Regina v Radical Press Legal Update # 25 by Arthur Topham

screen-shot-2016-11-16-at-9-00-06-am

screen-shot-2016-11-16-at-9-01-29-am

screen-shot-2016-11-16-at-9-02-04-am

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.

Conclusion
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:

Arthur Topham
4633 Barkerville Highway
Quesnel, B.C.
V2J 6T8
THANK YOU!
Arthur Topham
Pub/Ed
The Radical Press
Canada’s Radical News Network
“Digging to the root of the issues since 1998”
–––––––– 88 ––––––––
*** (Note please that the full transcript of the trial can be found HERE for those interested in reading it and preserving it should my website eventually be taken down.)
 

Canada’s illegal witch-hunt: Arthur Topham trial continues Monday By Denis G. Rancourt

rancourtvtisraelgazaattack2014

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

Your Honour:

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.[1]
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:[2]
“And this Court reaffirmed in Divito v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), [2013] 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:[3]
“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[4] to the protection of freedom of expression “must conform to the strict tests of necessity and proportionality”:[5]
“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.][6]
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”)[7] 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.[8]
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.
Yours sincerely,

Joseph Hickey
Executive Director
Ontario Civil Liberties Association (OCLA)

[1] Defendant’s “Memorandum of Argument Regarding Charter Issues”, R. v. Topham, Court File No. 25166, Quesnel Registry.
[2] Saskatchewan Federation of Labour v. Saskatchewan [2015 SCC 4], at para. 64.
[3] International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 19, at para. 2.
[4] Ibid., Article 19, at para. 3, and Article 20.
[5] General Comment No. 34, UN Human Rights Committee [CCPR/C/GC/34], at para. 22.
[6] Ibid., at para. 35.
[7] Criminal Code (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46), s. 319(6).
[8] 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, [1991] 1 SCR 139, 1991 CanLII 119 (SCC), p. 210 (i).


SOURCE ARTICLE

Prelude to Freedom of Speech or Zionist Hate Laws and Censorship? The Upcoming Charter challenge to Canada’s “Hate Propaganda” laws By Arthur Topham

preludehdr1000

Prelude to Freedom of Speech or Zionist Hate Laws and Censorship?
The Upcoming Charter challenge to Canada’s “Hate Propaganda” lawsBy
Arthur Topham“I am a Canadian, a free Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship God in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.”

~ The Canadian Bill of Rights.
The Right Honourable John G. Diefenbaker, Prime Minister of Canada,
House of Commons Debates, July 1, 1960.

There is a grave danger to any democracy when the laws of the land begin to shift from the concrete to abstract/emotional/ethereal planes of mental cognition. Such has been the case for many years now in Germany where freedom of speech has deteriorated to the point where, in reality, it no longer exists. A German citizen, if they so desire to question the authenticity of the purported “6 Million Jewish Holocaust” are automatically charged with “holocaust denial”, arrested and, when pronounced guilty, imprisoned, regardless of the fact that the state refuses to prove that the inquisitive thinker wrong in a court of law. All that was necessary was to create the “holocaust denial” legislation out of the shady realm of psychological cogitation; state that it was “manifestly obvious” that the event had occurred the way it was written (by the victors in WWII; and if anyone suggests otherwise then they are to be punished with a prison term up to 5 years in jail.

A similar reality existed here in Canada during the days when Sec. 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act was being used by the Jewish lobby groups and their sycophant supporters to harass, intimidate, fine and even incarcerate Canadian citizens who were deemed “guilty” of having committed the offence of promoting “hatred affecting persons identifiable as Jews and/or as citizens of Israel.” If victims were publishing information on practically any topic related to either the state of Israel, Jews, or the political ideology of the Jews-only state known as Zionism they were considered fair game and Jewish lobby organizations like the Canadian Jewish Congress (now defunct) and B’nai Brith Canada considered it open season on their critics and would scan the Internet in search of any sign of dissenting viewpoints which they could then attack via the Sec. 13 clause. While Sec. 13 existed in Canadian jurisprudence truth was not considered a defence against such accusations and if the Canadian Human Rights Commission decided to prosecute you it was commonly understood that you didn’t stand a snow’s chance in hell of ever winning. All you could look forward to was being forced through the quasi-judicial wringer then known as the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, for years, having your whole life turned upside down and then inevitably being found guilty of promoting “hate” and duly punished. The only difference between this process and that of the Stalinist Soviet Union’s Show Trials was that the Canadians at least attempted to defend themselves rather than simply admitting guilt and grovelling before their oppressors.

Fortunately for Canadians Sec. 13 was eventually repealed back in 2012. The story behind why it was repealed is a whole other can of worms that time and space won’t allow me to go into here. Suffice it to say that the law proved itself to be a “double-edged sword” and therefore was deemed unsuitable to the Zionist lobby here in Canada. The Zionist controlled media then consciously conspired to focus on it and before you could say “Bobs’ Your Uncle” it was gone from the statute books.

“A judiciary which functions as an auxiliary to Canada’s foreign, Zionist Jew lobbyists inevitably must produce absurd rulings for the simple reason that Hate Propaganda laws, in and of themselves, are the quintessential example of legal sophistry and not in any way reality based.”
~ Arthur Topham

What remained though and is currently enshrined in the Canadian Criminal Code and of much greater danger to our rights and freedoms is the section known as the “Hate Propaganda” laws which span Sections 318 to 320 of the Code. When it came time for the mainstream media to focus on that specious area of Canadian jurisprudence though their powerful and persuasive voice suddenly became muted.

The section under which I was charged in 2012 reads as follows:

• Wilful promotion of hatred
• (Sec. 319(2) Criminal Code of Canada
• 319. (2) Every one who, by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, wilfully promotes hatred against any identifiable group is guilty of
(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or
(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Having been found GUILTY on Count One of the crime of “Hate Propaganda” under Canada’s Section 319.2 of the Criminal Code and, simultaneously, found NOT GUILTY on Count Two of the exact same charge, by a jury of 12 Canadian citizens back on November 12th, 2015 I realized fully why it was that I had fought against this Orwellian section of the Canadian Criminal Code for over four years. What the legislation itself has now proven, beyond the shadow of a doubt, is that the whole concept of supposed “hate crimes” are irrational in nature and illogical in practise. When attempts are made by the legal system to insert them into a structure of jurisprudence that is purported to be based upon logic, common sense, the principle of Truth and, in the case of criminal offences, a foundation upon which real victims who have suffered some type of overt, damaging injustice are either present in a court of law to testify or else 6 feet under, they only exacerbate the absurdity that we currently are witnessing in Germany. A judiciary which functions as an auxiliary to Canada’s foreign, Zionist Jew lobbyists inevitably must produce absurd rulings for the simple reason that Hate Propaganda laws, in and of themselves, are the quintessential example of legal sophistry and not in any way reality based.

When the verdict first came down I, like most of those present in the court room, was taken by surprise. When I heard the spokesperson for the jury state that I was guilty on Count One I automatically assumed (given that the charge was identical) that I would be found guilty of the second charge as well. When a Not Guilty verdict was then announced for Count Two it blew me away and immediately I began to question why the jury would have come to such a conclusion.

An answer to that seemingly contradictory verdict wouldn’t be easy to figure out as Supreme Court Justice Butler, who had overseen the proceedings, made it perfectly clear to the jury members that their decision (in either of the two Counts) was to remain hermetically sealed forever and that it was a very serious offence if any jury member were to divulge the rationale for why they had come to their two diametrically opposed decisions. The matter of this process will of course play out in the ensuing Charter challenge set to occur in the Quesnel Supreme Court during the week of August 3 to the 7th, 2016.

To Satire or Not to Satire
One of the alleged claims during the trial by the Crown and the arresting officer (former) Det. Cst. Terry Wilson of the BC Hate Crime Unit, was that I was promoting the genocide of the Jewish population by having published my satire Israel Must Perish! and it was a point that the Crown Prosecutor consistently alluded to in her attempt to convince the jury that I was promoting “hatred”.

In the case of my satire of an actual book written by Theodore N. Kaufmann titled Germany Must Perish! I composed it in order to show the blatant hypocrisy of the Jews who subscribed to and supported the actual genocide of the German people and the only simple way of doing that (for me) was to turn the tables on the original author and his supporters by changing a few simple words in the text and shooting the very same book at them.

In the eyes of non-Zionists and non-Jews the idea of doing this in order to show the glaring bigotry of the Zionist lobbyists who were instrumental in creating Canada’s “Hate Propaganda” laws was not only self-evident but also considered an act of brilliance on my part. What better way to expose the machinations of the serpent powers who control Canada’s judicial system and its media than to publish a satirical article depicting their own malfeasance and hubris while at the same time revealing who, in actual fact, are the real haters.

