocaust”. B’nai Brith sent out clear messages that “this guy needs to be taken down”.
In the search warrant they stated that my offence was the “Sorry Mom, I was wrong about the Holocaust” video. What is astounding is that they did not seem to have a problem framing an apology to one’s own Mom, as “incitement to racial hatred”. This logic would certainly have had Hegel and Kant very alarmed about the state of mind of our people.
It makes no sense. Actually, they then go on stating that the person in this video claims that there were no gas chambers and that the holocaust is the biggest lie in history. That is the simple truth. This is now common knowledge, so obviously we are now dealing with a religious tribunal determined to weed out all heretics. So again, philosophers of the past would be astounded at how far we have regressed to in the year 2016.
The main purpose of this raid was to try to silence me. Ironically, this raid and its aftermath actually provided me with useful data for my latest video. As I stated in this video, “Police Raid and my Confession by Alfred Schaefer”, I think the physical loss of these devises was well worth the price for having an interesting story to tell. Their intention was obviously to make it more difficult for me to work, or to silence me, but it has had the opposite effect.
You ask, if this was legal and what is the organisation behind it?
Allow me to respond with a question of my own: Was 9/11 legal, and what is the organisation behind that? The answer is the same in both cases.
The paragraph 130 in German “law” that forbids stating that the fake holocaust consists of lies, is a law that allows the totally arbitrary punishment of any and all dissent. If a law was enacted that forbade breathing, then those in power could use the “anti-breathing” law to arbitrarily silence or punish any dissent, no matter what it was. Everyone with a functioning brain and the courage to ask to most basic questions, knows that the Jewish holocaust is nothing more than a fraud on an unprecedented scale.
But the law can now be arbitrarily applied to anyone that they want removed from the scene, which gives them truly god-like power over all of us. For me, I would rather be physically locked up or die, than to submit to this pathetic tyranny that reduces human beings to programmed rats.
Jonas E. Alexis: Describe how people in Germany and Canada can legally and effectively fight against the thought police.
Alfred Schaefer: Fighting the thought police legally and effectively is like trying to fight the inquisition with logic and reason.
It is not possible to fight an oppressor who labels “Sorry Mom, I was wrong about the Holocaust”, which is an apology to one’s own mother, as “incitement to hatred”, in a system where “law” is arbitrary and one-sided.
Thought laws as we have them now, in what was once our civilisation, are pure tyranny. You cannot fight this tyranny with logic or laws that negate free speech and justice.
To fight “legally and effectively” with a “lawmaker” who is a Talmudic psychopath is like a sparrow asking the cat to negotiate.
A regime that imposes thought laws will not relinquish the power that thought laws represent. Our oppressors will never voluntarily relinquish power. This is psychopathic behaviour, and it will continue on the same peak and crash trajectory that it has always experienced in the past. Peak and crash, peak and crash, peak and crash.
The past crashes were characterised by the expulsion of the Jews from either cities or regions. This is the fist time that the magnitude of the crash can be seen as a life threatening event that may put us back to something that more resembles the Stone Age than our present day technological society and civilisation.
Our best hope is for very large numbers of people to stand up and ignore thought laws by publicly announcing their defiance. A law becomes unsustainable when the productive people of the society openly defy these destructive and suicidal thought laws.
Any thinking person with the smallest amount of self-respect would not blindly subordinate himself to these bizarre thought laws. They are not accidental, harmless or irrelevant laws. They are the shield behind which the Jewish mega criminals bring us death and destruction on a global scale.
Maybe the fear of being seen as too cowardly or too stupid to speak up needs to become greater than the fear of possible consequences for actually speaking up, before the lemmings join those who are now already speaking up. In any case, fear is the overwhelming force that is determining the outcome.
The danger of our present situation is, that the perpetrators have always seen this moment in time as the timeframe reserved for their long planned “WWIII”. Their hope is that the traumatised remnants of this conflict will be in no more a position to resist the imposition of their long planned “Jew World Order”, than were the Germans able to resist the imposition, by stealth, of the imaginary “Holocaust” as we have witnessed over the past decades.
BETTY’S EARLY EDITION –
Connecting the environment to everything in the age of disconnection.
Get over it, CBC!
BY BETTY KRAWCZYK
Tuesday, December 13, 2016
Get over it, CBC. The rest of us have had to. Hillary Clinton, running under the same electoral rules she was proud of before she lost, now wants to turn the electoral tide around. She didn’t really lose, she says, the election was stolen from her by Putin. He hacked the voting machines. And the FBI and the CIA back her up, along with the neocons in government who see these accusations as the very thing needed to convince the American people that Putin is an inhuman devil and Russia must be conquered to set things right again (US undisputed hegemony). How to conquer Russia? By invasion, of course. The same way they conquered Libya, Iraq, and Afghanistan. The slavish NATO has ringed the countries on Russian’s borders as well as the entire neighbourhood with air and missile bases. They’re ready to go. As soon as they can figure out how to get Hillary Clinton back into the White House and on Wall Street’s payroll. Certainly all of the agencies that matter for them, especially the Pentagon, are rearing to go get those nasty Ruskies.
Jill Stein, for whom I voted, in the end bowed to Hillary (like Bernie Sanders) and was persuaded to call for a vote recount. That’s her privilege. But there is no proof of any reason to even be suspicious that a hack was made, much less that the Russian’s did it. The CIA says it has proof of the Russian hack, but just can’t reveal it. You know, like the Weapons of Mass destruction that killed so many human beings in Iraq. But this line is excellent fodder for the main stream media that understands only too well that their jobs depends on bashing Putin for the “US Deep State” that wants to invade Russia. But Trump supporters won’t peacefully stand for shenanigans that declare Trump’s legal right to the presidency invalid. There will be lots of trouble should this happen.
But no worry, we will be told by craven main stream journalists, these kinds of protesters will be taken care of. We have anticipated such an occurrence and the jails are waiting. We’ve built lots of new ones and they are nicely privatized the police are militarized with crowd control devices including tanks. And the main stream media, including CBC and BBC TV and radio stations will rise to the challenge of echoing almost word for word the US war propaganda of why this war (nuclear)with Russia was(is) necessary. If you think I am worrying foolishly, just listen when listening to the National News to how much space is given to beating the war drums against Putin and Russia. I hope you become as alarmed as I am about what the CBC is pounding unrelenting into our ears on the need to teach Putin and Russia a lesson. A really hard lesson. But remember, Russia is not Libya, Iraq, or Afghanistan. Russia is a modern state with nuclear weapons. They are equipped to give as well as take. If you do become concerned about the Putin bashing, Russia hating, one sided reporting of your national broadcasting station please let them know. Maybe it’s not too late for the CBC to get over it.
New bill puts Jews above the law
(as if they aren’t already)
The real fake news is that we’re a free country
By John Kaminski
This is not the America you thought you knew. It is an international crime syndicate wholly run by Jews.
World history shows that when Jews rule, criminals run free and the innocent are raped and plundered.
Forced into silence, the people are ordered to shackle their minds and disregard their own common sense.
It happened long ago in a place called Russia, where they made Anti-Semitism a capital offense and butchered a hundred million people.
Russians didn’t do that to themselves; shipped in from New York City, Jews did.
A new bill just approved by the U.S. Senate mandates new prohibitions on how Jews can be mentioned in public utterances as well as news stories. According to the bill, any attempt to connect Israel or Jews to 9/11, or, notably, to “exaggerated” Holocaust claims, will now be regarded as anti-Semitism and punishable by law.
S. 10, the “Anti-Semitism Awareness Act of 2016,” was introduced and adopted by the U.S. Senate in a single day and without discussion on December 1.
This bill ends all pretense that Americans still possess their Constitutionally guaranteed freedom of speech.
If this bill is signed into law, you may no longer disagree with the government, and you will wind up in jail for doing so. This is already the situation in France — it is a crime to disagree with the government. And it’s even worse in Germany, where defending yourself is a crime unto itself, especially when dealing in matters of the Holocaust.
All of America’s allies are now lockstep totalitarian states. The Jews have imposed their artificial reality on the whole world. They fund both sides of every argument in order to reap the profits of conflict, the single biggest moneymaker in human society.
As the neocon New World Order spreads its stain around the world, in America . . .
• You may no longer connect Jews with the 9/11 attacks on America.
• You may no longer mention that the Holocaust Six Million was counted as 271,000 at the end of World War II by a responsible news gathering organization.
. . . because it would be Anti-Semitic to name certain Jews who are wholly complicit in the mass murder of millions of people.
Pizzagate hit a major nerve
It is an interesting convergence of two seminal events: the united opposition of mainstream media to Pizzagate, the shocking revelations about rape, murder and the most powerful people in the world, and the imminent passage of the Anti-Semitism bill, which will erect an impermeable curtain across all the major investigations of our time.
Jews did 9/11, sports fans! This Anti-Semitism bill will prevent the perpetrators, collaborators and facilitators of 9/11 from being investigated, indicted, convicted and executed for treason.
But there won’t be any 9/11 treason trials, will there? The event will remain unresolved forever, because the people who run America are the guilty party. I’m not saying they’re Americans because they’re not, no matter what they call themselves. But guilty they are beyond question.
Mainstream spinmeisters went into overdrive to delegitimize the Pizzagate scandal, because it hit so close to home to too many rich and powerful people. As they have with so many other shocking political revelations that have turned out to be true, the stunning unanimity of mainstream media to refuse to look at the case — and the child rape epidemic it reveals — demonstrates that some people who are calling it fake news have their own private interests to conceal.
It’s almost as if evil and corruption are suddenly somehow fashionable — innocent people wrongfully accused are put in jail while the rich criminals who run the world are able to break any law they like and are applauded for it by our vacuous media darlings.
When frauds cry fake, do the math
It’s good to see how everybody in the alternative media has jumped on the fake news fiasco, with a million different angles on aspects of the debate.
But the mainline seems to be that mainstream media has fed us nothing but lies since time immemorial, which is why Europe is being overrun by savage hordes and America continues to be fleeced by Israeli criminals who pretend they’re Americans. <http://theduran.com/hillary-c
I got a kick out of this fake news dustup. It was enjoyable watching these anchorpeople squirm when they had to announce the public trust in mainstream media has reached all time lows. A tsunami of ridicule has poured forth from the Internet, and the American public now has a much better idea on how the networks spin the news to suit the government which works for the bankers and their big business customers.
Everyone is trying desperately to cover up a genuine psychocriminal network among the very rich and powerful that enables those who would rape and murder children to do their stuff.
Frauds like the New York Times have been pumping out fake news for more than a century
Ironically, the real fake news is the official stuff funneled through Wall Street through the glitzy emoting of the news readers who are chosen for their subliminal sexual suggestiveness, right out through the TV screen and into your brain. Later, you quote authoritatively that you heard it from a very good source.
What once appeared clear to us becomes not so certain with the passage of time. And with spinmasters ready to help bury the truth, government fabrications like the burial at sea of Osama bin Laden become hard and fast historical events taught to spellbound schoolchildren in American classrooms.
Nothing about the mainstream narrative is true. Never has been.
All-out assault on free speech
Earlier this year, an uncommonly forthright Jewish writer, Max Blumenthal, wrote:
With guidance from Jerusalem, where the most right-wing government in Israeli history is mounting an all-out assault on internal dissent, the lobby has embraced a totalitarian agenda that aims for nothing less than the criminalization of all political opposition.
The de facto situation is this.
By law, Jews are innocent of all crimes. Between the judges and lawyers and the rich bankers who buy both, when Jews rule criminals go free and the innocent are plundered.
By not recognizing the profound extent to which Jews have control of your life, you assist them in their efforts to control the whole world and you profoundly disfigure your own life by participating in the falsehoods — from psychology to finance — which they compel everyone to embrace.
The purpose of anti-semitism laws is to criminalize all reports of Jewish criminality, and thereby prevent them from seeing the light of day. Very similar to the situation in German courts, which are also controlled by Jews, where defending oneself against baseless charges is now a crime in and of itself, squeezing the last drop of sanity out of a terminally sick system.
Since Jews have totally infected the system, this amounts to making all criticism of the government illegal. They are already doing this in France.
Senate Bill S.1 law forbids any critical discussion of Jews or Israel, placing Jews even further above the law than they already are
If all the politicians weren’t owned by them, the proper maneuver to save the world would be to arrest the jewish kingpins for treason and confiscate their wealth to balance everybody’s budget.
Disabuse yourself of the notion that their wealth was honestly accrued. The Rothschilds made their money by stealing and swindling people, according to biographer Frederic Morton.
With each passing day, the history of the USA more closely resembles that of the old Soviet Union, where doctors are murdered for practicing people’s medicine and the government declares who is guilty and who is innocent without considering any evidence.
Forced into silence out of fear for their well being, the people are ordered to shackle their minds and disregard common sense in order to survive.
This is what the new Common Core system of education is all about. Forget about thinking, just do what the government tells you to do.
Murder Palestinians when you are told to do so.
Jews claim to be superior when in reality they are twisted savages, destroying everything they cannot steal.
Under the bill, any attempts to “demonize Israel,” which could include “drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis,” would be defined as anti-Semitism. Universities which tolerate speech of this type on campus would be in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and presumably could be denied federal funding. <https://richardedmondson.net/
Michael Hoffman wrote about the impact of this subversive legislation on college campuses <http://revisionistreview.blog
• Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as a collective—especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
(To those who have studied the matter, it is no myth; it is a verifiable, 2,000-year-old truth.)
• Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, the state of Israel, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
(Every rabbi cheers for deaths of non Jews. You hear it in Jewish rhetoric every day as Jews describe why they had to blow Palestinian children to smithereens for throwing rocks.)
• Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
(The Holocaust is a total hoax. The Germans took much better care of their prisoners than the Americans, who starved 2 million prisoners to death in a field in France.)
• Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interest of their own nations.
(No dual Israeli-American citizen would ever say that America was more important to them than Israel. Of course Jews lie constantly, so it could happen.)
I am guilty of these four offenses and would love to debate them in court, were not all the courts in America controlled by Jewish judges who aim not for justice but for total control over the stupid American goyim.
I shudder to think how our new President-elect Donald Trump will deal with this demolition of the First Amendment to our beleaguered Constitution.
But since he is surrounded by Jews, and virtually indistinguishable from them, we can expect the worst, which we always seem to receive from all our presidents. They are always are far more concerned with the opinions of the bankers who gave them their careers than they are watchful that honest ordinary people get a fair shake.
Instead our government goes around shooting up the world and then demands the taxpayers pay for all those murderous escapades that benefit only the super rich yet kill a high percentage of the poor slobs they get to fight in their unjust wars.
Don’t you look forward to telling your children that your president goes around murdering foreign leaders because they possess oil and water that the Jews of Israel want the Americans to steal for them?
Do you find this patriotic? Or psychopathological.
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.
How Clinton and the Jew U.S. Green Party Candidate Jill Stein Are Planning a Coup to Defeat Trump By BuckleYourSeatBeltsEveryone
How Clinton and the Jew-controlled US Green Party Plan a Recount Coup to Defeat Trump
November 25th, 2016
[Editor’s Note: The following article came in to RP as a comment associated with an earlier article titled, Donald Trump wins U.S. election in astonishing victory by ZBC. I felt that the information contained in the comment deserved to be given additional exposure in the event that these Satanic psychopaths actually attempt to pull this massive scam off.]
As of today (November 25th 2016) we have some “new developments” arising on the still on-going 2016 US Presidential Election Results “Front”. . .
As one would expect, we have a heavily promoted (((Jewess))) in the mix causing trouble, so please keep reading- because as at this point, practically anything could happen- and we all need to keep abreast of the situation . . .
First off, Who is Jill Stein?
Jill Stein was the Green Party candidate in this past 2016 US Presidential Election.
Jill Stein is a heavily promoted (MSMI and MSMII) Jewess.
By the way, something everyone needs to know about the Green Party…
Jews know that Native Americans and non-Jewish White-skinned Americans of European Christian descent- including any and all percentages of mixtures between those two peoples, are very compatible with one another. One of their common interests is the Love of Life- that is to say “Nature.” It’s a known fact. The Jews exploit this common Love continuously. They try to pit the two aforementioned compatible peoples against one another- including each of the peoples mentioned themselves. Furthermore, the Jews will even use this common, essentially unbreakable, bond to pin the American Individual against his own self! Enter the Jew-created, Jew-run “Green Party”…
“In a nutshell, the Green Party is nothing more than a “closet” Judeo-Fabian Socialist front. Yep, it’s true- and to say it is so, is not to say that you don’t Love Nature- you can still Love Nature and The Great Spirit (the Father of Jesus Christ) without having to join a Collectivist front organization. Remain an American Individual, and voluntarily cooperate with your like-minded friends without each of you having to combine (chain) your interests to that of the GROUP. Tangentville, anyway- all you need to know (for now) is that the Jews run the Green Party- and you still Love Nature, Nature still needs to be protected, respected, and revered- nothing has changed, so don’t freak out. You’ve only just (possibly) discovered that the Green Party ain’t maybe the best way to go- it’s possibly another trap- so keep your knee down. Got it? Good…”
Back to the Jewish Green Party Jewess Jill Stein . . . .
Jill Stein has recently demanded (and since been granted) a “vote recount.”
I know, I know- “Why Stein and NOT Clinton?” you’re probably (and logically) asking . . .
Because Stein is clearly operating as a “proxy” (or straw man) for Hillary Clinton. As rumor has it, (((Stein))) has been offered the job of Secretary of the Interior, or the Director of the Jew-infested US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) if she can pull off a legit looking recount request, without the American public catching wind to it- where Clinton could “take it from there” so-to-speak, thereby paving the way for Mrs. Clinton to possibly be legally and officially named the US President upon subsequent appeal.
SHHHHuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuZZZZZZZZaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaMMMM ! ! !
[LOL – in the spirit of the American TV Show “Green Acres”]
This rumor has a great deal of credibility. Why? Because Stein, from an election standpoint, has absolutely nothing (repeat) nothing to gain from any recount anywhere WHAT-so-EVER!
Always remember to ask:
The only beneficiary, with respect to a vote recount, is Hillary Clinton. This is obviously a case of Jewish “you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours.”
Thus far (11/25/2016), Hillary Clinton has gained, through proxy, a recount of the following three very important states:
Official Presidential Vote Recount for the State of Wisconsin:
Jill Stein supposedly raised enough money “all on her own” via website “donations” to pay for a recount in Wisconsin.
Enter the Jewish “Shell Game” . . . . .
Many of you are probably unaware of the above, or the backstage stuff at least.
Most of you however, have heard plenty (from the JMSM) about Colorado this and Colorado that.
Likewise, you’ve been hearing also a lot about Washington State this and Washington State that.
[Note: the state of Washington (WA) is not the same as the US capital “The District of Columbia” aka “Washington DC” over on the East Coast beside the Atlantic Ocean]
So what’s the deal with Colorado and Washington State?
Shell Game – Magic – Jewish Kaballah – That’s the Deal.
Let me explain . . .
First off, you’ve got to understand just what and who the Electoral College is…
The Constitution for the united States of America provides that the President shall be elected by a body of presidential electors chosen by all the states. This body is the Electoral College.
Every state has as many votes in the Electoral College as the total of its Senators and Representatives in Congress. Amendment 23 to the US Constitution, ratified in in 1961, gave the District of Columbia [Washington DC] three electoral votes (but don’t pay that any attention here or get that “territory” confused with Washington State located over on the West Coast up against the Pacific Ocean- it’s a point that needs to be made, but don’t let it serve as a spot of confusion- since we will be dealing with Washington State later on here) .
State committees or conventions of each political party usually select the candidates for potential Presidential Electors. In some states, the ballots list the presidential and vice-presidential candidates, but do not list the proposed electors. For this reason, many voters (the man on the street) have never actually realized that they do not actually vote directly for the President and Vice-President. Instead, they vote “indirectly.” In the election, the candidate who wins a plurality (the highest number) of a state’s “popular votes” usually receives all the state’s “electoral votes.” Thus, a candidate may be elected without a majority of “popular votes.”
Majority = More than half (50%) of a given number of votes.
Say it’s a tiny USA, and 100 people Voted for President in one of the 50 tiny states…
1. Steve 80 Votes (won 80% of the total votes cast)
2. Jason 10 Votes (won 10% of the total votes cast)
3. Bobby 5 Votes (won 5% of the total votes cast)
4. James 5 Votes (won 5% of the total votes cast)
Steve won the plurality (highest number of votes) and also the Majority- because 80% of the votes is well over half (50%) of the total votes that were cast. Steve was a really popular guy! Steve received all this state’s electoral votes.
1. Steve 40 Votes (won 40% of the total votes cast)
2. Jason 30 Votes (won 30% of the total votes cast)
3. Bobby 26 Votes (won 26% of the total votes cast)
4. James 4 Votes (won 4% of the total votes cast)
Steve won the plurality (highest number of votes) however failed to win the Majority- because 40% of the votes is under half (50%) of the total votes that were cast. There was no real popular “stand-out” winner like up in Example1. Steve received all this state’s electoral votes. Hence, this was a perfect example where a somewhat “lackluster” candidate may still be elected- even without having ever received a majority of the “popular votes” within the state.
But wait, there’s more ! . . . . .
In the December following the presidential election (coming up), on a day set by law, the aforementioned duly elected presidential electors in each state (and the District of Columbia etc) assemble. State electors usually meet in their respective state’s capital. The electors then cast their ballots for President and Vice-President. Either by custom, or in a few states, by law (Hence in those particular states- News Agencies can sometimes go ahead and “call it” on Election Night in November without waiting til later in December), electors vote for their party’s choices for the two offices. The lists of these (December) elections are physically sent under protected seal to the president of the United States Senate and to the Administrator of General Services in Washington, D.C. In January (2017), at a joint session in the House of Representatives, the president of the Senate opens the certificates. Then four tellers, one Democrat and one Republican from each house (House of Representatives and Senate), count the votes in the presence of both houses of Congress. The candidate who receives a majority of the electoral votes for President is declared the elected. If no candidate has a majority, the state delegations in the House of Representatives choose the President from the three candidates having the highest number of of electoral votes. Each state has only one vote in such an election. If no candidate wins a majority of the electoral votes for Vice-President, the Senate elects the Vice-President from the two candidates with the highest number of electoral votes.
Reasons for the Electoral College
The manner of electing the President was a major problem at the Constitutional Convention of 1787. The convention rejected the proposal that the chief executive (President) be elected by Congress, on the grounds that he would then be under the control of the Legislature. The proposal that the people elect the President was also rejected- and at that time in history, perhaps rightly so.
To solve this problem, the Constitutional Convention agreed on the method of indirect popular election which became the Electoral College. The Fathers of the Constitution hoped this procedure would promote calm deliberation and selection of the best-qualified man.
Now back to present matters, being churned up everywhere by the Jewish-controlled Main Stream Media (JMSM) in regards to the states of Colorado and Washington State . . . . .
The MSM keeps making a big deal about Electors in certain states that told/ensured the media (on November 8th – the popular election day/night) that they were going to vote for candidate X come December, as explained above- going back upon their word, and turning, or “flipping” their December electoral vote over to candidate Y instead! So instead of the Elector voting for Candidate X as promised to the media on popular “Election Night” (11/8/2016), they are now allegedly (per a lying scheming Jewish media) telling the media that they have essentially changed their minds- in some cases a legal impossibility, that they are instead voting for Candidate Y! How absurd!
For example, the (((media))) is now claiming the following…
That 6 Colorado Electors have decided to “flip” their votes away from Clinton, as originally claimed, and plan to instead vote for Trump. That claim is of course absurd. Why? Because in the state of Colorado an elector cannot do that- he has no choice– period. In a Presidential election held in the state of Colorado- Colorado state law confirms that a candidate that wins a plurality (the highest number) of the state’s “popular votes” receives ALL of the state’s “electoral votes.” So in the case of Colorado, Clinton won the highest number of votes in the popular election- therefore Clinton receives ALL of Colorado’s “electoral votes”- it doesn’t matter what 6 of the individual electors have to say! LOL The media is betting on Coloradins’ and Americans’ ignorance of their own election laws and procedures!
6 Colorado electors threatening to instead vote for Trump in December- against what they had promised on November 8th is ridiculous! It is meaningless, and doesn’t help Trump at all, because the popular vote in CO [which went to Clinton] automatically becomes the actual vote cast for each elector there- the JMSM is running a “shell game”- playing upon the ignorance of the public. See next for more details on that…
The (((media))) is also now claiming that…
Another Colorado Elector, a Jew named Michael Baca, may also “flip his vote”- however he intends to flip his particular vote away from Trump (as originally promised on Nov 8th) and cast it over to Clinton in December. Again, rubbish. He could not vote for Trump even if he wanted to, because he is an Elector in the state of Colorado, one of many states where the state’s popular vote BECOMES essentially that state’s electoral votes! In other words, in those particular states, no matter who the “Electors” each votes for, the Will of the People prevails- by state law! Thus, since the majority of the popular vote in Colorado went for Clinton, it doesn’t matter if ALL of the Electors in Colorado went against the majority of the voters, and voted for Trump- their own personal favorite, ALL electoral votes from the State of Colorado would go to Clinton- not Trump. Those states just keep the Electoral College around for legal reasons, the popular vote IS all of the electoral votes in those particular states where the state legislature decided to do it that way over time. Trump never had one single electoral vote in Colorado state- no matter what the electors originally promised to vote for, or may “flip” over to- because the majority of the public voted for Clinton, therefore ALL electoral votes in that state are to automatically be cast for Clinton. Thus, Trump cannot lose what he never had to begin with- it’s a MSM “shell game”- apparently priming the ignorant/unsuspecting American public for something real sinister somewhere down the pipeline.
What the (((media))) is now claiming about Washington State…
A Washington State Elector, Bret Chiafalo, has allegedly “flipped his vote” (in his mind, mind you) away from Clinton over to Trump- but once again, such statements are meaningless- because Washington is one of the states that automatically (no matter how much each “human” elector balks), casts the popular vote winner as the candidate that each elector voted for- it’s meaningless what the human elector does- the process is ensured to always operate that way- it’s protected by law. The elector in December cannot over-ride the majority vote winner (from November 8th) of the people in those states set up that way. It is illegal for human electors in such states to “go rogue” in December and vote against the way of the popular majority back in November- should they try to do so anyway- it’s considered by law to be invalid, and the elector can be punished- just for being a “pain in the rump,” as he did not harm anyone- he has no “true voting power” (recognized by law) in those states. Again, Trump never had one single electoral vote in this state- no matter what the electors originally claimed who they were going to vote for in December, or may “flip” over to- because, once again, the majority of the public in Washington voted for Clinton, therefore ALL electoral votes in that state are to automatically be cast for Clinton. So Trump can’t lose what he never had to begin with. Shell game.
So what else is the Jew-controlled media, Green Party Jewess Jill Stein, and crypto-Jewess Hillary Clinton up to, besides a little “Never Let em’ Know Where They Stand” terror/destabilization here and there? Let’s try to follow the shell . . .