Another fundamental point is, had there been some solid evidence contained on my website that clearly showed I was promoting genocide of the Jewish race or population or ethnic group then, by such logic, I should have been charged under Sec. 318 of the Criminal Code of Canada not Sec. 319.2 for advocating genocide.

Section 318 reads as follows:

Advocating genocide
• 318. (1) Every one who advocates or promotes genocide is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.
• Definition of “genocide”
(2) In this section, “genocide” means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy in whole or in part any identifiable group, namely,
• (a) killing members of the group; or
(b) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction.

As in Germany so in Canada?
The example of present day Germany is but a foreshadowing of what the rest of the worlds’ democracies can expect should they allow the forces of Zionist dictatorship to invade and take control of their respective judiciaries.

Since my trial ended in November of 2015 we’ve witnessed more cases where the foreign Jewish lobby organization B’nai Brith ‘Canada’ has been instrumental in attacking and vilifying and destroying or attempting to destroy the livelihoods of other Canadians who have shown the courage to speak out about the crimes of the Zionist state or the lies surrounding the now dismantled myth of the so-called “6 Million Jews” holocaust.

First we saw Buddhist teacher and videographer Brian Ruhe having his employment with various school districts in Vancouver, B.C. destroyed by the same individual agent of B’nai Brith who first charged me with a Sec. 13 “hate crime” back in 2007 and then lodged a Sec. 319(2) complaint with the BC Hate Crime Unit in 2011. This agent of a foreign, secret, Jews-only Masonic order (which is what B’nai Brith is) lives in Victoria, B.C. and has been responsible for numerous crimes against Canada’s Charter right to freedom of Expression. Were it not for a court order imposed upon me by B.C. provincial court Judge Morgan back in 2013 I would divulge the name of this traitor.

The more recent case is that of musician and activist Monika Schaefer of Jasper, B.C. who has also been attacked by the Jewish lobbyists for having produced a short video on the holocaust lie while holidaying in Germany this past summer. Ms. Schaefer’s vilification and slandering and the subsequent loss of her position as a music teacher in Jasper is just one more example of what Canadians will be seeing on a regular basis if these despicable and unjust “Hate Propaganda” laws are not speedily removed from Canada’s statutes.

As well as these two German Canadians we also are seeing the academic careers of university professors being threatened by these same cliques of power-crazed control freaks whose lust for dominance over the nation’s legal system has gone berserk. The case of tenured Professor Anthony Hall from Lethbridge University in Alberta comes to mind and his is but the latest not the last if we don’t curtail this madness within the legal system that’s making Canada look like a remake of Bolshevik Russia under Stalin.

On October 3rd of this year I will once again be appearing in B.C. Supreme Court in Quesnel, B.C. to argue that Sec. 319(2) of the Criminal Code is an infringement of Sec. 2b of Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms which unequivocally states:

Fundamental freedoms
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d) freedom of association.

It’s my heartfelt hope that justice will prevail and that B.C. Supreme Court Justice Bruce Butler, who will be presiding over the hearing, will see the logic and the reasoning and the justice in defending this extremely important basic human right and free Canadians from these notorious dictatorial laws so that like former Canadian Prime Minister John Diefenbaker said, they will be once again “free to speak without fear, free to worship God in [their] own way, free to stand for what [they] think right,” and “free to oppose what [they] believe wrong”.

In closing, and on behalf of my loving and devoted wife Shasta and myself, I would like to thank the many friends and associates from Canada and around the world for their steadfast support over these past ten years of litigation. There’s absolutely no way that we could have carried on without your moral, spiritual and financial support. God bless you all!

May Truth and Justice prevail.
_____

Those wishing to help out with the additional costs of the upcoming Charter hearing can do so by going to the following website and making a donation.

gogetfunding.com/canadian-publisher-faces-jail-for-political-writings

THANK YOU!

Arthur Topham
Pub/Ed
The Radical Press
Canada’s Radical News Network
“Digging to the root of the issues since 1998”

BREAKING NEWS: Canada’s Terror Patsies, John Nuttall and Amanda Korody’s guilty verdict overturned by Judge

http://greencrowasthecrowflies.blogspot.com/2016/07/breaking-news-canadas-terror-patsies.html

Screen Shot 2016-07-30 at 9.52.04 AM

Screen Shot 2016-07-30 at 10.04.15 AM

Friday, July 29, 2016

BREAKING NEWS: Canada’s Terror Patsies, John Nuttall and Amanda Korody’s guilty verdict overturned by Judge

John Nuttall and Amanda Korody
after hearing verdict today
“The world has enough terrorists…we do not need the police to create more.”
BC Supreme Court Justice Catherine Bruce

In what Vancouver Sun reporter Ian Mulgrew describes as a stunning decision, the Judge in the Canadian Terror Patsies trial today ruled that the pair were entrapped by the RCMP. She overruled last year’s jury “guilty” decision and ruled that the police themselves broke the criminal code and if the guilty verdict were left to stand, it would obstruct justice. Well, that’s about as clear a verdict as can be stated by a judge. But it’s not good enough for the Crown and the police. They’re going to appeal. But looking at the verdict from their POV…what other choice do they have? If they don’t appeal, and win the appeal, the government’s going to get its @$$es sued off by the couple for entrapment, false charges and imprisonment.

Here is the CTV news report on the verdict and I will have some more comments to follow:

“VANCOUVER — A British Columbia couple found guilty of terrorism charges have had their verdicts tossed out in a scathing court decision that flays the RCMP for its “egregious” conduct in manipulating naive suspects into carrying out a police-manufactured crime.
B.C. Supreme Court Justice Catherine Bruce said the Mounties used trickery, deceit and veiled threats to engineer the terrorist acts for which John Nuttall and Amanda Korody were arrested on Canada Day three years ago.
The couple believed they were planting pressure-cooker bombs to kill and maim crowds gathered to celebrate at the B.C. legislature.
“The world has enough terrorists. We do not need the police to create more,” Bruce said in a landmark ruling Friday as she characterized the RCMP’s methods as “multi-faceted and systematic manipulation.”
“There is clearly a need to curtail the actions of police … to ensure that future undercover investigations do not follow the same path.”
Bruce said Mounties involved in a months-long sting launched in early 2013 knowingly exploited Nuttall and Korody’s vulnerabilities to induce them to commit an offence.
She described the pair as marginalized, socially isolated, former heroin addicts dependent on methadone and welfare to subsist and said they were “all talk and no action.”
Nuttall and Korody were recent converts to Islam. Their trial heard Nuttall say in a recording that he wanted to kill and maim countless people during Canada Day festivities in retaliation for Canada’s role in the mistreatment of Muslims in Afghanistan and other countries.
Without the heavy-handed involvement of undercover officers, it would have been impossible for Nuttall and Korody to articulate, craft and execute a terrorist bomb plot, Bruce said.
“Ultimately, their role in carrying out the plan was minuscule compared to what the police had to do,” Bruce said. “It was the police who were the leaders of the plot.”
She also condemned the behaviour of the primary undercover officer who, at the direction of the operation’s overseers, discouraged Nuttall and Korody from seeking outside spiritual guidance and convinced them he was a member of a powerful international terrorist group that would likely kill them if they failed to follow through.
“He was their leader and they were his disciples,” said Bruce, who stayed the proceedings, which threw out the convictions and allowed the couple to walk free after more than three years behind bars.

Screen Shot 2016-07-30 at 10.03.34 AM

They embraced outside B.C. Supreme Court before being temporarily re-arrested and later released from provincial court under a peace bond, which places them under strict conditions for up to a year.
A jury found the pair guilty in June 2015 of terrorism-related charges but Bruce delayed registering the convictions at the request of defence lawyers, who wanted to argue the Mounties had entrapped their clients.
The stay of proceedings means the charges won’t appear on any criminal record and can’t be used against the couple in the future. Had they been convicted, Nuttall and Korody could have faced a maximum sentence of life in prison.
Nuttall’s mother, Maureen Smith, was in court for the ruling and pumped her fist in the air when Bruce ordered a stay of proceedings.
Smith said she was ecstatic about the verdict but still furious at the RCMP.
“It makes me so angry that the cops did that to my son and Amanda,” she said. “The police were dirty crooks for committing these crimes against people, especially marginalized ones.”
Outside court, Crown lawyer Peter Eccles said he was disappointed by the decision and emphasized that the couple still pose a threat to the public.
“Let’s face it, they did do it,” Eccles said about Nuttall and Korody planting the inert explosives. “And they meant it.”
The Crown has filed an appeal of the ruling issued Friday.
Marilyn Sandford, Nuttall’s lawyer, referenced a section of the judge’s ruling, which described the RCMP’s perception of the risk posed by her client as “farcical.”
“We don’t criminalize thought in our country,” Sandford said. “We don’t criminalize crazy ideas. There are a lot of people with crazy ideas who are not inclined to act on them.”
Korody’s lawyer, Mark Jette, described the ruling as a “powerful indictment” against the RCMP and said the next step will be helping the couple re-integrate into society.
Jette rejected the suggestion that the public should be concerned about the ruling hamstringing police from investigating terrorism threats.
This is the first time in Canada that the legal defence of entrapment has been successfully argued in a terrorism case. Three previous attempts failed.”

Screen Shot 2016-07-30 at 10.03.21 AM

This is not over…as John Nuttall himself stated outside the courtroom after the verdict. He said he and Amanda Korody just want to go away and live their lives and have children. But he’s afraid to walk the streets of Canada…afraid the police will frame him again and/or take any children he and Amanda have. He says he can’t live in this country anymore.

I would say that John’s fears are well-founded. The police (and the police officers’ handlers…CSIS) cannot let this verdict stand. Not only will it bring lawsuits by the victimized couple for entrapment and imprisonment, etc…as I said before…but the RCMP and CSIS are in deep doo doo with the international cabal. They were supposed to get a conviction, which would serve as a precedent in the further corruption of the justice system in Canada….and lay the groundwork for more entrapment of vulnerable patsies and more terror plots/false flags for the international terror grist mill they’re setting up.

This Canadian legal precedent can be applied internationally and is a major setback for Terror Inc. The mistake the perpetrators of the entrapment scheme made was that they needed a corrupt judge to go along with the corrupt police officers and CSIS agents. The Canadian judicial system just isn’t far enough along in terms of corrupt judges….and hasn’t kept up with the corruption of the police departments.

And speaking of justice. Kudos to Supreme Court Justice Catherine Bruce…a true Canadian heroine if ever there was one! Hopefully she can now retire in peace. She saved the integrity of the Canadian judicial system…for now at least.

—-

Report on week two of  Supreme Court Trial R v Roy Arthur Topham    by  Arthur Topham

Screen Shot 2015-11-01 at 12.18.21 PM

ATEditorPic185

EDITOR’S NOTE: Once again, please feel free to use whatever information is contained in this Report in order to spread the news concerning this important trial further afield.

To date only the local Quesnel Cariboo Observer, and CBC Prince George have given coverage to the story so it’s now firmly established that Canada’s major news networks (all of which are either controlled or heavily influenced by the foreign Zionist lobby) have no intention of informing the general public on this matter.

As I previously stated in the first report it’s up to the alternative news media to do its best to cover this important historic event in Canadian jurisprudence and bring it to the attention of internet readers around the world.

The original time period allotted for the trial indicated that it would conclude by Friday, November 6th but such is not the case. It will now carry on into week three and likely conclude on Tuesday, November 10th one day prior to Canada’s federal holiday known as Remembrance Day.
Thank you.

Sincerely,

Arthur Topham
Pub/Ed
The Radical Press
Canada’s Radical News Network
“Digging to the root of the issues since 1998”
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

To Alternative Media Sources
Report on week two of
Supreme Court Trial R v Roy Arthur Topham

by
Arthur Topham

The second week of Canada’s Sec. 319(2) “Hate Propaganda” trial R v Roy Arthur Topham got underway Monday morning, November 2nd, 2015.

Witness #1 former Det. Cst. Terry Wilson of the BC Hate Crime Team

During the fourth day of the first week of testimony (October 29, 2015) Defence attorney Barclay Johnson had cross examined former Det. Cst. Terry Wilson the lead investigator involved in the current Sec. 319(2) charge, arrest and incarceration of Mr. Topham back in May of 2012. Throughout his questioning of Wilson it was clearly shown that the former detective was not an “expert” on what constituted “hate” and that Wilson was solely relying upon only one definition of “hatred” which appeared in the Keegstra case from back in the 1980’s. It was also evident from the former Hate Crime Unit investigator’s statements that after the second complainant had filed his complaint to the BC Hate Crime Team back in May of 2011 Wilson traveled over to Victoria, B.C. to interview the complainant who, during the course of the taped conversation, told Wilson that he’d also been involved in laying an earlier complaint against Topham back in 2007 as a representative of the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada. That earlier Sec. 13(1) complaint on the part of B’nai Brith Canada, fortunately for Topham, was stayed in 2010 pending the outcome of a Constitutional challenge to the Canadian Human Rights Act (where the legislation existed); one that ultimately resulted in the repeal of Sec. 13(1) in June of 2012.

In the course of their interview the complainant told Wilson that his organization, the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada, didn’t think they had any evidence strong enough to gain a conviction under Sec. 319(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada until Topham published his “book” Israel Must Perish! on his website May 28th, 2011. The complainant, upon reading what was in actuality a satire that Topham had written of the actual book Germany Must Perish! concluded that he now had sufficient evidence to prove to a court of law that Topham was proposing the total annihilation of the Jewish population and would therefore qualify as a candidate for a Sec. 319(2) “Hate Propaganda” complaint with the BC Hate Crime Team.

Under cross examination Defence attorney Johnson suggested to Wilson that it wasn’t until the complainant had told him about the “book” that he made his decision to charge Topham.

Topham’s attorney also brought forth evidence clearly showing Wilson to have abused his police powers during the course of his investigation when he wrote a personal letter to Topham’s Internet Service Provider (ISP) Netfirms.ca back on November 21, 2012 informing them that Topham had been charged on November 5, 2012 with a Sec. 319(2) CCC offence of “Wilfully Promoting Hatred”. Defence pointed out to the court that Wilson had taken it upon himself to go to Netfirms.ca, read through their policy and then suggested to the company that Topham’s Sec. 319(2) criminal charge “may in fact contravene” said policy under section 4(b)(i). The result of Wilson’s letter to Netfirms.ca was that the ISP wrote to Topham the same day issuing what was basically an ultimatum stating, “We have been advised by a visitor to your web site radicalpress.com that such web site contains content that is alleged to be untrue, offensive, slanderous, harassing or controversial in nature.

Accordingly, please remove such content within 48 hours of this notice. Failure to delete such content within such period will result in termination of your website.” It was signed by “Zach P Corporate Support”.

Given such short notice and not having the technical expertise to shift his website to a new (and more secure) server in the USA Topham had to rely upon an associate of his who also wasn’t fully proficient in downloading and uploading websites. The end result was that all the content on Topham’s website prior to November 21, 2012 ended up infected with computer code script that required hundreds of hours of labour to correct and to this day still hasn’t been fully repaired.

Defence also pointed out to the court that when Wilson wrote to Netfirms.ca on November 21, 2012 there had already been one attempt on the part of Crown to have Topham’s bail conditions changed so that he wouldn’t be able to carry on publishing until after the trial (should he be found not guilty). That attempt had failed and Crown was attempting a second time to change his conditions and a hearing on Crown’s application had already been set for January 2, 2013 but Wilson disregarded the court and proceeded on his own to try and remove RadicalPress.com before that date. Because of these independent actions on the part of former Det. Wilson, Defence suggested to the court that Wilson had acted in an extra-judicial manner and in doing so had attempted to circumvent whatever decision the court may have come to regarding Topham’s bail conditions (Crown’s application was unsuccessful). In other words Wilson had acted as judge and jury and concluded, prior to Crown’s application being heard, that Topham was guilty of the crime before having been tried. In other words, according to Defence counsel Johnson, Wilson’s testimony could not be taken seriously and ought to be disregarded by the jury.

NetfirmsWilsonLet

Crown Expert Witness Len Rudner

The first week’s proceedings concluded Friday, October 30th, 2015 with Crown’s Expert Witness, Mr. Len Rudner, former Director of the Canadian Jewish Congress, completing his testimony. Week two commenced with Defence attorney Barclay Johnson’s cross examination of Mr. Rudner testimony.

Len Rudner copy

As noted in the first report the focus of Crown’s evidence was contained in four large binders of which Binder #1 and #2 composed the complete texts of the following online books posted on RadicalPress.com:

1. Germany Must Perish! by Theodore N. Kaufmann
2. Israel Must Perish! (erroneously labeled by Wilson and Crown as a “book” rather than a satirical article)
3. The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion
4. The Biological Jew by Eustice Mullins
5. The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today by Elizabeth Dilling

Binder #2 was the complete text (580 pages) of Douglas Reed’s historic analysis of political Zionism The Controversy of Zion. Binders #3 and #4 were basically screen shots of all of Topham’s monthly postings on his website which Wilson had “captured” during the course of the Hate Crime Team’s investigation once the initial complaint was laid against Topham and his website on April 28th, 2011. As well, a number of Topham’s personal writings contained in the sidebar on the home page under the heading Arthur’s Court were also included.