Normally the margins would be too large to allow for a recount, but the ploy is that TRUMP “hacked” the Electronic Voting machines (which technically is impossible), but regardless [go figure], they are investigating an alleged “hack” anyway. LOL
With Jew (((George Soros))) [real name: György Schwartz] in control of the machines, a “hack” WILL MOST LIKELY INDEED be found, and then authentic Americans could find themselves to be in HUGE trouble! Massive fallout/destabilization, Martial Law declared, FEMA, a Rabbi Alex Jone$tein “The Works” type of fiasco. You get the drift.
Let’s go take a look at Stein’s “Federal Reserve Note Machine” . . .
Jill Stein’s Election Recount “Phony Fundraiser” Page:
It has been stated that (((Jill Stein))) supposedly raised enough money to fund a recount (attempting to steal the election away from Trump via a “recount”) in only 5 hours!
One observer allegedly reported:
Go to Jill Stein’s fundraiser page and watch the progress. You will see that her funding is coming in at a PERFECTLY CONSISTENT [$]160,000 an hour. I watched this yesterday and last night carefully, and noted that at night, when everyone [in the USA] is sleeping and right through the time when the whole world slows down, her donations for this [recount project] came in like clockwork [steadily and consistently without any derivation], with no deviation from the steady pace whatsoever.
The only way that [type of steady, non-stop flow] can happen is if a [computer Ro]bot was set up to fake her getting donations from multiple [real] people [as if in fact they were all authentic], and whoever set it up [programmed the page or WebBot] did not consider the fact that practically everything [as far as any donations would be concerned] would [be] come[ing] from America, and practically everyone [that could possibly be donating in America] is [usually] asleep at 3AM [in the morning]. LAST NIGHT IT [THE DONATIONS] SHOULD HAVE SLOWED DOWN. IT [THE ONLINE DONATIONS] DID NOT. IT JUST MARCHED RIGHT TOWARD THE FINISH LIKE AN OBEDIENT SOLDIER. It went straight to 2.65 million [US Dollars] by six AM [in the morning in the USA]. I can calculate: IT WILL GO TO 4.5 MILLION IN 28.125 HOURS. Oh, a few people will pitch in [actually donate] for real, so I’ll say 27 hours.
EASY MATH. JILL STEIN WILL GET THE [$]4.5 MILLION [Dollars] SHE NEEDS BETWEEN 4 AND SIX PM TONIGHT, DEPENDING UPON HOW MUCH REAL PEOPLE PITCH IN [in addition to the computer code dropping amounts in from who even knows where]. Actual math progression based on the steady rate lands squarely on 6:10 PM tonight, but I am guessing a few real people will pay in.
Don’t be fooled by the slick language on the [website’s] donation page, if those donations did not virtually stop at night [as would be normal, then] they are not coming [in] from the American people.
Yes folks, we are watching an attempted election steal occurring within the USA as it happens. It apparently could not be pulled off realistically by threatening electors, so now we have this. And it is all based on false claims, because Michigan CANNOT BE HACKED.
Michigan has a CERTIFIED VOTE. There is NO WAY THIS IS LEGIT. And that means ONE THING – there are liars doing it, powerful mostly-Jewish TRILLIONAIRE liars who know in advance that they are going to “find” what they have been searching for.
Michigan had all paper ballots and cannot be hacked. But that won’t stop liars of the caliber we are up against. Michigan has a different vote counting process than other states. First, Michigan does a quick count. Then, automatically, they do a certified count. That count was certified today. It is an un-hackable process. If Hillary takes Michigan when Michigan can’t be hacked, and the vote is certified, it will prove fraud of the highest order.
BULLYING ELECTORS WITH DEATH THREATS DID NOT WORK, SO NOW THEY ARE GOING TO FORCE A RECOUNT ONLY IN STATES [THAT] TRUMP WON.
Trump may have taken Michigan, but that will not make a difference. Jewess Jill Stein demanded a recount, and the election WILL be rigged. They have had ALL THE TIME they need to fill out a whole bunch of blank ballots and throw the election to Clinton. No one was watching. It happened, GAME OVER. All 3 states, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania will most likely be thrown to Hillary.
So that is how it was planned to be “stolen” all along, since election day at least. And Hillary get’s to skate home free, saying “Hey, I wasn’t the one that asked for it.”
Every last request (((Jill Stein))) has will most likely be granted, and every last request Trump asks for will most likely be denied. There may be nothing that can be done to stop it, because they would not have planned this unless they knew for certain they had it in the bag.
Bringing newcomers here up to speed…
They had a bunch of fake computer consultants state that there were voting anomalies in favor of Trump, and that they proved Russia rigged the vote. On those grounds, Green Party candidate (((Jill Stein))) called for a recount, and was handed all the money she needed to do it (practically out of nowhere) in a single day. In the background, leading up to this, (obviously) they wrote in a huge number of fake ballots for Clinton. The recount will “magically” discover all those “new” (but actually fake) votes for Clinton, and she’s going in. AT A BARE MINIMUM, SOMEONE OTHER THAN TRUMP WILL BE ELECTED. They would not be doing this unless they knew they had it in the bag.
They are saying the election was hacked, when Pennsylvania does not even have a way to hack it. They are BRAZENLY lying about EVERYTHING. The Jewish Main Stream Media (MSM) is backing them up, and Jewish-controlled (((Google))) is destroying dissent. And ALL the comment sections are suddenly “open for business” for a change- as in no longer on “Total Lock Down” as before- like during and right after the election, with 100 percent Jewish/Hasbara trollage in favor of it, (or when real opinion is allowed to post through as a comment, they have trolls waiting in lay to have it perfectly answered, via pre-written scripts, to have the legit commenter’s comment bashed into the ground- then ban the commenter from being able to reply).
This is such a brazen steal they would not even think of doing it unless they KNEW FOR SURE they have it in the bag.
Eye Roll [Looking Way Down the Roller Coaster] – Buckle Up – Oh Here We Go . . .
S – L – A – V – E ! ! ! YOUUUUUU GOOOOOOOONNNNNNIEEEEEEEEE ! ! !
[ Wide Open Roller Coaster Yell ]
Subhuman nature : The acute degradation of the American mind
Any trace of morality in an American leader has always been remedied by assassination.
The world rattles on while Israel’s proxy army known as the U.S. military murders dozens of people every day in places so far away they are beyond the comprehension of the average working American who consumes his time with inconsequential personal enrichment schemes that often involve quasi criminal techniques which often ruin the lives of others.
Third World nations are falling like dominoes to the neocon monstrosity, which devours its own citizens almost as fast as it obliterates distant countries. Any resemblance to the “domino theory” about Communism during the brutal reign of the Soviet Union is not purely coincidental.
It has become so easy and profitable to wreck other countries who won’t sign onto the Jewish world financial agenda. From there, it was only one small step for the American military to refocus its malicious intent upon its own people, with the ultimate goal of controlling every single person on the planet, Americans first.
Some would say — through propagandized schools, media and entertainment — this has already happened.
How else can we explain the sullen succession of presidential clones all regurgitating the same schizophrenic message — it’s OK to trust the bankers even though we know they’re stealing from us.
The clamoring of Bernie Sanders’ cult worshippers about the election of Donald Trump has that same kind of passionate ignorance that young devotees of communism evince on college campuses, without ever having learned that Soviet communism slaughtered one hundred million NON JEWISH humans in its nightmare pursuit of a Jewish heaven on earth feeding upon the corpse of Russia.
Throughout the world and from behind the scenes the Jews have trampled upon the world with a vengeance beyond all rationality.
Today the same maggots have eaten away at the innards of the United States. They have captured the minds of all Americans by their insidious monopolization of media, made possible by their unrestricted control of the money supply. And they have taught us that it was very stylish to be unreflective and self-destructive robots.
The Jewish spawned Frankfort School of so-called psychologists taught many generations of American children to hate their own families for their oppressive beliefs. These beliefs were the psychological glue that held nations together.
There was never a republic on the American continent. The banks always determined the chains that bound us, simply by buying politicians and owning all the newspapers. It was always about what the banks permitted. Nothing has really changed.
The degradation of the America mind is so acute for the past hundred years people have failed to see that what has been promoted by the mass media has been largely false, deliberately designed by and for the financial moguls who owned the newspapers rather than for the people who read them.
The public conformed to what the authorities said to do, and as has been the case throughout history, the authorities were utterly corrupt.
• • •
All men are not created equal . . .
The fact that Abraham Lincoln said they were in his canonized Gettysburg Address was perhaps the first step in the overthrow of the American republic.
The forced equality of inferior minds has damaged the American educational mission beyond repair. Once it was a tool for enlightenment; now it has become a choice of what military support mechanism do you wish to pursue? Scientific research has become totally skewed in pursuit of weapons applications despite the visible risks and the questionable rewards that almost always complicates stealing from others.
Any trace of morality in an American leader has always been remedied by assassination.
Christianity had gained its ascendance over the minds of humanity in much the same way, by promising deliverance from pain and forgiveness for past crimes, and undermining the formula of the Roman Empire in which every citizen was a soldier.
Yet as the centuries passed, the majority of the army became composed of people from other countries whose allegiance was to leaders who promised them fortunes rather than to the community they had pledged to defend.
Similar story today. Perhaps the story of civilization.
Hell, if they can get away with 9/11, they can get away with anything, put anything over on a nation of dummies, of intellectually challenged individuals who are the products of the totally misguided American school system and then brainwashed throughout their lives by uninterrupted doses of artificial reality, where the world is kept in constant fear by a government so desperate to prove it is needed to protect us that it invents its own terror threats.
The government’s philosophy is to put us in jail to protect us — so we will never present a danger to its hegemony. That’s why they’re flooding white countries with nonwhite immigrants, to force prison conditions on the chaos that is inevitably resulting.
Just another classic strategy by the alleged humans who invented the Jewish destabilization template, which is guaranteed to destroy every country it infects with its homicidal mania and unquenchable penchant for swindling.
What kind of demented bureaucrats would slaughter 3,000 of their own countrymen simply for geopolitical objectives, and the fabulous profits of worldwide commerce in drugs, oil and weapons. We know who most of these people are? We allow them to walk among us unmolested.
Could these people all have had bad parents? These things make you wonder about how civilized is the civilized world? Do we need to be restrained? Can we ever be allowed to be free?
When Trump’s righthand mad marine spews from the podium about American exceptionalism I think it means anyone can be killed for any reason simply by declaring them a potential terrorist for disobeying the pronouncements of an utterly corrupt government.
Like so many other things, it makes me shiver.
The sheer ugliness of American behavior in the world in recent years has confounded many American patriots who realize they have been supporting criminal garbage who continually betray their own people for profit, no matter how immense the carnage or how indefensible their lies.
Consider recent American history ignored by Jewish mainstream media:
• Gassings of 200 Syrian children and then displaying them in a gym for photos, blamed on Assad but carried out by U.S. supported jihadis, a classic example of the media working hand in hand with the military, both driven by demonic politicians intent on destroying Syria for Israel, all for a stupid oil pipeline.
• Murdering two million defeated and defenseless German soldiers in a field in France — the Rhine Meadows massacre — never reported by mainstream press. Perhaps the No. 1 source of twisted Jewish glee ever produced.
• Buying the Ukrainian revolution for $5 billion and hiring mercenaries to shoot people from both sides in order to stimulate a phony revolution that immediately began slaughtering Russians who didn’t go along with the plan.
(Face it! Obama has been trying to start World War III at the behest of his Jewish paymasters.)
• Assassinating doctors for curing cancer that the pharmaceutical industry does not want cured.
• Giving smallpox blankets to Indians who taught the Pilgrims to avoid starvation by planting corn. Get it? The Indians saved the Pilgrims, and the Pilgrims murdered them.
Could this have been the template all American behavior that followed? The list of these stupendous moral infractions is, as you know, endless.
Except we must take note of the current pedophilia revelations now being unearthed involving the highest levels of Washington society that have persisted for decades. This would be the most jarring example of the subhuman nature that now infects every maneuver by a clearly perverted Obama administration, but also Washington society in general. War mad perverts, you might say.
If the objective of seeking power is to rape and murder children, we must ask ourselves what is the purpose of our lives.
The Jews want to turn the United States into Africa or South America because it would make everybody easier to manage. Peasants are easier to manage than financiers.
The younger generations are lured away from their parents by trends designed to addict them to damaging pastimes and derail any ideas they might have had about how the world is really run.
You can control their educations so they can only rise to a certain level, far below the level needed to perceive the scams that limit our freedom and damage our health.
Throughout the 20th century, Americans have been unable to perceive the swindles perpetrated on them by the Jewish bankers and their hired politicians.
Generations have been bamboozled by the Jewish press, which explains away the financial crimes and enflames the population to go and kill some designated enemy for some totally fallacious reason.
Will we ever have a leader who can be candid?
Or will we keep on prattling until we kill each other off?
If Donald Trump has come to give us the peace of the Jews we’re no better off than we were before.
Remember the subhuman drecks who attached wires to people’s genitals in Abu Ghraib prison . . . those orders came right from the top.
We can no longer believe our government when it says it has identified an enemy.
It cannot tell the difference between an enemy and a potential victim of crime.
What it calls an enemy is all too often the next victim of its outrageous crime.
The criminals who are our bankers, presidents, generals and editors can justify anything that makes them richer.
And it so happens that is exactly the behavior that makes the world inestimably poorer.
Change this system or watch the world go up in flames. Some say it’s too late, and the final fire season is already here.
This is our subhuman nature. Most people don’t realize any of this. And worst of all, don’t care who we kill.
This may be how the world DOES work, but I think we, as intelligent humans, can all agree it’s not how the world SHOULD work.
And we should never stop working to make the world the way we want it. Enough of this Jewish slave colony.
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.