Over the course of Len Rudner’s testimony Crown’s Prosecuting Attorney Jennifer Johnston led Rudner through all of the above online books and portions of the articles, most of which contained Topham’s “Editor’s Note” prefaces. It was mainly these prefaces to other writer’s work that Crown zeroed in on as they apparently were having great difficulty in finding anything in Topham’s own personal articles on the site that they felt would meet the stringent standards that the law required in order to prove, “beyond a reasonable doubt” that Topham was “wilfully” promoting hatred toward “people of Jewish ethnicity or religion”.

Fortunately, for the defence, Crown’s Expert Witness Len Rudner provided the court with some extremely revealing evidence while under cross examination which, ultimately, led to some damning conclusions.

Given that Rudner had told the court that during the period of his tenure as a Director for the Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC), which spanned the years in which Mr. Topham had been harassed and dragged through the whole of the Canadian Human Rights Commission Sec. 13(1) complaint process from 2007 until 2012, Defence counsel Johnson began questioning Rudner on statements he’d made under oath regarding his personal involvement in the laying of these Sec. 13(1) “hate crime” charges against Canadian citizens. What Rudner told the court, was most revealing and in some instances totally unexpected. As it turned out, in his capacity as a director of this foreign Israeli lobbyist organization, Rudner stated that as far back as 2007 he had been personally involved in an attempt on the part of the CJC to file a Sec. 319(2) “hate” complaint against Arthur Topham and his website RadicalPress.com with the British Columbia Hate Crimes Team (BCHCT). This was the very same RCMP unit that on May 16th, 2012 arrested Topham and charged him under the same Sec. 319(2) criminal code section. Rudner’s statements were corroborated by the evident from Crown’s disclosure which contained the following document shown below.

BCHCTFILE 2007-23814

While the document itself hadn’t indicated who, in particular, was responsible for filing the complaint, Rudner having sworn that he was personally involved in drafting a number of such complaints, admitted to having signed off on that one as well.

During the course of his testimony before the court Rudner also admitted to having had contact with Topham’s former Internet Service Provider (ISP) MagNet.com (now defunct) back as far as 2005 wherein he had complained to said company that Topham was publishing “anti-Semitic” materials on his website RadicalPress.com. He admitted under oath that at the time he complained to the ISP he realized that it wouldn’t necessarily guarantee that Topham’s site would be removed from the Internet but that it would at least be an “inconvenience” for Topham! What Rudner and the court, including Defence attorney Barclay Johnson, didn’t realize was that the complaint by the CJC to Topham’s then ISP resulted in Topham losing all of the contents of his website, including a long and lively forum, that dated back to and included the period from 1999 to 2005 and constituted a valuable historic record of a section of history that has since dominated much of the narrative concerning the nascent period of the 21st Century and its reaction to the defining event now known as 911. At the time of the loss Topham had a strong suspicion that the person or persons responsible for filing the complaint to his ISP were most likely connected to either the Canadian Jewish Congress or B’nai Brith Canada (both of whom are admitted lobbyists for the foreign state of Israel), but his then server refused to divulge who had registered the complaint and had only given Topham 48 hours to find a new server. Now the truth regarding that premeditated event finally came to light ten years after the fact.

Given Rudner’s direct testimony that he had personally been involved in two previous attempts to have Topham’s website taken down, Defence attorney Barclay Johnson then questioned Rudner regarding the credentials used in determining his suitability to appear as an “Expert Witness” on behalf of the Crown. Johnson pointed out to the court that in order to qualify for such an esteemed position within the Canadian court system one had to be seen as impartial and unbiased and neutral in order for their “Expert” testimony to be considered credible. He then punctuated this scathing indictment of Rudner’s disingenuousness and confession of complicity by stating that Rudner had, in fact, “a horse in the race” all along and that his admission of these facts could only serve to discredit the worth of all of his testimony in the case before the court.

When Rudner attempted to justify his clandestine attempts to take down Topham’s website Johnson’s response was to suggest that it was nothing but “pure sophistry”.

Defence Expert Witness Gilad Atzmon

GILAD&BARCLAY

Gilad Atzmon is an Israeli-born writer, musician, and political commentator who has written extensively about global politics, and specifically the geopolitical role of the State of Israel. Atzmon is critical of the Israeli government and its approach to other countries in the Middle East. He moved to England in 1994 and became a British citizen in 2002.

Mr. Atzmon had agreed to take the stand on behalf of Arthur Topham and testify as to why he felt that the charge of “hatred toward the Jews” was inappropriate and his decision to do so was based upon his strongly held conviction that the vast majority of criticism being directed toward the Jews was in fact political in nature rather than personal or aimed specifically at Jews based upon either their religion or their ethnicity.

While the Crown had made a big display before the court of the fact that their Expert Witness Len Rudner was being paid $195.00 an hour to appear to testify when Mr. Atzmon appeared on the morning of November 3, 2015 Defence Barclay Johnson pointed out to the jury that Atzmon had volunteered his expertise without pay and that only his airfare and hotel accommodations and food were being covered by Topham’s defence fund.

After much to do about having his status as an Expert Witness accepted by Justice Bruce Butler when Gilad Atzmon stepped up to the podium and began to speak it immediately became apparent to the court that here was an Expert Witness to be reckoned with. Being an internationally recognized lecturer and in possession of the academic credentials to back up his philosophical approach to the issues being discussed in the courtroom, Mr. Atzmon’s quickly took control of the narrative and over the remainder of his testimony spoke with an unabashed air of certainty and conviction. Unlike Rudner whose quiet, monotone presentation lacked any overt sense of passion in what he was saying, Gilad’s outspoken oratory coupled with his obvious depth of knowledge concerning what he talked about left little doubt in the minds of anyone in the courtroom that here was a man of scholarly quality who unquestionably knew his subject.

Defence counsel Barclay Johnson then led Atzmon through the various online publications that were the subject of Crown’s evidence and Atzmon framed each book and quotation cited within his own analysis of the overall question concerning the Jewish Question and what Atzmon referred to as “Jewish Identity” politics. He went on to explain by means of visual aids (a graphic of a triangle with the three points headed by “Religion”, “Ethnicity” and “Identity or Jewish-ness”), all of which formed the basis of his thesis as contained in his internationally renowned book, The Wandering Who? which has been a best seller since it first came out in 2011.

Of particular note were Atzmon’s comments on the controversial satire which Topham had written in response to his reading of the actual book titled Germany Must Perish! by Theodore N. Kaufmann which Topham then satirically titled  Israel Must Perish! This was the already noted article on Topham’s website that the complainant in the case told former Det. Terry Wilson of the BC Hate Crime Team was sufficient evidence that Topham was promoting the total genocide of the whole of the Jewish population. When Gilad Atzmon addressed the issue he was adamant in his appraisal of the satire stating that it was an exceptionally important contribution to the overall discussion of Jewish identity in that it basically represented a mirror image of what Kaufmann’s book had said and that this mirror was now being held up before the Jewish people and in particular the Zionist state of Israel as a reminder for them to reflect upon their own actions and behaviour in todays political setting. He made reference to the plight of the Palestinians in his comments but Crown was quick to object (and Justice Butler was also quick to agree with Crown) that Atzmon wasn’t an expert on the Palestinian issue and therefore his testimony in that regard should be disregarded.

As Atzmon stated in his book, “As far as self-perception is concerned, those who call themselves Jews could be divided into three main categories:

1. Those who follow Judaism.
2. Those who regard themselves as human beings that happen to be of Jewish origin.
3. Those who put their Jewish-ness over and above all of their other traits.

Crown’s Cross Examination of Gilad Atzmon

Crown Prosecutor Jennifer Johnson commenced her cross examination of Expert Witness Gilad Atzmon at 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday, November 4th and it resumed the next morning of November 5th. It was basically on the second day of cross examination that the Prosecutor began her laborious efforts to try and get Atzmon to agree to the Crown’s position with respect to the term “Hatred” and also to many of the quotations cited throughout the trial that Crown felt showed evidence of Topham’s wilful promotion of hatred toward the Jews in general. Suffice it to say that every attempt at twisting Gilad’s words to conform to Crown’s preconceived mould of what “hatred” meant was met with not only dismissal but further testimony on Atzmon’s part as to what he actually was saying. This process continued on throughout his cross examination and it would not be unfair to say that the following exchange was typical of Crown’s approach and Gilad’s reaction:

Crown: Mr. Atzmon, I’m sure that you would agree that ….

Gilad Atzmon: No.

The jury and members of the public sitting in the gallery witnessed this scenario occurring over and over and the end result was that Crown was unable to refute any of Atzmon’s testimony nor discredit his presentation in any way.