Dear Free Speech Defenders and Radical Press Supporters,First, allow me to extend my sincere apologies to all of those who have been waiting so long for this legal update. It has been delayed for over a year now primarily due to the snail’s pace at which the R v Roy Arthur Topham Charter challenge has been crawling through the BC Supreme Court legal system. Delay after delay meant postponement of an overview that might provide a useful picture of all the salient events. As a result coverage of all that’s gone down demands a somewhat lengthy update.
To recap the issue for readers – Constitutional notice was first served to the Crown on March 23rd, 2015 and and the process, such as it was, did not conclude until November 8th and 9th, 2016 in Victoria, B.C. where the final two days of argument took place. That amounts to a little over 19 months this aspect of the case has been ongoing.
From the onset it was Crown’s position that they wanted the Constitutional Charter challenge put off until after the end of the trial. Following the pre-trial hearing on the matter that began in Vancouver, BC’s SC on June 22nd, 2015 – in his Reasons for Judgment handed down July 8, 2015 – SC Justice Butler, citing case law, ruled that it would be better to hold off on the Charter argument until after the trial so as to not “fragment” the criminal proceedings. He also decided that in the case of constitutional challenges it’s better to wait until after the trial to adjudicate such issues because by then a “factual foundation” would be in place.
Arthur and the Three Hookers
As well, prior to Justice Butler’s decision of July 8th, during a June 10th, 2015 appearance, he ruled that in order for the Constitutional Charter challenge to proceed it would first be necessary for the Defence to provide sound reasons which would satisfy the Justice the “Bedford Test” had been met in order for the proceedings to move to the stage where the actual challenge to the legislation would take place.
In a nutshell the Bedford “Test” or “Threshold”, as it’s often called, is a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Canada (Attorney General) v Bedford handed down on December 20, 2013, wherein the Supreme Court ruled that some of Canada’s prostitution laws were unconstitutional. Bedford was the surname of one of the three prostitutes who challenged the legislation.
One of the principal issues that the S.C. of Canada deliberated in that case was whether a trial judge could consider Charter arguments not raised in a previous case about the same law. Legal tradition has always held that a lower court (in my case the BC S.C.) is ‘bound’ by decisions made by the SC of Canada. It’s this particular principle and precedent (in Latin called stare decisis) which Crown has been arguing over-rides my arguments as presented in my Memorandum of Argument Regarding the Threshold Issue where I state that the decision in Keegstra is no longer binding upon my case due to similarities with the Bedford case where the Supreme Court of Canada found that lower courts may revisit binding authorities from higher courts in cases where new legal issues are raised, or where a change in the evidence or circumstances fundamentally shifts the parameters of the debate.
As a result of Justice Butler’s ruling my challenge was therefore postponed until the trial was completed. The trial ran from October 26, 2015 to November 12, 2015 (a period of 14 days) and when it concluded I was found guilty on Count 1 of the charge of “willfully promoting hatred against an identifiable group, contrary to s. 319(2) of the Criminal Code”. At the same time the jury also acquitted me on Count 2 which was the same identical charge.***
Fixing a date with the Queen of England no easy task
After the trial ended I appeared again in Quesnel SC on December 7th, 2015 to “fix a date” for the Charter hearing to take place. During this appearance Rodney G. Garson, a special Crown Prosecutor out of the Prosecution Support Unit within the Crown Law Division of the Ministry of Justice filed a requisition with the court to appear on behalf of the Crown to argue the Charter matter.
It was also then that a new date of January 25th, 2016 was set to fix another date to argue the question of who it was, Crown or Defence, that bears the onus of having to prove that Sec. 2(b) of the Charter is infringed upon by s. 319(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada and is therefore open to challenge, regardless of the former landmark Keegstra decision.
The January 25th, 2016 appearance came and went. During court my legal counsel Barclay Johnson informed the Justice and Crown that the Defence would be calling Expert Witnesses to testify during the Charter hearing. In that instance Dr. Michael Persinger’s name was given to the court. Once again we didn’t get to “fixing a date” and the issue was put over to March 29th, 2016.
On March 29th, 2016 we met again to “fix a date” but, alas, it didn’t happen. My counsel, Barclay Johnson did notify the court at that time that we would also be calling Dr. Timothy Jay as an Expert Witness. He also brought up the issue of the double verdicts, i.e. one Guilty count and one Not Guilty count for the same identical charge. A new date was set for April 4th, 2016 to “fix a date” for the Charter hearing.
Like all the others dates April 4th, 2016 came and went and still no date was fixed. A new date of May 2nd, 2016 was set.
On May 2nd, 2016 I again attended court. Murphy’s Law still being in effect this time there were computer problems in the court room and so Quesnel Crown counsel Jennifer Johnston appeared on behalf of Crown Prosecutor Rodney Garson and a new date of June 6th, 2016 was set to “fix a date” for the Charter hearing.
On June 6th, 2016 the “fix a date” phenomenon was getting so bad that my own counsel’s computer went on the blink and we had to set another date! This time it was for July 11th, 2016.
When July 11th, 2016 rolled around and a miracle occurred. We finally were able to “fix a date” for the commencement of the Charter hearing. The week of October 3rd, 2016 to October 7th, 2016 was SET! During this time Crown chose the date of October 31st, 2016 for “sentencing” in the event that I lost my Charter argument.
The Hearing (Part 1)
One day prior to the commencement of the hearing on October 3rd I was informed by my legal counsel that the scheduled week would not see the completion of the Charter argument. Crown Prosecutor Rodney Garson informed the court that he would require additional time in order to cross-examine the two Expert Witnesses that Defence was planning to call and he didn’t feel there would be enough time to also argue the issue of the Bedford Threshold.
Along with Dr. Persinger and Dr. Jay there was a third witness present in court on October 3rd. Jeremy Maddock, who was my former lawyer Doug Christie’s legal assistant and is currently assisting my counsel Barclay Johnson, appeared in order to testify to the various websites online where the materials that were posted on RadicalPress.com could also be found. This was one of our principal arguments – that all of the online books that I have posted on my website are also readily available on numerous other websites around the world as well as being openly sold on major book-selling sites like Amazon.com and Amazon.ca. Jeremy Maddock presented to the court 22 screenshots of other websites that he had researched which clearly showed that the impugned books and articles were freely available elsewhere on the net.
In cross-examination Crown Prosecutor Garson attempted to dismiss the screen shots of the various websites that Mr. Maddock presented suggesting that they weren’t reliable and also that the numbers shown in the Google searches were also irrelevant. Defence lawyer Barclay Johnson responded by referring to the hundreds of pages of screen shots that Crown had introduced into evidence during the trial and suggesting that if they weren’t relevant then Crown should not have presented them to the jury. Justice Butler, having sat through the trial, was well aware of this fact and didn’t buy into Crown’s argument and accepted Maddock’s testimony as both relevant and admissible.
The Defence’s first Expert Witness was Dr. Timothy Jay. (It should be noted here, prior to discussing Dr. Jay’s testimony, that throughout the trial Crown consistently made reference to my satire Israel Must Perish! , an article created by me in order to show the glaring hypocrisy of Jewish lobbyists like B’nai Brith Canada – one of the two complainants who had filed the Sec. 319(2) charge against me and my website – who were accusing me of spreading “hate” when one of their own kind, Theodore N. Kaufman, had unquestionably written one of the most vile, hate-filled books titled Germany Must Perish! back in 1941 that basically called for the absolute genocide of the German nation and all of its people.)
Dr. Jay, a full professor with the Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts, is considered to be an expert in the field of cognitive and linguistic psychology and has extensive experience interpreting allegedly obscene speech in the context of U.S. radio and television regulation. He’s also written numerous books and articles dealing with the issue of controversial language and for purposes of the Charter hearing had written a paper in my defence called “Opinion Regarding Arthur Topham’s Israel Must Perish” the gist of which was:
“It is my opinion as a cognitive psychologist that a satirical reading of Israel Must Perish! by an average adult reader would not result in the satire being considered hate speech. There are several mitigating factors which must be taken into account regarding how people read and comprehend literature, for example, what frame of mind the reader brings to the literature, what the reader thinks the literature is “about” or “means”, what impact a satirical reading might have on a reader, and what a reader would ultimately remember about the literature. I also consider the context in which the reader encounters the literature.”
My legal counsel Barclay Johnson presented Dr. Jay’s curriculum vitae [a fancy Latin term for a resume. A.T.] to the court and Dr. Jay appeared via telephone to answer any questions that the Defence or Crown or Justice Butler might have.
From the onset Crown Prosecutor Rodney Garson was quick to respond to Defence’s introduction of Dr. Jay and began citing a number of case law examples regarding “expert opinion” in order to challenge Dr. Jay’s qualifications. He went on about how an expert witness should be “impartial”, “independent”, “unbiased”, “fair”, “objective” and “non-partisan”, all the while overlooking the fact that during the trial itself the Crown’s own “Expert Witness”, former Canadian Jewish Congress CEO Len Rudner, had outright proven to the court that he was anything but impartial and independent and unbiased and objective and, to top it all off, had unabashedly committed perjury during his testimony, a fact which SC Justice Butler was made aware of but chose to ignore. Garson of course wasn’t present during the trial but given these facts all his feigned and overtly aggressive protestations against Dr. Jay’s credentials and his ability to offer expert opinion appeared rather disingenuous, especially when he exclaimed to the court that he had a “realistic concern” about Dr. Jay’s qualifications.
The thrust of the Crown’s argument was that Dr. Jay’s opinions on my satire Israel Must Perish! was biased and would “undermine” the decision of the jury and “the administration of justice” and put SC Justice Butler in an “invidious” position. Going further, Crown Prosecutor Garson told the court that the jurors’ decision cannot be questioned or “further evidence” be added by an expert witness. It was clearly evident that the Crown didn’t want any expert opinion on my satire to be considered or even an acknowledgment that it was a satire and not a “book” as the Crown consistently referred to it as during the trial.
On Tuesday, October 8th at 2 p.m. SC Justice Butler gave his oral decision regarding Dr. Timothy Jay’s qualifications and ruled that Dr. Jay’s evidence impinged upon the question of my guilt or innocence and was therefore a “collateral attack” on the jury’s “guilty” verdict and wasn’t permissible.
In a recent article published in the Friends of Freedom newsletter (A private newsletter for the supporters of the Canadian Free Speech League, dealing in cases of the censorship and persecution of political, religious, and historical opinion.) titled “Topham Embarks on Long-Awaited Challenge of Hate Speech Law” by Jeremy Maddock he has the following to say about Justice Butler’s decision to disallow Dr. Jay’s evidence:
“Justice Butler’s decision leaves the defence in a very difficult position. On one hand, the Supreme Court of Canada’s Whatcott decision provides that hate speech laws must be narrowly construed, and are only constitutional to the extent that they ‘prohibit expression that is likely to cause … discrimination and the other societal harms of hate speech.’
At trial, defence counsel was told in no uncertain terms that he was not permitted to call evidence on the constitutional question, which is an issue for the judge alone to decide, and cannot be put to the jury. By limiting the trial evidence in this way, then subsequently ruling that evidence about the effects of the impugned material is inadmissible on the constitutional application, the Court has made it exceedingly difficult for the defence to meet the test in Whatcott.”
A Bloody Disgrace
What ought to be of immediate concern to readers and especially supporters of this Charter hearing is the fact that I had worked hard to raise funds via my GoGetFunding site to hire Dr. Jay to write his report. It was an endeavour which cost the Defence $2,000.00 in US funds the money ultimately coming from numerous supporters around the world who donated their hard-earned cash to make it happen. Justice Butler’s decision to not allow Dr. Jay to testify meant all that money had been wasted yet in the case of Crown’s “Expert Witness” Len Rudner during trial, hardly a second thought was given to granting him the same official status. Then, on top of that, I recently received, via my legal counsel, another invoice from Dr. Jay requesting an additional $1,700.00 US funds for his time spent in court on the 3rd and 4th of October, an amount which still must be raised in order to fulfill Defence’s commitments. In total that amounts to $3,700.00 US which translates into $5,112.29 Canadian dollars all raised in vain. The matter is blithely brushed aside as being just a part of the process of doing the legal dance but from my perspective it’s nothing short of being a bloody disgrace and an insult to all who have given their financial support to this ongoing “hate speech” trial.
Dr. Persinger takes the stand Day 3 of the hearing began on Wednesday, October 5th with Defence counsel Barclay Johnson introducing our second Expert Witness Dr. Michael Persinger who also was able to appear via telephone.
Dr. Michael A. Persinger is a Full Professor in the Departments of Psychology and Biology Behavioural Neuroscience, Biomolecular Sciences and Human Studies Programs at Laurentian University in Sudbury, Ontario and his curriculum vitae is, like Dr. Jay’s, also long and distinguished.
Dr. Persinger had written a paper titled, The Anachronism of Policies and Laws for Hate Speech in Modern Canada: The Current Negative Cultural Impact of Legal Punishment upon Extreme Verbal Behaviour, the focus of which was a review of an earlier related document published back in 1966 titled Report to the Minister of Justice of theSpecial Committee on Hate Propaganda in Canada [Also referred to as the Cohen Committee Report. A.T.]. It was this paper which the Defence introduced as part of the reasons for having Dr. Persinger testify.
The report had been commissioned by The Honourable Lucien Cardin, Minister of Justice and Attorney-General of Canada in 1965 during the time when the Cohen Committee was laying the groundwork for the implementation of Canada’s current Hate Propaganda legislation. (Background information on that period is contained in an article I published on RadicalPress.com in March of 2014 titled, Bad Moon Rising: How the Jewish Lobbies Created Canada’s “Hate Propaganda” Laws).