Defence’s Summation to the Jury

Friday, November 6, 2015 was originally the final day scheduled for R v Roy Arthur Topham. But like most things the numerous delays throughout the past two week due to Crown’s own actions (which will be touched on at the end of this report) the only thing that happened on this day was that Defence Attorney Barclay Johnson was able to (after numerous interruptions by Crown and Justice Butler) finally sum up before the jury his arguments as to why they should find the defendant not guilty. That summation, in itself, was prolonged by the presiding Justice so that it wasn’t until 2:30 p.m. that Johnson finally was able to speak to the jurors. He ended at precisely 4:00 p.m.

The main thrust by defence was to speak to the jury about Crown’s two witnesses, former Det. Terry Wilson of the BC Hate Crime Team and Crown Expert Witness Len Rudner. Johnson outlined for the jury the many instances of bias displayed by both these two individuals while testifying. In addition to that he also (after much wrangling with Justice Butler) presented to the jury some of Arthur Topham’s writings taken from an article which had been included in Crown’s disclosure. That article, titled KILLING THE HUNDREDTH MONKEY: The Battle for Control and Censorship of Canada’s Internet by B’nai Brith Canada was originally posted on the website back in 2008 and dealt with issues related to the first complaint laid against Topham by B’nai Brith Canada under the former Sec. 13(1) Canadian Human Rights Act in the article were references made to the character of Topham which the defence wanted the jury to hear.

Defence then read out the following to the jury: [please note that the defendant is restricted by his current bail conditions from naming his accuser online and therefore the individual in question is simply referred to as “Mr. Z”]

“I have lived, uninterruptedly, in the province of British Columbia since December of 1956. After leaving high school I attended university (SFU) in 1965 and there obtained a Professional Teaching Certificate. I worked for a short number of years in this capacity both in the public school system and for First Nations school districts, all of which were located in the province of B.C., and taught grades ranging from Kindergarten to Grade 5. I left the profession in 1978 and worked for the Provincial Parks Branch for 8 years where I was a Supervisor and Park Ranger in the Quesnel District of the Cariboo region of the province. After losing that profession to government restructuring in the late 1980’s I returned to teaching for a couple of years and worked for the Nuxalk Education Authority out of Bella Coola, B.C. in 1991 – 1992 where I taught on reserve Grades 2 and 3. From there I returned to Quesnel and worked in a substitute capacity for the local School District (#28) until I resigned in September of 1998. It was also during the year 1998 that I established my publishing business known as The Radical Press. From June of 1998 until June of 2002 I published a monthly, 24-page tabloid called The Radical which sold in retail outlets throughout B.C. and across Canada and by subscription around the world. Due to financial challenges the hard copy edition of the newspaper ceased in June of 2002 and from that date I carried on publishing online with my website known as http://www.radicalpress.com . In 2005, using my lifetime of personal experience in the log building trades and construction industry which I had developed in conjunction with my tenure as a school teacher I formed a carpentry business and have been operating said business up to this point in time. I have lived out in the country for the vast majority of my life, have build my own home, grown my own garden, and maintained a philosophy of independence both in thought and deed. Throughout the course of my life I have fathered four children and now, along with my dear wife of thirty years, also have been blessed with seven grandchildren.

In many respects my life has been an open book to the community in which I have resided since 1970. I began writing letters to the local Quesnel newspaper known as The Cariboo Observer, newsroom@quesnelobserver.com beginning in 1976 and have steadily contributed to that publication over the ensuing years both as a regular columnist and an inveterate contributor on matters of public concern. While I would describe myself as a very controversial writer (and most, if not all of my readers would agree) I nonetheless need to stress the fact that throughout all the years of presenting my ideas to the general public on a number of issues ranging from politics to religion to social justice and environmental issues, I have never made any racist, hate-filled remarks against any person of Jewish or any other religious or ethic grouping. All this I state with respect to the present allegations made against me by Mr. Z and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada; charges that they would fain convey to the public that insinuate I am a person who promotes hatred toward others, in this case Jews. The records of my writings would not, I suggest, indicate this to be the case….

There is one last, missing factor in this “hate” equation which Mr. Z and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada have accused me of which needs to be mentioned. I feel it poignantly illustrates the absurdity of what is going on with respect to the danger of abuse inherent in such laws as Sec. 13(1) when exploited for partisan purposes by people and organizations such as Mr. Z and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith. It also epitomizes the spuriousness of all the allegations and contentions which they have used in their attempt to harass and intimidate me by falsely and publicly accusing me of the crime of promoting “ongoing hatred affecting persons identifiable as Jews and/or as citizens of Israel.” I now present this final factor to you Ms. Kozak and to the CHRC Tribunal as the culmination of my testimony to the frivolous and vexatious nature of these charges. For me to either admit to or accept that I am promoting hatred toward Jews would be tantamount to saying that I hate, rather than love and cherish beyond description, the one person in my life who has been wife and friend and companion to me over the last thirty years. For she too is Jewish.”

Final observations on Crown’s handling of evidence

Given that the total cost to Canadian taxpayers to proceed with this trial is likely over one million dollars throughout the duration of this two week trial the court has been witness to endless problems dealing with Crown’s disclosure materials. Given the fact that Crown has now had over three and half years to put together the evidence in a format that would easily facilitate the normal reading habits of the jurors and Defence counsel what we have witnessed throughout the trial is a disgrace to the supreme court system in British Columbia.

From the onset of the case (beginning in May of 20120), defence had to fight tooth and nail to get disclosure from Crown and to try and have Crown particularize the evidence so it was clearly evident what would be used in the actual trial. Instead Crown insisted that the case was an “ongoing investigation” and therefore they couldn’t provide the full disclosure until final weeks preceding trial. When they did send Defence counsel their Disclosure much of it was unreadable. Defence had to redo pages and pages of Crown evidence in order that it could be read in court, not only by defence but also by the jurors who would be expected to follow along in their own Binders. This aspect of the trial consumed hours of time and even after the trial was well underway it became blatantly obvious that the last two binders would have to be republished so the jury might have a readable copy to refer to. Those final two binders didn’t enter into the court until the morning of Friday, November 6, 2015!

Typical of the quality of the documents is the image below taken from one page of KILLING THE HUNDREDTH MONKEY: The Battle for Control and Censorship of Canada’s Internet by B’nai Brith Canada It would not be a stretch of the imagination to conceive of the jurors being each given a magnifying glass in order to try and read the evidence. Given that it cost the taxpayers an additional $2000.00 to have them reprinted twelve magnifying glasses might have been a more cost effective measure.

Screen Shot 2015-11-08 at 12.13.33 PM

Still to come

Monday, November 9, 2015 will see Crown present its summation to the jury. On Friday Justice Butler asked the jury if they would be ready to have him charge them on Tuesday morning the 10th of November. He told them that if he charged them on Tuesday that in the event they couldn’t come to a decision by the end of the day that they would have to remain sequestered through to November 11th which is Canada’s Remembrance Day federal holiday. The jury went out and discussed this and returned to tell Justice Butler that they would prefer to be charged on the 10th. That meant they didn’t think it would take more than one day to make their minds up.

As it now stands Tuesday, November 10th, 2015 will conclude the trial and a verdict will be handed down on that day. Stay tuned folks!

•••0•••
 
Donations can be made online via my GoGetFunding site located at http://gogetfunding.com/canadian-publisher-faces-jail-for-political-writings/ or else by sending cash, cheques or Money Orders to the following postal address. Please make sure that any cheques or Money Orders are made out to – Arthur Topham – and sent to:
 
Arthur Topham
4633 Barkerville Highway
Quesnel, B.C.
V2J 6T8

Arthur & the Jews The controversy over freedom of speech By Arthur Topham, Publisher & Editor RadicalPress.com

Arthur&TheJewsFINAL

Arthur & the Jews

The controversy over freedom of speech

By

Arthur Topham
Publisher & Editor
RadicalPress.com

October 23, 2015

“And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”

~ Jesus Christ, John, Ch. 8, Verse 32

“For nothing is secret that shall not be made manifest; neither any thing hid, that shall not be known and come abroad.”

~ Jesus Christ, Ch. 8, Verse 17

“If this book has any sombre look, that is the native hue of the story it tells, not the reflection of my own cast of mind. I have written with feeling: the feeling of a contemporary, participant, eye-witness and of a journalist thwarted in his calling, which in my belief should serve truth without fear or favour, not special interests. I have seen more of the events of our century and of the secret perversions of national purposes than most, and have discovered through this experience that it was not all chance, but design. Therefore I have written a protest, but it is a protest against the suppression of truth, not against life.”

~ Douglas Reed, The Controversy of Zion (1956), Epilogue, P. 568

 

Two days from the time of this writing, on October 26th, 2015, a trial in B.C. Supreme Court involving the case of Regina v Roy Arthur Topham will commence in the small city of Quesnel, located in the central interior of the province of British Columbia in an area known as the Cariboo.

In essence this isn’t just the trial of Arthur Topham based upon a politically motivated and spurious Sec. 319(2) Criminal Code of Canada “Hate Propaganda” charge initiated by one of Canada’s largest Zionist Jew lobby organization, B’nai Brith Canada. It’s far more than that. What will be on trial from October 26th to November 6th is the legal entitlement of all Canadians to exercise their Constitutionally guaranteed right to freedom of expression, both on and off the Internet –  as written in Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Sec. 2b which states that “Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: (b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication“.

The outcome of the trial will determine whether or not Canada is, in fact, a truly open and free democracy or a nation whose sovereignty and freedom has been compromised by the wilful, premeditated actions of foreign lobbyists inimical to the country as a whole. In other words Freedom of Speech will be on trial.

The charge itself ought to be clearly understood by everyone concerned about their rights and freedoms as Canadians. Thus we see that the charge under Sec. 319(2) of the Criminal Code reads as follows:

Roy Arthur TOPHAM, between the 28th day of April, 2011 and the 4th day of May, 2012, inclusive, at or near Quesnel, in the Province of British Columbia, did by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, willfully promote hatred against an identifiable group, people of the Jewish religion or ethnic origin, contrary to Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code.

B.C. Supreme Court Justice Butler will preside and a jury of twelve men and women will make the final determination of guilty or not guilty.

EndHateCrimeLegislation 2 copy 2

Basically, to narrow it down to its core intent, I am being charged with willfully promoting hatred against people of the Jewish religion or ethnic origin based upon the multitude of articles and online books which I have published on my website prior to and since April 28th, 2011 when the complaint was officially laid against me by Canada’s most controversial serial complainant in the history of the human rights industry. Within a month of the first complaint being laid a second individual, an agent working for the League of Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada, also filed an identical charge.

Upon receiving the complaints, the head of the BC Hate Crime Team, former Det. Cst. Terry Wilson located in Surrey, B.C. along with his partner Cst. Normandie Levas, initiated an investigation into the allegations. What was unknown to me at the time was that all three of these individuals knew each other and had known each other in some cases for as long as fifteen years and all three of them were in the “business” of hunting down and attacking individuals and website owners who were being critical of the foreign Zionist state of Israel and/or its ideology known as Zionism.

In fact the two complainants in the Sec. 319(2) complaint were known to be friends and associates as far back as 2007 when one of the same complainants, a Zionist Jew working for B’nai Brith Canada first laid a similar complaint against my person and my website RadicalPress.com using the now repealed Canadian Human Rights Act legislation known as Sec. 13. In other words I have been attacked by this foreign Zionist lobby organization now for the past nine years and have been in a constant battle with them to retain my basic human rights.

The whole of Crown’s case rests upon the key terms “willfully” and “hatred”, which, in the case of the latter term “hatred”, any person of common sense will realize, is a word that, like its opposite, “love”, is imbued with multiple meanings, all of which are based upon subjective emotions of one type or another.

Now there are some serious problems that accompany an allegation which accuses a person of “hating” a whole “identifiable group” such as the “people of the Jewish religion or ethnic origin” based upon not only his own writings but also the written works of dozens of other writers, journalists, video producers, talk show hosts, artists, musicians and so on and these problems will undoubtedly come up during the course of the trial.

FREEXPRESSIONLOCKUP copy 3

Without going into too much further detail surrounding the spurious nature of the charge of promoting “hatred” toward all the Jews of the world (an accusation arising from comments made to me by former Det. Cst. Terry Wilson during the time I was incarcerated after my arrest on May 16th, 2012) I would rather focus on letting readers know a bit about who I really am and what my life has been all about since at least the year 1967 when I first became involved in what is now commonly referred to as “political activism” or “social activism”.

I was twenty years old and in my second year of university at Simon Fraser University in Burnaby, B.C. in 1967. For those who were too young to remember the Sixties or weren’t born yet, it was a period of history not that different from the world we’re now living in. Wars were rampant then as they are now. Protests and civil rights and civil liberties were still in their nascent stages of development relative to today’s scene but people were demanding their rights in the Sixties just as they still are today. Police brutality and corporate crime and political corruption were as widespread then as they are now and the mainstream media in 1967 was basically just as controlled by the Zionists as it is today. The only fundamental difference really was the sudden and unexpected appearance throughout Western society of what became known as the Hippie Movement. It was that previously unheard of phenomenon that attracted me and countless others and became the focus of my life; one which has never ceased or abated since I first became involved with it.

The watchwords of the Hippie Movement were “Love” and “Peace” and our collective efforts to manifest those two positive, life-enhancing moral qualities throughout the war-torn society of our day were what inspired millions of my generation to work toward a world where violence and war and terror and hatred would end forever to be replaced by the fundamental Christian values and precepts taught by Jesus Christ, values that included learning to love each other and respect each other as well as caring for the Earth Mother that sustained us all. These were my guiding principles throughout my life and remain so to this very day.

With that in mind the accusation of the Zionist lobbyists, when it comes to dealing with their own hatred of anything or anyone who doesn’t support their ideological objectives or the actions of the foreign state of Israel and its parallel objectives, that every critic of their political agenda “hates” all the Jews in the world is utterly preposterous and beyond all comprehension. Having fashioned the term “hatred” into a twisted, Talmudic talisman of loathing and contempt through generations of endless propaganda emanating from their own controlled media and then inserting the word into Canadian jurisprudence via legal subterfuge and political influence, they now feel that they have the judicial wherewithal to attack their perceived enemies and somehow stem the unstoppable tide of political and spiritual awareness that was birthed in the Sixties and then embellished beyond comprehension and control in Nineties with the advent of the World Wide Web.

The controversy surrounding the Jews throughout history has now reached the point of culmination. Their mission to stop the truth from being revealed. whenever it applies to their own culpable actions, by using the criminal court system to attack the truth revealers is doomed to end in failure just as their efforts to stop the Internet from exposing their heinous acts of terror and murder and destruction perpetrated upon the defenceless Semitic people of Palestine has proven to be unstoppable.

The Age of Orwellian Censorship is coming to an end and it behooves all people of all races, nationalities, ethnicities and colour including the Jews to recognize that no single group of people has the right or the power or the ability to stem the tide of evolutionary consciousness that’s now happening on this planet.

It’s for these basic reasons that I have fought against the Zionist efforts to control our basic human rights over the past nine years. Now we will see if the country is willing to protect its most precious of gift – the freedom to speak one’s mind and express one’s views on whatever issues they deem of value to sustain our God given right to live in peace and happiness without fear and war.

I pray that God will grant us the wisdom to choose freedom over censorship and love over hate.

•••0•••

Please help out with my upcoming Sec. 319(2) “Hate Propaganda” trial that commences in one week on October 26th by making a donation.

Donations can be made online via my GoGetFunding site located at http://gogetfunding.com/canadian-publisher-faces-jail-for-political-writings/ or else by sending cash, cheques or Money Orders to the following postal address.

Please make sure that any cheques or Money Orders are made out to – Arthur Topham – and sent to:

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

 

Zionist Jew Lobby B’nai Brith Canada Attacks Buddhist Truth Revealer Brian Ruhe by Arthur Topham

BuddhaAttackHdr copy 2

 

BodhisattvaVow

Zionist Jew Lobby B’nai Brith Canada Attacks Buddhist Truth Revealer Brian Ruhe

by

Arthur Topham

They say that the Devil never rests and in the case of Canada’s rabid Zionist Jew lobby organization B’nai Brith Canada truer words were never spoken.

Not wishing to await the outcome of the upcoming trial of R v Roy Arthur Topham set to commence on October 26th, 2015 –  the result of which will play heavily into whether or not the pro-Israeli, Zionist lobbyist will have been successful in using their Sec. 319(2) “Hate Propaganda” legislation, which they successfully embedded into Canadian jurisprudence in order to censor and suppress any and all legitimate criticism of their nefarious political ideology and their detestable terrorist, racist supremacist actions in Palestine and around the world – the Zionists are continually combing the Internet here in Canada trolling with vehement and fanatical Simon Wiesenthal “Nazi-hunting” fervour for more truth seekers who are courageously revealing the plethora of lies that the Zionist controlled msm has been mind-controlling the masses with for the past century.

There are more victims of Zionist misfeasance in former democratic Canada than the recent case of Buddhist author and teacher Brian Ruhe of Vancouver, B.C., the foremost being that of Vancouver’s Chinese artist and writer Joe Canuck whose two websites www.joecanuck.net and www.joecanuck.wix.com/justiceforchinese were both surreptitiously and summarily silenced and removed from the net by the server www.wix.com without explanation to the owner, but for now I will focus on Ruhe as his woes are well documented.