As Dr. Persinger states in his paper, “Although the document (the Cohen Committee Report) was primarily a legal text, it contained a review of social psychological analysis of hate propaganda by Dr. Harry Kaufmann, an Associate Professor of Psychology at the University of Toronto. The mass of this literature was not empirical but based upon theories that are now almost fifty or more years old. There were almost no experimental data, not surprisingly because social psychology was in its infancy and neurocognitive psychology with the powerful tools of brain imaging, did not exist.”
Further, Dr. Persinger also stated that, “The policies upon which contemporary laws for hate propaganda and hate speech have been based in Canada appear to be primarily derived from” Dr. Harry Kaufmann’s Report to the Minister of Justice of theSpecial Committee on Hate Propaganda in Canada. He then goes on to say that, “Today’s environment is dominated by the Internet, the multiple variants of cell phone media, and the requirement for the average person to be more evaluative with respect to what is read and what is said within chat rooms, bulletin boards, and other electronic forms of information exchange. The world of Google and of search engines has shaped a generation with premature sagacity for challenge and resistance to gullibility that did not exist in the population of the 1950s and 1960s. Those individuals would have constituted the focus of concern at the time the document was published.”
One additional statement in Dr. Persinger’s paper claimed that “The assertion by the Cohen Committee that ‘individuals subjected to racial or religious hatred may suffer substantial psychological stress, the damaging consequences including a loss of self-esteem, feelings of anger, and outrage’ is confounded by archaic concepts of psychological processes.” Basically put Persinger’s position was that the psychological methods used back in the mid-1960’s to determine whether or not “hate propaganda” was dangerous and in need of criminal protection are now completely out of date and irrelevant.
Having stated his position Crown then responded by going on the same attack used in cross-examining Dr. Jay. Prosecutor Rodney Garson did all he could to down play and dismiss Dr. Persinger’s expertise, focussing primarily on the fact that Dr. Persinger had not, in his estimation, read or written scholarly articles on “hate speech”. Garson then quoted a number of reviews written in legal journals that focussed on the subject of “hate speech”. As he referenced them it became quite apparent to myself that all of the authors of the articles were Jewish and their arguments were specifically designed to buttress the whole concept of “hate speech” in order to lend a fabricated sense of authenticity to it.
Earlier in his presentation Dr. Persinger had already stated that he doesn’t use the term “hate speech” in his work for the simple reason that it’s too vague, unscientific and open to multiply shades of interpretation. He didn’t go so far as to state that the term itself is actually a cognitive construct coined by the Jews for their own propaganda purposes but it was evident that the whole notion of “Hate Propaganda” is one that was created by Jewish lobbyists in order to justify their implementation of “Hate Propaganda” laws into Canada’s Criminal Code. Dr. Persinger also made a point of stating at the start of his testimony that he doesn’t read legal documents as they are generally out of his sphere of expertise yet Crown kept on doggedly asking Dr. Persinger if he’d read this book or that book or any of the plethora of materials on “hate speech” (the vast majority written by Jews) and eventually the good Dr. responded to Garson’s incessant questioning by stating, “No, I’m not familiar with that book. I usually read detective books.”
By Thursday, October 6th the arguments still continued back and forth as to whether or not Dr. Persinger was qualified to give expert testimony related to the issues surrounding the Charter challenge. Prior to the morning recess S.C. Justice Butler told the court that after the break he would give his oral ruling on the matter. He returned at 11:59 a.m. and ruled that Dr. Persinger was qualified to testify.
Court did not resume until 2:35 that afternoon. Dr. Persinger’s health was such that he could only speak for certain lengths of time and then it was necessary for him to take a break. By 3:30 p.m. during Crown’s cross-examination Dr. Persinger’s energy was waining and Justice Butler decided that it would be better stop and set another date when Crown might be able to complete their portion of the cross-examination. A new date of October 19th, 2016 was set with the proceedings to take place in the Vancouver Supreme Court and following that the week of November 7th, 8th and 9th, 2016 was set for the completion of arguments on the Bedford Threshold.
The Hearing (Part 2)
The Vancouver SC portion of Crown’s final cross-examination of Dr. Persinger was over within a couple of hours in the afternoon. Due to the fact that I was already down on the coast on other personal matters I was able to attend in person.
The Hearing (Part 3)
In attendance for the final two days of arguments were SC Justice Bruce Butler, my lawyer Barclay Johnson, Crown Prosecutor Rodney G. Garson and Barclay’s legal assistant Jeremy Maddock. Due to a critical issue with Legal Aid over funding my counsel, Barclay Johnson, was unable to fly up to Quesnel and so the hearing was rescheduled to resume in Victoria, BC SC where Justice Butler was already scheduled to appear for those three days. The sudden change of venue meant I couldn’t attend in person but was able to listen in from my home in Cottonwood, BC via a telephone link.
Final arguments were exchanged and when the hearing concluded SC Justice Bruce Butler announced to both Defence and Crown and myself that he would not be handing down his decision on the Charter argument until March 11th, 2017. When that date arrives either a new sentencing date will be set if we lose the argument or Justice Butler will make a positive pronouncement on the defence’s argument that Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code constitutes an infringement of Section 2(b) of Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The R v Roy Arthur Topham “hate speech” case essentially began February 14th, 2007 when I first was attacked by the foreign lobby organization B’nai Brith Canada and accused of posting anti-Semitic, hate articles on my website. This coming February 14th, 2017 will mark the 10 year anniversary of this assault upon my constitutional right to freedom of expression. Given that my next court appearance is not until March 11th, 2017 it’s basically a done deal that the trials and tribulations surrounding this decade long travesty of justice will have surpassed the 10 year mark.
When SC Justice Butler hands down his decision on March 11th, 2017 we will know what my options are for the future. Should Justice Butler see fit to find the circumstances surrounding this case do in fact warrant a constitutional challenge to Sec. 319(2) of the Criminal Code then the immediate result will be a stay of the charge against me but that, in all probability, will only continue until the BC Crown in all likelihood appeals the decision of Justice Butler and the whole proceeding then shifts from the BC Supreme Court level to the federal Supreme Court for further adjudication.
On the other hand, should Justice Butler find my argument doesn’t pass the Bedford Threshold test then I will be faced with Sentencing on the guilty verdict in Count 1 soon after his decision. At that time I will have to decide whether or not to appeal the verdict in Count 1 and begin all over again with a new trial or else accept the verdict and whatever legal repercussions it entails.
Barclay Johnson, my legal counsel throughout the trial and the Charter hearing, has informed me that should the case go to the Supreme Court of Canada on appeal that it would entail a very costly and lengthy process of litigation running into hundreds of thousands of dollars and possibly a number of year of more court appearances which would occur not here in my home town of Quesnel but require my travelling to Ottawa, Ontario. Given the fact that I don’t fly this would be an additionally onerous undertaking that I’m not excited about. Therefore, speaking frankly, at this point in time I don’t find the prospect of years of more litigation a very attractive option for either myself or my wife who is dealing with serious medical issues that require urgent attention. This coming February I will turn 70 years old. That is also another factor which will affect whether or not I decide to enter into a further protracted legal battle which I can hardly afford to undertake considering the reasons given above. If wishes were horses then beggars would ride and I might be able to hand the reins over to a younger free speech warrior who could take up the torch and carry on to Ottawa with it but, unfortunately, wishes are not our four-footed friends.
The only thing that appears relatively certain at this point in time is that I and my wife will have close to four months off and a chance to rest up and consider our options for the future.
In final closing I would like to quote once again from Jeremy Maddock’s article in the Friends of Freedom newsletter with respect to funding. He writes, “As this complex process unfolds, Mr. Topham depends on donations to fund various expenses, including expert witnesses, transcripts, and ongoing legal research support. This is the first time since Keegstra (in 1990) that the Courts have entertained a constitutional challenge of the Criminal Code hate speech provision, and it could be the best opportunity in a generation to support internet free speech.”
There are still bills to pay and costs involved so if there is any chance supporters can afford to contribute toward these expenses I would be sincerely appreciative of any assistance. Please go the following website to making a donation or else send a donation to the mailing address shown below:
The Radical Press
Canada’s Radical News Network
“Digging to the root of the issues since 1998”
West cracks down on universities for open debates on Holocaust: Interview with Prof. Anthony Hall By Khamenei News Service, Iran
West cracks down on universities for open debates on Holocaust: Interview with Prof. Anthony Hall
Khamenei News Service, Iran
If academic freedom is not to be respected in institutions of supposedly higher learning then there can be no basis for freedom of speech in environments not subject to the protections of tenure. The first to suffer the crackdown in universities will be our students.
Dr. Anthony J.Hall is a Professor of Globalization Studies at the University of Lethbridge in Alberta Canada. Professor Hall is the editor-in-chief of the American Herald Tribune. He is author of several books, including a two-volume publishing project at McGill-Queen’s University Press entitled “The Bowl with One Spoon”; American Empire and the Fourth World: The Bowl with One Spoon, Part I (McGill-Queen’s Native and Northern) Earth into Property: Colonization, Decolonization, and Capitalism: The Bowl with One Spoon, Part II (Mcgill-Queen’s Native and Northern Series). The Part II edition was recently selected by The UK Independent as one of the best books of 2010. The Journal of the American Library Association called Earth into Property, “A scholarly tour de force.” The books aim to set the 9/11 catastrophe and post 9/11 Wars in the context of global history, since 1492. Dr. Hall has been suspended and harshly pulled from his classroom, in mid-term without any process of arbitration: namely, for having expressed his viewpoints on Israeli crimes, calling for an open debate on the Holocaust and 9/11, despite being promoted to a Full Professor rank through a process of peer review. In an exclusive interview with Khamenei.ir Professor Hall elaborates on how academic freedom is perceived and practiced in the West:
Ayatollah Khamenei has stated that “genuine freedom of thought will help the country to progress. In the absence of a free intellectual atmosphere, there can be no opportunity for growth.” How do you– as a Professor– perceive it?
I reflected very self-consciously on the prospects of contributing to the progress of my country Canada when I opted in the mid to late 1970s to go to graduate school at the University of Toronto. With the great Canadian historian, J.M.S. Careless, as my Ph.D. Supervisor I made a commitment to study the history of colonial relations with the First Nations of Canada. My course of study took me in 1982 to my first appointment in the Native Studies Department at the University of Sudbury. The University of Sudbury was in those years a Jesuit-run entity. It formed the institutional seed from which the secular Laurentian University would emerge in the decades prior to my appointment there.
For the next two decades I was able to work from my academic bases in Sudbury and then in Lethbridge Alberta beginning in 1990. At the invitation of the Leroy Little Bear, the Chair of the Department of Native American Studies I thus moved to the resource-rich province of Alberta. Once again I was motivated to make the transition in my professional work with the hope my I could contribute constructively to the progress of our country from an academic base in Western Canada.
In my years as a young professor I took an active part in four First Nations/First Ministers conferences that took place in Ottawa between 1983 and 1987. The purpose of these conferences was to negotiate a constitutional amendment to give greater definition to the phrase, “the existing Aboriginal and treaty rights of the Aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed.” (Section 35, Constitution Act, 1982).
Section 35 was part of the text of the instrument facilitating the movement of authority over Canada’s constitutional structure from the British imperial Mother Country to the domestic institutions of Canadian federalism.
The culmination of my contributions to the formulation of a made-in-Canada version of the Canadian constitution involved my opposition between 1987 and 1990 to what became known as the Meech Lake accord. If this political deal between Canada’s First Ministers had become constitutional law, the First Nations of Canada would have been excluded from a very powerful legal definition of Canada’s “fundamental characteristic.”
In academic essays, in the mainstream media and in presentations to various legislative committees, I contributed to public awareness of the negative implications of the Meech Lake accord for fair-minded Canadians supportive of existing Aboriginal and treaty rights. More specifically I contributed to the strength of the platform from which an Oji-Cree parliamentarian by the name of Elijah Harper used his veto power in the Manitoba Legislature to block the ratification of the Meech Lake accord. Because of Elijah Harper’s actions the Meech Lake accord did not become part of Canada’s “supreme law.”
I was able to contribute to discourse crucial to the progress of Canada until about the year 2000. Between 2000 and 2002 I had to adjust my work away from the activities of the Department of Native American Studies towards a field of my own making, Globalization Studies. I prepared two academic volumes to lay the academic foundation and methodological framework for my transition to a new academic role. The core focus of my emphasis on “Globalization Studies” was Indigenous peoples in encounter with colonialism globally from 1492 until the present.
It is in this context and with the encouragement of my very accomplished student, Joshua Blakeney, that I began to shift focus towards the treatment of Palestinian and other Arab peoples in the region of Greater Israel, Eretz Israel. It was Joshua who also led me to my first interactions with Iranian journalists resulting in my participation in the New Horizon conference of the autumn of 2014. As I have described in writing elsewhere this episode proved to make a major positive impact on me.
Due to the intervention of my colleague, the Mohawk activist Splitting The Sky, I also began to see the events of 9/11 as a major factor in the shaping of the global geopolitics in the twenty-first century.
My quest for new academic turf at the University of Lethbridge has sometimes been bumpy and contested. Certainly many major obstacles were put in the way of my promotion to full professor. Eventually my academic peers were allowed to make their input into the promotion process apart from the artificial blockages thrown up by my University administration. In 2008 after what I took to be my obtaining a position of intellectual and professional security as a senior faculty member, I resolved that henceforth I would pursue difficult lines of research and publication. I made this decision with an understanding that less secure younger colleagues might eschew such a course of action.
I have made no secret of the fact that I see the recent surrender of the high ground of academic freedom by the members of the administration of the University of Lethbridge as an indicator that Canada is on a downwards spiral. It seems to me there is a move a foot to sabotage the intellectual freedom of our universities. If academic freedom is not to be respected in institutions of supposedly higher learning, then there can be no basis for freedom of speech in environments not subject to the protections of tenure.