What is rather unique about this latest provocation by the Zionist Jew control freaks from B’nai Brith Canada is that they usually spend their time and taxpayer’s money attacking Christians who they feel they can accuse of spreading “hate” toward their self-chosen tribe of spiritual delinquents in order to have their victim’s tossed in the slammer for a couple of years and their websites either taken down and/or, as in the recent case of Canada’s coffee and donut franchise Tim Hortons, if nothing else, at least have their sites blocked from access by the general public.

These Talmudic Marxist Bolshevik Communist inspired censors from B’nai Brith Canada are relentless and deeply disturbed individuals – their insecurity and paranoia being paramount and the transparency of their actions blatantly obvious in every act they perform. Rather than openly debating those who criticize aspects of their own ideological foundations and proving them wrong they prefer to use their “power of the purse” and their undue political, legal and media influence to simply vilify and slander their intellectual opponents and in the process do anything they can to discriminate against and harass them and destroy their financial means of survival.

In the case of Vancouver based Buddhist teacher Brian Ruhe, rather than attempt to have him charged with a Sec. 319(2) “Hate Propaganda” Criminal Code of Canada offence, they’ve decided to do everything in their power to both discredit his good name amongst his employers and destroy his livelihood at all costs. This is the first instance that I’ve heard of where they are working their vile black sorcery behind the scenes in order to destroy the reputation and good will of a recognized and practising Buddhist. Once again living proof that their Talmudic mindset has absolutely no regard for any other religions or beliefs besides its own supremacist, racist ideology.

Readers who have been following my own case in the courts over the past 9 years of litigation brought on by this same notorious group of self-deluded sycophants for the state of Israel will know that recently I was interviewed on video by Brian Ruhe while in Vancouver early this year while looking after my dying brother. The purpose of the interview was to assist me in raising awareness about Canada’s disgusting, unjust “Hate Crime” legislation (Sec. 318 to 320 CCC) which the Zionist Jew lobby was directly responsible for creating for their own self-serving purposes as well as helping me to raise funds for my upcoming trial this October.

Meeting Brian for the first time in the flesh it was easily discernible to me that here was another individual who had finally, through his own researching and seeking, come to the full realization that all we had been told and taught about world history over the past century was twisted and warped beyond comprehension by the Zionist Jew media acting in and through all of its shape-shifting aspects, be they academia, Hollywood movies, books, magazines, radio stations, tv news and the Zionist newspaper monopoly.

Brian Ruhe is the author of two well-known and loved books on Buddhism. His first work, Freeing the Buddha, pictured below was published in March of 1998.

FreeingtheBuddha copy

FreeingtheBuddha 1 copy

Brian’s second work, A Short Walk On An Ancient Path, came out in 2010 accompanied, as in his first work, with many positive reviews.

ShortWalkonÅncientPath copy

ShortWalkonÅncientPath 1 copy 6ShortWalkonÅncientPath 1 copy 4

ShortWalkonÅncientPath 1 copy 5

Upon reading the book reviews and accolades it was quite apparent that Brian Ruhe was/is a well loved and respected Buddhist meditation instructor. He had moved to Vancouver back in 1980 from Ontario where he’d studied business and philosophy at Brock University. Following a few years stint as a financial planner Brian’s inner quest for greater spiritual understanding finally moved him to begin his search for a deeper understanding of life. Like many of his generation he was drawn to Buddhism because of its focus upon the mind and the age-old practise of seeking within one’s own being for the truths that the soul eternally strives to attain.

Brian’s path led him to a Tibetan Buddhist centre in Vermont, USA that had been founded by the world reknowned Buddhist teacher Chögyam Trungpa. From there he traveled to Thailand where he continued his spiritual efforts for the next four years and was trained to be a meditation instructor. Brian eventually returned to Canada in order to begin sharing his teachings with others.

It wasn’t coincidental nor did it require any amount of foresight to realize that while in conversation with Brian at his Kitsilano apartment in Vancouver during the course of our interview we openly discussed the prospect that it was merely a matter of time before he would, in all likelihood, like myself, soon show up on B’nai Brith Canada’s radar screen and the attack upon his name and work would commence. In fact, it wasn’t long after doing the video with Brian I learned from him that he was being attacked front, left and center by the Zionist forces embedded throughout our pro-Israel, Jewish-influenced cultural institutions.

Of course, as per usual, it began with a Zionist Jew “Lama” (try wrapping your mind around that one!) by the name of “Tsewang” who phoned Brian at his home and threatened to call B’nai Brith Canada (BBC) and report him. Once he did that B’nai Brith’s Victoria based sayan operative* wrote to the Vancouver Parks Board and had Brian fired from teaching at (four) community centres.

On Sept. 14th Mr. Ruhe did get fired from the Roundhouse Community and Arts Centre. When this despicable act occurred Brian Ruhe phoned the sayan agent in Victoria, B.C. and spoke to him.  The BBC operative told Brian “I don’t think you’re qualified to teach.” He then threatened to contact the Vancouver Police force and register a complaint of harassment against Mr. Ruhe for actually having the chutzpah to call him on the telephone to discuss his rash and hateful behaviour!

Following word of his dismissal Brian also wrote a letter to Craig Giles – President of the Roundhouse Community and Arts Centre stating in part,

“As the president of the association you are in a leadership position in our community and it doesn’t make sense that someone in Victoria should tell you how to do your job. Were you under pressure from any quarters to fire me? Did City Manager Penny Ballem have anything to do with this?

I have taught meditation for 16 years at the Roundhouse since 1999 with over 1000 people taking my classes there in groups from 5 to 25. This has helped a lot of people and I have a good reputation with these students. I’ve always enjoyed working with the staff and have had a very good relationship with them all these years. I have booked Tuesday nights here and now it’s too late to work somewhere else for the fall term.

This is a larger issue of freedom of speech in Canada. I was fired for using my freedom of speech in my YouTube videos where I discuss truth search themes about geopolitical power in the world and 20th century history. I didn’t discuss these views in my meditation classes, I was not accused of doing so and there were no complaints from the students in my classes. I feel that I am showing a high moral standard by speaking out for the benefit of humanity. Our country was founded on the fundamental principle of freedom of speech and our forefathers fought for the freedoms that you and I have today. You are in a leadership position so I ask you to consider this and write back to me with your thoughts on this please.

Thank you kindly,

Brian Ruhe

brianruhe.ca

So that in a nutshell is what is now happening here in Canada when anyone decides to question the Zionist Jewish narrative whether it be their “Holocaust Hoax” of the 20th Century, their actions in Gaza against the indigenous true Semitic people of Palestine, their media control over Canada and the West,  or any number of other facets of the Zionist paradigm that the Jews subject their host societies to in order to maintain their power base throughout the Western world.

Brian Ruhe’s experience is not new. Je Suis Brian Ruhe! There have been dozens of other Canadians before him (including yours truly) who have suffered the slings and arrows of outrageous falsehood by the political machinations of this tribe of psychopathic deviants willing to go to any length to prevent the world from knowing the truth about their dark and sinister agenda for total global control of the world’s resources, both natural and human.

In a very real sense this is the essence of all that I have fought against over the past nine years of ongoing litigation brought on by this power-crazed Rothschild Freemasonic organization known as B’nai Brith Canada. It began on Valentine’s Day February 14th, 2007 when this same deluded maniacal sayan first sent me an unsolicited email using a phoney alias “Brian Esker” accusing me of being an “anti-Semite” and demanding that I stop publishing articles on the Zionist Jews and remove the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion from my website.

Come October 26th, 2015 here in Quesnel’s Supreme Court we will see whether or not these past nine years of harassment, intimidation, arrest, incarceration and theft of my personal computers, files and firearms will end with a victory for freedom of speech in Canada and a loss for the likes of this traitorous foreign lobby group B’nai Brith Canada and their sleazy serpentine zombie trolls. If it doesn’t then we will all be held hostage to these alien enemy interlopers who’ve been destroying our nation and culture for the past century and the country will be torn further and further apart as they once again destroy another gentile nation in their heinous game of power and control over humanity.

Justice must and Will prevail.

——-

* [Editors Note: I am restricted by a court order from publishing the name of this B’nai Brith agent.]

••••  ••••

Please help out with my upcoming Sec. 319(2) “Hate Propaganda” trial in October by making a donation.