The first to suffer the crackdown in universities will be our students. They will have to deal with the fact that the treatment visited on me indicates it has become dangerous to ask pointed questions which might produce answers embarrassing to power. Our country, Canada, cannot progress to higher levels of discourse and achievement under these repressive conditions.
Ayatollah Khamenei believes “exchanging viewpoints and opinions are in the nature of academic work”; How is this principle practiced at Lethbridge University?
I agree that exchanging viewpoints and opinions is a central aspect of academic work within universities and between universities. I found that there was a good deal of openness to the exchange of information and ideas with colleagues, media and public officials in the years between 1982 and 2001 when the core of my academic work revolved around the history of Canada-First Nations relations.
Unfortunately I would have to say that the obstacles to the exchange of information and ideas began to mount significantly after 2008 when I began to question the official narrative of what happened on 9/11. Who really did what to whom during the initiating events of what soon became known as the Global War on Terror? As I began to become skeptical of the official narrative I noticed more and more inclination on the part of colleagues to distance themselves from the subjects that captured my professional interest. To put it bluntly, I suppose it became clear to me that, for a number of reasons, it was not a good career move for younger colleagues to show interest in the subject of 9/11 specifically and false flag terrorism more generally.
As I began to look more deeply into the existing research on 9/11 I was simultaneously drawn to the subject of war crimes and international law. My collaboration with Splitting The Sky became more intense when we went to work to organize in response to the decision of the former US President, George W. Bush, to give a talk in Calgary in 2009 as his first public engagement as (theoretically) a regular civilian citizen. Our collective action in Calgary in the spring of 2009 led to a trial that we dubbed Splitting The Sky versus George W. Bush. Although I had not yet associated the lies and crimes of 9/11 with Israel First protagonists, I ran into my first Zionist pushback for my 9/11 studies when I presented my essay, “Should George W. Bush Be Arrested in Calgary, Alberta, To Be Tried For International Crimes?” I originally presented the paper at an invited talk at the University of Winnipeg.
My essay eventually ended up as an exhibit in the litigation that we referred to as Splitting The Sky versus George W. Bush. Our stance was that the former US President should have been arrested in Canada for being a credibly-accused war criminal. We were far from alone in bringing forward evidence that Bush had violated many international covenants and conventions against, for instance, prohibited torture. Not only had he arguably violated international law but it seemed the former US President had violated Canada’s own Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act. The legislation had passed through Parliament with the view that Canada should not become a haven for war criminals.
In pursuing this line of analysis I faced my first allegations that somehow my academic inquiry was anti-Semitic.
As I worked on this subject, one that I integrated into my pedagogy, it became clear to me that we have never seen anything but victor’s justice when it comes to the enforcement of international law against those that commit war crimes, crimes against humanity, crimes against the peace and crimes against democracy. It seems that only those on the losing side of military conflicts are ever brought to justice. Those on the “winning” side, the stronger side, are invariably held to be above the law.
This line of scholarly investigation did result in various channels of academic exchange opening up for me with colleagues in my own university and other universities. The most fruitful collaboration to develop, however, was that with Dr. Kevin Barrett who had lost his academic position at the University of Wisconsin for incorporating 9/11-related subjects into his research and pedagogy.
For sure I should not be made to feel so alone in the academy when it comes to the study of 9/11, the most transformative event of the twenty-first century. In my view the academic institutions in North America and Europe have failed abysmally in the study of false flag terrorism starting with the events of 9/11. I am particularly appalled by how this failure on the part of our institutions of higher learning has contributed to the rise of Islamophobia as the necessary psychological condition giving license to those promoting the invasions of Muslim-majority countries.
In a meeting with President Rouhani and his Cabinet, the Leader of the Islamic Revolution said: “When it comes to caricatures insulting the sanctities of Islam, the West suddenly becomes an advocates of freedom and the freedom of expression. However, when it comes to the Holocaust, there is no freedom of expression!” Why do you think we witness such double standards?
A gross display of double standards plagues the ethnocentric way “freedom” is being defined in the so-called “West.” The psychological operations attending the “We Are Charlie Hebdo” ceremonies on Paris in early 2015 epitomized the hypocrisy. The whole essence of this strange event in the city of Lights seemed to signal that “freedom of speech and expression” in the West is virtually limitless when it comes to demeaning through cartoons of Prophet Mohammed as well as other sacred symbols of Islamic religion. The other side of the same coin are the many prohibitions imposed on, for instance, the French comedian M’bala M’bala Dieudonné. Dieudonné was barred from entering Canada for his efforts to make humor of the paranoid state of affairs attending any public references to Jews, Jewish institutions or the activities of Israel these days.
One of my discoveries through this period of crisis is the fact that the thought police agents in the B’nai Brith equate my call for open debate on “the holocaust,” and indeed open debate on all subjects, as the equivalent of so-called “holocaust denial.” How many of my colleagues at the University of Lethbridge and in other universities have bent before the harsh intimidation? How many have made themselves proponents of shutting down open debate and allowing censorship from outside the academy to regulate our research, teaching and publication?
There is a controversial quote from Ayatollah Khamenei in which he says’ “May God curse all those who put an end to political thoughts, work and endeavor in universities”. What’s your take on that? How essential do you think such a perspective is for the academia?
I agree wholeheartedly with the Supreme Leader’s observation. One of the great gifts of the Creator to humans is the gift of reason and rationality. Our application of reason and rationality to our understanding of society will inevitably contribute to political thought, work and endeavor.
This type of applied reason should be especially vital in the work of universities where the highest level of political conception should be able to find expression, elaboration, and receptiveness. Indeed we need to make ourselves expert in Universities at making safe places for the development of political discourse. God curse us in the universities if we cannot be the home for vibrant political discourse.
Open Letter on Anthony Hall, the B’nai Brith and the Dishonesty of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation By Marsh Collins
Open Letter on Anthony Hall, the B’nai Brith and the Dishonesty of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, 21 Oct., 2016
By Marsh Collins
You are being attacked by hidden forces, people associated with money and power. The attacks are coming from those with a very wide reach, able to literally sway public opinion both in Canada and the World. The exercise of power and control over the public mind is perfectly illustrated by the question ….. how can you knock down a 47 story building, in broad daylight, in the middle of a major U.S. city, and 15 years later, the majority of the pubic does not even know it fell down or what caused it. That is Orwellian control over the public mind and CBC is part of it.
CBC is just one more platform being used to attack you and turn the public mind against you. The one platform which Canadians falsely believe gives them an equal voice to respond, which as a Canadian Citizen you have supported all your life, is just one more avenue of attack.
Our public funded independent National Broadcaster, prohibited by law from broadcasting or disseminating false or misleading information is presenting a one sided attack designed to destroy the reputation and career of an honest Canadian. CBC will not provide you a platform to defend yourself in front of the Canadian public.
CBC does not provide a voice for the Canadian electorate. It does not speak on behalf of, or represent honestly the views of the Canadian electorate as required by law. CBC has always had provisions to control content based on national security, or sensitive information. In recent years this control has vastly increased where in my view it now encompasses almost everything of importance. CBC is not a free press, it does not speak on behalf of Canadians, but is instead a deep state tool, controlled by hidden hands which are unelected, undemocratic, and unaccountable. Above the office of the Prime Minister of Canada, at the level of deep state agencies/(& corporate arms), this hidden hand acts behind a protective veil of national security, surveillance, sensitive information, censure, and propaganda. In many ways CBC operates similar to, if not in concert with , secret societies like B’nai Brith. Unlimited power and control over us, with zero accountability.
If CBC offers further so called interviews to hear your side, I would ask for some ground rules in writing so that you have some allotted time guaranteed, some chance to speak, defend yourself, and put your case before the Canadian public while not being aggressively attacked and prevented from even having a couple of minutes to appeal to the public.
I believe your stand on 911, has drawn a lot of this onto you. People were listening to you and that will not be tolerated. The facts behind the crime of 911 implicate very powerful forces, and in particular people associated with the wrong country. I have read and studied 911 investigations from many independent investigators, and different sides, and the evidence points to an inside job involving, Mossad, CIA, DOD, and many high level Israeli dual citizen PNAC NeoCons . Despite facts which show clear probable cause, the guilty people, or forces implicated are at the highest levels and are above any law and any court in the world. The majority public is not aware and you will not be allowed to tell them.
This world seems beyond salvation. It is hard to hide who you are when you live stream in front of the world hour after hour. I see an honest man who fights for the truth as he sees it, and this has put you at great risk. Look after yourself and your family.
Signed …Marsh Collins an average Canadian who saw you on u-tube.
October 17, 2016
University of Lethbridge Suspension of Tenured Professor Lacks Due Diligence
Dr. M. R. Islam
No one should be under the illusion that University of Lethbridge president Dr. Mike Mahon is giving the case of suspended professor Dr. Anthony Hall proper legal procedure and due diligence.
In case anyone wonders what “due diligence” actually means, it’s about impartially following the rules set out in the university’s Board-Faculty Association Collective Agreement, not just calling a meeting or two to air opinions.
A tenured professor cannot be suspended as a precautionary measure, “just in case” something went wrong. One doesn’t need a lawyer to understand this. One does need conscience, ethical principles and the ability to actually read and interpret the articles of a collective agreement.
Accusations by special-interest groups are levelled against academics all the time, not only concerning their research – which may upset prevailing biases and mindsets – but also to cast aspersions on their character. In a democratic society such accusations don’t form a legitimate basis for even starting an investigation.
In the case of a professor supposedly teaching falsehoods in class, the basis for factually determining truth or lies must be scrutinized at ground level. University presidents have no business interfering with the process, and for good reason.
How on earth can the president of an academic institution know if a professor’s course material is false? Unless the president happens to be a specialist in the same discipline as the professor being criticized (and such is not the case with the University of Lethbridge situation), that individual is at a distant arm’s length of the lecture-hall.
It is the community of professors themselves, not top-down administrators, who are vocationally mandated to seek and define truth. That’s the whole point of having a tenure process. Allowing administrators such as Dr. Mike Mahon to take unilateral punitive action due to subjectively-driven external complaints is akin to allowing a Parliament Hill custodian dictate House of Commons protocol.
A little history is in order when considering the value and necessity of due process.
When Phillippe Rushton, a former University of Western Ontario professor whose theories on race and genetics raised heated controversy in 1989, was discovered to have benefited in his research from the financial support of white supremacist groups, the court of public opinion wanted him fired on the spot. That was not allowed to happen.
Although Rushton (who died in 2012) had few influential defenders, “due process” meant that he was subjected to the same annual academic evaluation as anyone else on faculty, where the protocol would be to suspend a professor after a series of failing scores on criteria covering a wide range of academic and pedagogical criteria.
Despite the hue and cry around Rushton’s case, people were decent back then; they understood he was being targeted for a reason other than “academic failure.” Rushton left active teaching of his own volition and continued on in his research for nearly a quarter-century without any further controversy. His published opinions and findings on racial and gender issues were no more palatable to most of us than before, but we’d entered the “new normal” of post-9/11 society by then and the paradigm had changed.
So, what happened after 9/11? The old days had a code of conduct, embodied in formal terms such as “due process.” Judge R.D. Fratkin wrote regarding the criminal case of once high-profile activist and MP Svend Robinson, “As I say, the public, at least in Canada, I think, has always lived by the sort of guiding principle [that] you don’t kick somebody when they’re down.” In our post-9/11 world of continual electronic downloading and instant media reaction, the new way of dealing with people and things we dislike, or don’t understand, is reactive paranoia.
“Unfortunately, Zionist groups, traditionally defensive and hyper-reactive, are thriving on a climate where everything and everyone is fair game to be judged via social media before informed and impartial “due process” can ever take place. The new mantra: Kick a person only when s/he is down, and just keep on kicking … truth is irrelevant.”
Unfortunately, Zionist groups, traditionally defensive and hyper-reactive, are thriving on a climate where everything and everyone is fair game to be judged via social media before informed and impartial “due process” can ever take place. The new mantra: Kick a person only when s/he is down, and just keep on kicking … truth is irrelevant.
Another historical example of uninformed public censure over-riding and even hijacking due process is the case of once high-profile activist MP Svend Robinson – perhaps the first victim of compromised due process in Canadian political history. He is the man that proposed that September 11 be designated as “Chile Day”, to mark the overthrow of Chilean president Salvador Allende’s democratically elected government on September 11, 1973.
Among a number of gaffes committed during his turbulent career, Robinson made the tactical error in 2002 of attempting to bypass Israeli security to visit Nobel Peace Prize winner Yasser Arafat. Zionist groups – including the one now trying to destroy the career of Dr. Anthony Hall – had a field day raising vitriolic protest against the NDP MP when the international controversy broke in the media.
How did then NDP federal leader Alexa McDonough react to what Zionists called the “travesty” of Robinson’s action? She stripped him of his prestigious Foreign Relations portfolio, and shortly thereafter resigned the party leadership. Alexa McDonough had been known in Halifax to be sympathetic to the Palestinian cause until that time. Two for two in favour of the Zionist fear-mongers … and no due process.
Which brings us full circle back to 2016 and the Zionist hijacking of due process at the University of Lethbridge.
I have always believed that a university president with an iota of self-respect would resist tooth and nail such a blatant assault on academic freedom and professional ethics as is occurring right now at his institution. Unfortunately, Canadian law cannot compel Dr. Mahon to disclose the real reasons behind his actions. It is no small irony that Dr. Mahon cannot be brought to justice with the charge of misfeasance in public office, similar to the one brought against York University’s Lorna Marsden by Freeman-Maloy, because there is another due process, called Arbitration that was specially designed to protect tenured professors and was supposedly speedier than the lengthy court battle.
To make matters worse, notice the deafening silence of CAUT (Canadian Association of University Teachers) about the case of Dr. Anthony Hall. No wonder some university presidents went on record dismissing CAUT as “a bunch of losers.” Sadly, a group that could have raised a loud and legitimate collective voice in support of due process has lived up to its “loser” label and stayed in the shadows.
And one can only expect similar cowardice from the University of Lethbridge’s own Faculty Association. There will be initial cries of indignation, but soon enough they will decrease to furtive whispers. You see, they will have been “consulted,” making it then acceptable to watch one of their peers left by the roadside with no fair or impartial evaluation.
The experienced, well-orchestrated and politically influential Zionist group is making sure all the legal and ethical loopholes are closed and that the guillotine is firmly in place to chop off Dr. Hall’s career with no chance of appeal.
And that’s what is so manifestly wrong with this picture. As Einstein famously pointed out, “We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.” Others have aptly added that the result of doing so is insanity.
Dr. M.R. Islam is a retired Dalhousie University professor and former Killam Chair of petroleum engineering. The opinions expressed in the foregoing editorial are his own.
Editor’s Note: This short 9 minute news item on Press TV gives a very succinct and powerful portrayal of the machinations of the foreign lobby organization B’nai Brith ‘Canada’ and its outrageous actions designed to destroy freedom of speech in Canada and specifically within the area of academia where they’ve been instrumental in having the University of Lethbridge, Alberta suspend Professor Anthony Hall without pay based solely on the machinations of their own Israeli Zionist operatives and aided and abetted by the Zionist “mainsteam” media including the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC).
The Radical Press
Canada’s Radical News Network
“Digging to the root of the issues since 1998”
MEET RYAN BELLEROSE B’NAI BRITH CANADA’S NEW ZIONIST MÉTIS “LODGE (MASONIC) BUILDER” FOR WESTERN CANADA By Arthur Topham
MEET RYAN BELLEROSE B’NAI BRITH CANADA’S NEW ZIONIST MÉTIS “LODGE (MASONIC) BUILDER” FOR WESTERN CANADA
By Arthur Topham
On September 1st, 2016 the Canadian Jewish News published an article about a Metis by the name of Ryan Bellerose who the secretive Masonic lodge of B’nai Brith Canada have recently hired as B’nai Brith Canada’s new advocacy co-ordinator for Western Canada.
What’s so astounding is that a Zionist organization as powerful and well-funded (by the Rothschild Banking cartel) as B’nai Brith Canada was unable to find a suitable Zionist Jew anywhere in Western Canada willing to fill this (one would think) crucial role of ‘advocacy co-ordinator’ for their masonic propaganda organ.
This Ryan fellow, who I nicknamed Ryan “Bellicose” due to his belligerent, aggressive, bellicose manner, featured on Radical Press last year around this time in an article titled, THE ZIONIST METIS IN THE TIPI .
Ryan, poor fellow, was apparently bullied when a child and grew up with an inferiority complex not unlike that of the Zionist Jews who always portray themselves as being down-trodden and picked on and bullied by the rest of the world.
Ryan is the typical example of what’s known as a “Useful Idiot”, a person who has been sucked into the mind-control vortex of the Zionist propaganda machine. He believes every lie that he’s been told by the Zionist media and has a special hate-on for the people of Palestine who he feels are stealing the limelight from the Indigenous peoples of the world by always portraying themselves as being more “bullied” than Ryan was.
The first comment on Ryan’s Facebook page that I encountered back in 2015 was when he wrote, “Topham is a racist twat, hate speech is not free speech.” My first thought was Ryan appears to be getting his genders mixed up here but then upon reading more of his posts and comments it was clear that his level of intelligence and writing skills were definitely a factor in the way he presented his position.
This individual, now in the employ of B’nai Brith Canada, is on the warpath and with his trusty bow in hand has been given the assignment of attacking Professor Anthony Hall of the University of Lethbridge, Alberta.
There’s not too much more to say about Ryan Mervin Bellerose that I didn’t already cover in my article above so I’ll just include a few graphics of Bellerose which contain his verbatim comments that illustrate rather clearly where this person’s head and heart are truly at and leave it to readers to drawn their own conclusions as to whether or not one would side with Bellerose’s bellicose belligerence or the professional mannerisms of Professor Anthony Hall.
Tenure’s End: Foreign Israeli Lobby B’nai Brith Attacks Canada’s Longstanding Academic Tradition to Safeguard Freedom of Speech
Tenure’s End: Foreign Israeli lobby B’nai Brith Attacks Canada’s
Longstanding Academic Tradition to Safeguard Freedom of Speech
By Arthur Topham
The foreign, Jew’s-only, secret Masonic lobby organization B’nai Brith Canada and its ADL-ed component the League for ‘Human Rights’ of B’nai Brith are on a rampage through Cyberspace in their ongoing attempts to destroy Canadian’s constitutionally guaranteed Charter right to freedom of expression.
One of the most recent, egregious examples by this traitorous, Israel-sponsored, Fifth Columnist organization is their despicable attempt to destroy Canada’s longstanding tradition of academic Tenureship via their relentless, underhanded attacks upon tenured Professor Anthony Hall of the University of Lethbridge, Alberta.
Using every dirty trick in their bag of lies, this traitorous “benevolent society” of Zionist Jew, duel-citizens have been falsely maligning Professor Hall both in their Zionist-controlled mainstream media and via Canada’s legal system through their misuse of provincial “Human Rights” organizations.
The usual plethora of slander, lies, vilification, ugly epithets and guilt by association, coupled with copious amounts of arrogant innuendo, are their standard psycho-weapons of destruction and in the case of Professor Hall they’ve pulled out all the stops.
I have been covering Professor Hall’s plight for some time and observing how this Public Enemy #1 of Canadian sovereignty, B’nai Brith Canada, has been viciously libeling Hall in their Jewish publications both here in Canada and in the foreign state of Israel’s media outlets as well as in the mainstream media.
It’s well beyond time that Canadians WAKE UP and smell the kosher coffee that’s been brewing beneath their noses for decades and realize that this subversive agent of the foreign state of Israel is quickly destroying the underpinnings of Canadian culture through their blatant attempts to dismantle and subvert every level of the nation’s government, media, judiciary and, now, academia.
Watch the above video and listen carefully to the words of Professor Anthony Hall and TAKE HEED! If this apocalyptic beast hidden with the Trojan Horse called “B’nai Brith Canada” isn’t collared and put on a leash soon all hell will be breaking loose as our rights and freedoms dissolve and we shift into either a state of anarchy or totalitarian dictatorship.
Please share this article with your friends and associates and if you can, write to those persons listed below and tell them how you feel about this deplorable affront to Canada’s freedom.
Those concerned about the B’nai Brith’s assault on Professor Anthony Hall can contact Lethbridge University President Mike Mahon. Email: email@example.com and cc firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org
Write, fax, or phone: Mike Mahon President & Vice-Chancellor A762 University Hall, University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada T1K 3M4. Phone: (403) 329 -2201. Fax: (403) 329-2097.
There is also a Petition that’s been started where you can help support Professor Hall and our rights and freedoms. Here’s the link:
As the old saying goes, “JUST DO IT!” The time for hesitation is long past. Let’s put our country’s freedoms ahead of our own petty and personal agendas for a change and start standing up for CANADA instead of kowtowing to the interests of a foreign, racist nation!
In a shameful display of state hubris, Canada is using illegal concocted provisions of its Criminal Code to prosecute a citizen for innocuous postings on a personal blog (The Radical Press). The provisions allow a maximum 2-year prison sentence, where the state prosecutor (“Crown”) does not need to prove intent to harm or any actual harm to a single person. Intent and actual harm are not even relevant legal considerations in the proceeding. Both harm and intent are presumed.
The said Criminal Code provisions are straight out of the playbook of a totalitarian state.
The show trial was separated into two parts, despite the objections of the accused. In the first part the accused was found criminally guilty, for one blogpost, while not guilty for the other blogpost of the Crown’s charge. In the second part, which is scheduled to start tomorrow Monday October 3rd, the constitutionality of the law is being challenged on limited grounds. Any sentencing will be decided after the ruling on constitutionality.
The process of thus dividing the show trial into two parts is equivalent to first determining that the witch is guilty of blasphemy or worst, followed by a hearing to determine if burning at the stake in the town square is still within the bounds of community standards, rather than evaluating the legitimacy of the law at the same time (and before the same jury) that the nature of the “offense” is evaluated.
The process of thus dividing the show trial into two parts is equivalent to first determining that the witch is guilty of blasphemy or worst, followed by a hearing to determine if burning at the stake in the town square is still within the bounds of community standards, rather than evaluating the legitimacy of the law at the same time (and before the same jury) that the nature of the “offense” is evaluated.
Meanwhile, the “defendant” was gagged from identifying the original complainants (the usual crew) but allowed to continue blogging about the process until a conviction is finally secured, and has mounted a funding campaign for the expensive constitutional challenge.
These kinds of show-trial proceedings and the associated media assaults are attempts to create a false impression of a victimized Israel, to shield the apartheid state from international condemnation for its on-going violations of the Geneva Conventions, illegal annexation, constant violations of human rights, and mass-murder “mowing of the grass” in Gaza. Israel wants a free hand to continuously expand by the same criminal methods it has used for decades. Therefore, when successful, the domestic show trials (most prominent in Canada, France, and Germany) are geopolitical in character by virtue of Israel’s leading role in US interference in the Middle East, with Canada and France as lead accompanying sycophant states.
Canada’s Ontario Civil Liberties Association (OCLA) has defended Arthur Topham against the state’s attack on freedom of thought and expression with several interventions. OCLA applies the principle that those who’s views are most at odds with orthodoxy and who are most aggressively attacked using the state apparatus are those most in need of civil defense.
The OCLA’s 2014 on-line petition to the state authority gathered over 1,400 signatures. OCLA also, in 2015, intervened by letter against other “civil liberties” associations that adopted a statement that harmed Mr. Topham’s case.
This year, OCLA intervened prior to the constitutional part of the trial by sending a letter directly to the trial judge, with all the state actors in cc. OCLA’s letter, reproduced below, spells out the illegal character of the criminal law being used in this particular show trial and witch hunt:
January 13, 2016
The Honourable Mr. Justice Butler, Supreme Court of British Columbia
Re: Unconstitutionality of s. 319(2) of the Criminal Code (R. v. Topham, Court File No. 25166, Quesnel Registry)
The Ontario Civil Liberties Association (OCLA) wishes to make this intervention, in letter form, to assist the Court in its hearing of the defendant’s constitutional challenge of s. 319(2) of the Criminal Code (“Code”), to be heard in the Supreme Court of British Columbia.
The defendant submits that s. 319(2) of the Code infringes on the s. 2(b) guarantee of freedom of expression contained in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and is not saved by s. 1 of the Charter.
The Supreme Court of Canada has determined and reaffirmed that the Charter must provide at least as much protection for basic freedoms as is found in the international human rights documents adopted by Canada:
“And this Court reaffirmed in Divito v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness),  3 S.C.R. 157, at para. 23, “the Charter should be presumed to provide at least as great a level of protection as is found in the international human rights documents that Canada has ratified”.”[Emphasis added.]
Canada has ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (“Covenant”). Article 19, para. 2 of the Covenant protects freedom of expression:
“2. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice.”
Further, the U.N. Human Rights Committee, in its General Comment dated 12 September 2011, has specified that any restrictions to the protection of freedom of expression “must conform to the strict tests of necessity and proportionality”:
“35. When a State party invokes a legitimate ground for restriction of freedom of expression, it must demonstrate in specific and individualized fashion the precise nature of the threat, and the necessity and proportionality of the specific action taken, in particular by establishing a direct and immediate connection between the expression and the threat.” [Emphasis added.]
The impugned provision in the Code does not require the Crown to prove any actual harm, and no evidence of actual harm to any individual or group was presented in the trial of R. v. Topham. There is no “direct and immediate connection” between Mr. Topham’s expression on his blog and any threat that would permit restriction of his expression.
The OCLA submits that the current jurisprudence of the Covenant, including the 2011 General Comment No. 34, represents both Canada’s obligation and the current status of reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society, in relation to state-enforced limits on expression. The process and the jury-conviction to date in the instant case establish that s. 319(2) of the Code exceeds these limits, and is therefore not constitutional.
Furthermore, s. 319(2) of the Code allows a maximum punishment of “imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years”. The Code punishment of imprisonment exceeds the “strict tests of necessity and proportionality” prescribed by the Covenant.
In addition, in paragraph 47 of General Comment No. 34, it is specified that: “States parties should consider the decriminalization of defamation and, in any case, the application of the criminal law should only be countenanced in the most serious of cases and imprisonment is never an appropriate penalty.” [Emphasis added.] In the penal defamation envisaged in the Covenant, unlike in s. 319(2) in the Code, the state has an onus to prove actual harm.
And in relation to state concerns or prohibitions about so-called “Holocaust denial”, paragraph 49 of the said General Comment has:
“Laws that penalize the expression of opinions about historical facts are incompatible with the obligations that the Covenant imposes on States parties in relation to the respect for freedom of opinion and expression.”
Finally, the OCLA submits that the feature of s. 319(2) that gives the Attorney General direct say regarding proceeding to prosecution (the requirement for the Attorney General’s “consent”) is unconstitutional because it is contrary to the fundamental principle of the rule of law, wherein provisions in a statute cannot be subject to arbitrary application or be politically motivated or appear as such. The fundamental principle of the rule of law underlies the constitution.
For these reasons, the OCLA is of the opinion that s. 319(2) of Canada’s Criminal Code is unconstitutional and incompatible with the values of a free and democratic society.
If the Court requests it, the OCLA will be pleased to make itself available to provide any further assistance in relation to the instant submission.
Ontario Civil Liberties Association (OCLA)
 Defendant’s “Memorandum of Argument Regarding Charter Issues”, R. v. Topham, Court File No. 25166, Quesnel Registry.
 Saskatchewan Federation of Labour v. Saskatchewan [2015 SCC 4], at para. 64.
 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 19, at para. 2.
 Ibid., Article 19, at para. 3, and Article 20.
 General Comment No. 34, UN Human Rights Committee [CCPR/C/GC/34], at para. 22.
 Ibid., at para. 35.
 Criminal Code (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46), s. 319(6).
 For a recent example where unconstitutionality arising from the rule of law was the main issue before the court, see: Trial Lawyers Association of British Columbia v. British Columbia (Attorney General), 2014 SCC 59 (CanLII); and see Committee for the Commonwealth of Canada v. Canada,  1 SCR 139, 1991 CanLII 119 (SCC), p. 210 (i).
A ship without a captain
The world is like a gun in the hands of a child
There is nobody you can call for help. The authorities you were taught to trust are criminals. You abide them because secretly you want to be as rich as them, which makes you look the other way when they commit their crimes that kill millions.
Systems we have relied upon are breaking down. They told us lies to make us feel good that were meant to quell our outrage at the perpetual shrinking of our freedoms. Now they are toppling from the weight of their own corruption.
When there is no one left to defend our honor, then we will be worthless and defeated. The first step is acknowledging the damage our past unconsciousness has allowed to occur, followed by the second and final stage which is to undo it as best we can.
To not do that is to forfeit our potential as worthwhile human beings.
We begin by understanding that we are poisoning ourselves and everything around us by pursuing profitability without honor and consciousness, the hallmarks of a healthy society without which it is soon overtaken by ruin (as America is today), rusting from within due to a lack of reinvigorating purpose and authentic pride in worthwhile achievements.
We see this absence today in the cynical righteousness of superficial politicians luring peasants with glowing promises of wealth distribution dragging the whole country down from its ivory tower into a polluted husk of its former self. The notorious international bankers scramble everyone’s genes and turn them into uniform numbers, real lives to be cashed in at propitious moments determined by the men who own your money and control your lives.
America struts around the world flexing its military muscle, determining the political structure of countries it enslaves. All this epidemic over the past 20 years of sanctions, no fly zones, and murdering foreign leaders has produced shill governments in all of Israel’s neighbors (except Syria), and has cast a gigantic shadow over the world that signifies when American ships show up, people are going to die.
Ceaseless Smear Campaigns by B’nai Brith Lobby & Zionist Media Must End!
by Arthur Topham
Ruth, my Jewish mother-in-law, was always fond of saying “Enough already!” an expression most apt when it comes to the ongoing smear campaigns by the Zionist Jew media in Canada and bottom-feeding, serpentine, masonic Jewish lobby organizations like the former Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC) and the ongoing run of blustering bigots and liars who compose B’nai Brith Canada and their League for ‘Human Rights’ of B’nai Brith Canada. Then there’s the latest snake in Canada’s political, cultural and media grasslands, the Centre for Israel & Jewish Affairs (CIJA), formed as an umbrella organization to carry out the nefarious work of the former CJC which, not coincidently was piloted by Bernie Farber the present writer of the latest libelling, lying, hate-filled screed aimed at University of Lethbridge Professor Dr. Anthony Hall.
Farber has made a name for himself over the years by spreading his venomous, hate-filled lies throughout Canada’s Israeli-first media in an endless effort to keep their “6 Million Jews” holocaust LIE alive by attacking any writer who publishes the actual truth about the real history of the past century. He has absolutely no compunction when it comes to lying to the general public or a court of law and will do so without blinking an eye.
A recent and rather poignant personal example of Farber’s disingenuous actions came up during my “Hate” trial back in October/November of 2015 when the Crown, out of desperation to find someone who they could pawn off as an “Expert Witness” on the subject of “hate speech”, managed to gain Farber’s consent to appear on their behalf. When Farber was subsequently told that he would have to travel to Quesnel, B.C. and appear in person in Supreme Court (rather than appear via video) he refused to come but with a little wrangling and more deception he managed to get his former second in command at the Canadian Jewish Congress, Mr. Ed Rudner, to appear on his behalf.
As it turned out fast Eddy Rudner didn’t have the time to prepare his presentation to the jury so he conveniently borrowed Farber the fibber’s written submission and told the court, under oath, that he had composed the bulk of it (with a little help from his buddy Bernie). In other words Rudner committed perjury. Had it not been for the sharp eye of Mr. Gilad Atzmon who was working with my team for the defence during the proceedings this criminal act on the part of these two fork-tongued vipers may never have been exposed. But then lying to the gullible goyim is all part of the Zionist modus operandi and I’m certain that neither Farber or Rudner lost any sleep over the fact they had deceived presiding Justice Butler, the jury and the BC Supreme Court.
So these are the types of people who are spreading outright bold lies about real, honest, Canadian men and women of integrity, individuals like Professor Anthony Hall and Canadian-German citizens Monika Schaefer and Brian Ruhe.
Let’s now cut to the chase and take a more discerning look at Farber’s fatuous fabrication of libellous vilifications concerning Dr. Hall.
Farber, himself a life-long member of the most Satanic and lunatic cult on the face of the planet, i.e. Zionism, begins his slander of Professor Hall by going directly to the source of his defamation which, inevitably in today’s digital world, means Facebook. It’s there where Bernie supposedly gleans his evidence to back up the blatant lies which he concocts about Professor Hall. He accuses Prof. Hall of posting “ravings” on his Facebook page and in the next breath attempts to incite his readers to believe that, “Hall gives every appearance of being both a conspiracy nutter and a classic anti-Semite. Like his late Eckville, Alberta, neighbour James Keegstra, Hall has found a comfortable home amongst Holocaust deniers.”
How Farber managed to make the quantum leap from what is posted on Prof. Hall’s Facebook page to the notion that Hall is a “conspiracy nutter” and a “classic anti-Semite” and, by extension to the now deceased Jim Keegstra, a “Holocaust denier” is anybody’s guess as Farber doesn’t bother to embellish his viperous hissings with any actual evidence.
Zionist hacks and Mossad sayan (voluntary agents for the Israeli propaganda network) like Farber always have their list of weaponized words and phrases at hand when they go into mind-control mode and attack truth tellers. After a shabby attempt to disparage the work of Jewish author Gerard Menuhin and his very popular book on the Holohoax LIE, Tell The Truth And Shame The Devil the fibber suddenly spews out the old “Jew-hater” epithet just to add a bit of kosher garnish to his plate of pernicious, poisoned platitudes offered to the Canadian reader.
Finally Farber gets to the core of what he thinks will permanently nail the tenured Lethbridge University Professor to the proverbial cross of “Jew-haters”, “anti-Semites” and “Holocaust deniers”. His statements in this regard warrant quoting:
“In late August, B’nai Brith exposed a hateful and genocidal anti-Jewish comment by one Glen Davidson that appeared on Hall’s Facebook page.
It was about as bad as it gets when it comes to graphic anti-Semitism: the image of a man assaulting what appears to be an Orthodox Jewish man. Next to that photo a screed that might have made Keegstra blush.
It claims that there was never a Holocaust but should have been, and rest assured, there will be, adding, “I will not rest until every single filthy, parasitic kike is rounded up and slaughtered. The greedy hook-nosed kikes know that their days are numbered” It ends with a call to “KILL ALL JEWS NOW! EVERY LAST ONE.””
Allow me to begin dissecting this Zionist Jew slander by posting the aforementioned “hateful and genocidal anti-Jewish comment” (it was included in an actual graphic image and not in text format).
The very first thing to understand about this graphic image is that Professor Anthony Hall NEVER EVER SAW IT ON HIS FB “WALL” prior to FB eventually taking it down. It’s important that readers know this.
Next, it must also be very clearly understood that Farber states, “It was about as bad as it gets when it comes to graphic anti-Semitism”. Having been in the business of studying political Zionism for many years and all of the associated aspects of Zionism’s preoccupation with the weaponized term “anti-Semite” I would concur with Bernie on this aspect of the graphic. It definitely was a winner but not for the loser Farber as we will soon see.
Apart from the graphic image telling the truth about the Holocaust LIE Farber the Fibber goes on to quote further from the text:
“I will not rest until every single filthy, parasitic kike is rounded up and slaughtered. The greedy hook-nosed kikes know that their days are numbered” It ends with a call to “KILL ALL JEWS NOW! EVERY LAST ONE.”
Again, I’m reminded of Ruth who likely would have remarked, “Oi vey! Such language!” So let’s face it the graphic that someone else posted on Professor Hall’s Facebook “Wall” which the good Professor had not seen was indeed a very “not nice” image by most community standards and, rightfully so, it ought to have been, and was, eventually removed by Facebook. But the burning question still remains: WHO in their right mind would create such a terrible image combined with such distasteful language and then post it on the Internet for all to see? What deluded, hate-filled neo-Nazi and Jew-hater would have the audacity and the chutzpah to come up with such a sick, despicable anti-Semitic graphic image? Could it have been the ghost of James Keegstra beaming it down from some Astral plane into Cyberspace? Or maybe it was the infamous “Holocaust denier” Ernst Zundel? Zundel is still alive and living somewhere in exile in Europe so you never know. Possibly it was Dr. David Duke or Professor Faurisson or David Irving or any of the more prominent “anti-Semites” that live on in Zion’s pathetic pantheon of Jew haters? Anything is possible, no? Why given my own propensity for creating graphic images for use on my website it could very well have been me who created this image. I’m certain that it wouldn’t surpise B’nai Brith and frankly I’m a bit surprised that they didn’t accuse me right off the bat! But for all of the concern about the image our over-zealous and diligent zio nazi-hunting dilettante Bernie Farber doesn’t delve into that aspect of the story but quickly moves on in an attempt to shame Facebook for taking so long to remove the image after B’nai Brith’s internet spies managed to spot it lurking there on Hall’s wall.
Well, for the sake of truth and transparency which are the necessary ingredients to a healthy and harmonious society, I now will share with Bernie and B’nai Brith and the rest of the readers the dreadful Truth of who it was that created such an abominable anti-Semitic image.
When I first saw the controversial image I though to myself, “Hmmm… I know that face.” Not the face of the squashed “Orthodox Jewish man” as Bernie stated it but the face of the culprit who was doing the squishing. At first I couldn’t place it but then subsequently I learned from an associate of mine that it was in fact the face of the Montana Internet cartoonist, Ben Garrison. I knew Ben because of an incident that had taken place a year or more ago when I had posted what I thought was one of his cartoons on Radicalpress.com. Sometime later I received an email from Ben informing me that the cartoon was a doctored up version of his original cartoon and not his and he politely asked me to remove it. I did so. Knowing the little I did know of Ben’s work I found it hard to conceive that he would have created such a vile image so I wrote to Ben and asked him about it. This was his reply to my question which I received on September 20th, 2016 and the key to realizing who the creator of the graphic was:
From: Benjamin Garrison <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: The genuine copy of the fake original
Date: September 20, 2016 at 2:56:21 PM PDT
To: Radical Press <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Yes, I remember you and a lot has ‘gone down’ since that time. I learned a lot about free speech on the Internet and I suffered a lot of indignities and lost work because of my cartooning endeavors.
I have no problem with the professor’s [he’s referring to Prof. Hall. A.T.] opinions–that’s his right of free speech. Unfortunately that Photoshopped image of me assaulting that Orthodox Jew man continues to circulate and be posted everywhere. Ironically, it was created by a 20 year-old Jewish kid named Joshua Goldberg. He was arrested by the FBI about a year ago for sending bomb making instructions to what he thought was a Muslim terrorist–instead it was an FBI undercover agent. Goldberg is now pleading mental illness, but for years he was allowed to stir up trouble from his parent’s basement in Florida. For some reason he enjoyed targeting me and he’s the one who created that image as well as many other hate screeds.
So there you have it, plain and simple. Another deranged Jewish kid, most likely brainwashed by his Talmudic upbringing into hating the goyim, spreading his lies about the Internet so that other deranged Zionist fanatics might then pick up the image and use it to carry on their own hateful, libellous attacks upon good folks like Dr. Anthony Hall of the University of Lethbridge, Alberta who has never committed a hateful or anti-Semitic act in his life.
One final word on NOW Magazine. This publication, like most of the Zionist controlled media in Canada, has been carrying the LIES of Zionist Jews such as Bernie Farber for years now and, like Farber himself, it is just as guilty of defamation and libel as Farber is. Media that publishes lies and slanders and vilifies individuals out of pure spite and hatred do not deserve to get away with it. Were I a very rich man I would encourage anyone who has been vilified and and had their name and reputation dragged through the sewers of hate i.e., the Zionist mainstream media, and their careers destroyed, to file a legal suit for defamation and libel. NOW magazine and the Zionist National Post would be tops on the list of traitorous, foreign controlled propaganda outlets that are doing everything in their power to destroy Canada and its long-standing traditions of freedom of speech and expression and thought. It strikes me as obvious that people like Bernie Farber would also be eligible for such treatment as well.
As the title of this article stated, the ceaseless smear campaigns by B’nai Brith Lobby & Zionist Media must end!
I still require funding to help out with the costs of the upcoming Charter hearing by going to the following website and making a donation.
The megalomania of the Zionist Jews: Robert Faurisson found “guilty of racial defamation for 2006 Tehran talk”
Robert Faurisson found guilty of racial defamation for 2006 Tehran talk
September 27th, 2016