Donations can be made online via my GoGetFunding site located at http://gogetfunding.com/canadian-publisher-faces-jail-for-political-writings/ or else by sending cash, cheques or Money Orders to the following postal address. Please make sure that any cheques or Money Orders are made out to – Arthur Topham – and sent to:

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

BC HATE CRIME TEAM Det.Cst. Terry Wilson Pulls Disappearing Act By Arthur Topham

WilsonResignsHdr

BC HATE CRIME TEAM Det.Cst. Terry Wilson Pulls Disappearing Act  

By Arthur Topham

I recently learned from an associate that Det. Cst. Terry Wilson, Chief Investigator for the BRITISH COLUMBIA HATE CRIME TEAM located in Surrey, B.C. has suddenly “retired” from the RCMP.

Former Det. Wilson was the head cop responsible for flying his Hate Crime Team up to Quesnel, B.C. and then, with the assistance of the local RCMP, stopping me and my wife on the Barkerville Hwy while traveling to Prince George on business on the morning of May 16th, 2012 and then arresting me on a trumped up Sec. 319(2) “Hate Crime” charge and tossing me in the Quesnel jail.

TOOMUCHTOTHINK!

While I was locked up he and his partner Cst. Normandie Levas then proceeded to gain an illegal search warrant from some flunky judge down on the coast and then entered my home and stole all of my computers and electronic files.

BBTRAITORS

When I was released just before midnight from confinement I was given an order not to post anything on the internet. Since that infamous day, 1181 more days have passed, first battling with the B.C. provincial court system and now with the BC Supreme Court in order to defend my name and my Constitutional right to publish news and opinions on my legitimate sole proprietor business website RadicalPress.com as well as stop the legal system from possibly sentencing me to two more years in jail should I be found guilty of this spurious, politically motived “crime” initiated by the Jewish lobby group B’nai Brith Canada a secretive, Jews-only Freemason society.

The first question that sprung to my mind when I heard of Det. Wilson’s disappearance from the force was did he leave intentionally in order to somehow avoid having to appear in court when the trial commences this October 26th here in Quesnel and thus escape being cross-examined for his part in this whole disgusting charade that has been ongoing since November of 2007?

Or could it have been due to the fact that Wilson and his “HATE CRIME TEAM” have been wasting HUGE amounts of taxpayer’s money for years trying to catch Canadians who are merely exercising the constitutional right to free expression on  the internet and NEVER gaining a conviction over the time and money spent on this frivolous and malicious enterprise of censorship on the part of the Zionist Jew lobby in Canada?

terry-loves-donuts-2 copy

Whatever the reason this traitor to Canada and sycophant for the Zionist lobby is a disgrace to the country. Having stole years and years of private email communications when they removed all of my computers Wilson then proceeded to snoop about through the hundreds of thousands of private communications like some voyeur trying to find out who I’ve been exchanging my private thought and ideas with since 2006 at the earliest. Whenever I think about this sonofasatan going through all of my private email it burns my ass knowing that what he was doing was unethical, immoral and down right criminal. In fact there is a 5-year jail sentence for people like Wilson and Levas who pull this sort of shit on citizens that still awaits redress.

So this is how our justice system works in Canada these days. The Zionist lobby creates these phoney Commie style spy organizations and portrays them to the public as defenders of human rights and commissars of “hate speech” and then wastes millions of dollars of taxpayer’s hard-earned money threatening, abusing, arresting and charging people like myself for publishing news articles and opinions that the Jewish media intentionally hides and/or distorts from the public in order to cover their own asses and their own obnoxious and nefarious agenda.

Wilson will appear at my trial to justify his actions come hell or high water and justice WILL prevail.

 

Lonnie Landrud video exposes why Christy Clark Liberal government destroyed value evidence on Highway of Tears from RadicalPress.com

In light of the recent news events surrounding the BC Liberal government’s destruction of evidence surrounding the Highway of Tears mystery it is advisable to watch this important video of Lonnie Landrud. It will explain who is responsible for this great “mystery” and why the Christy Clark government is aiding and abetting the guilty party.

Header4LandrudArt

http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=1362

Canada: Hypocrite Nation Ruled by Zionist Deception & anti-Free Speech Laws by Arthur Topham

CanFlag1

Canada: Hypocrite Nation Ruled by Zionist Deception & anti-Free Speech Laws

Deconstructing the Zionist media’s hypocrisy surrounding Charlie Hebdo and the notion of “Freedom of Speech”

By

Arthur Topham

January 19th, 2015

 

“The National Post, perhaps Canada’s foremost advocate and practitioner of censorship, is the least qualified to condemn the alleged revenge massacre of 11 Charlie Hebdo workers, yet devoted several consecutive front pages and endless verbiage to the incident – far greater coverage than that allotted to the brutal massacre of 3000 innocent Palestinians several months earlier in Gaza, although the massacre was the more reprehensible for having been committed by a racist, occupier government already condemned by the United Nations for its barbarism.”

~ Ian V. Macdonald, letter to the National Post, Jan. 10, 2015

 

The latest Zionist false flag event in Paris, France on January 7th, 2015 that wiped out the staff of the pro-zionist, anti-Muslim, anti-Christian Charlie Hebdo hate propaganda rag, immediately unleashed a massively orchestrated outcry of cacophonous proportions from the Beast’s Big Brother Zionist msm media calling for greater protection of people’s right to “Freedom of Speech”.

Apart from the aftermath of 9/11, never has this writer witnessed such a unified show of chimerical bigotry and deception, all of it wrapped in the gilded glitter of falsely misplaced emotional rhetoric, blatant lies and contrived television imagery specifically designed and pre-packaged to elicit a world-wide response from an unconscious audience of somnambulant innocents still too blurry-eyed and bewitched to recognize the reality of the Rothschild New World Order and its modus operandi.

Reacting with predictable clockwork precision to their own fabricated murderous crime; one bearing all the standard hallmarks of yet another Israeli Mossad covert operation designed to appear as a deliberate “terrorist act” by a fanatical group of “radical” Muslims, the Canada-wide Zionist-controlled media immediately cranked up its Islamophobic sirens to a deafening roar with broadcasts blaring forth from talking heads accompanied by what W. H. Auden once aptly styled, “the hum of the printing presses, turning forests into lies” with their broadsheets whirling like buzz saws 24/7, flashing out nonstop, monotonous anti-Islam hate messages to Canadians across the country.

This relentless verbal/visual assault by the Talmudic inspired Israeli/Rothschild media upon the abused psyche of Western civilization – ongoing since their hugely successful 9/11 coup of September 11th, 2001 – has now reached the stage where every facet of their global crime syndicate is being utilized to increase hatred and fear of Islam to a climactic point of no return, thus providing their needed justification for whatever pre-emptive mode of violent attack the Zionist Jew killing machine might wish to adopt in the near future.

No better example exists of this hypocritical, bigoted vilification of Islam by the Zionist-controlled media than that found in their premier flag ship hate generator the National Post, Tel Aviv’s direct propaganda line for funnelling into the unwary, dumbed down minds of Canadians, Israel’s racist, supremacist, apartheid mindset; one that constitutes the foundational basis of its twisted, psychopathic political ideology known as Zionism.

NatZJPost copy 7

Completely disregarding Canada’s horrific record of outright censorship, harassment, fines, jailings and ongoing suppression of its own citizens’ fundamental right to freedom of speech, the Zionist media now has the unmitigated chutzpah to sermonize to Canadians about how important it is to protect “FREE SPEECH” for the likes of Charlie Hebdo and co. all the while overlooking the stinking mess of free speech violations in Canada’s own backyard.

Canada’s Disgraceful “Free Speech” Record

The National Post, of all Canada’s zio-rags, is a veteran of the infamous and controversial Section 13 “hate speech” legislation wars that suddenly gained prominence across the nation around 2007 when the Canadian Islamic Congress (CIC) filing a Section 13 “hate speech” complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) against Rogers Media Inc. (Macleans Magazine), based upon the reproduction of perceived anti-Islam writings by one of their pro-Zionist Jewish writers Mark Steyn.

Coinciding with Steyn’s case was also that of Ezra Levant, then owner of the Western Standard, an Alberta based tabloid that callously published the infamous Jyllands-Posten cartoons of the  Holy Prophet Muhammad (SAWW) back in February of 2006. As a result of Levant’s insolent disregard for Islam’s holy Prophet both the Islamic Supreme Council of Canada and the Edmonton Council of Muslim Communities filed complaints against Levant and his magazine with the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission that resulted in a hearing in January of 2008.

 MarcLemireFreedomsite

Marc Lemire, one of Canada’s most distinguished Section 13 victims and staunch resister to this nasty piece of Zionist/Bolshevik-motivated legislation, gives us a compete, well documented history of the rise and fall of Section 13 which can be found on his website, FreedomSite Blog As well, for those interested in delving into the specifics surrounding this specious piece of draconian “hate speech” legislation that initially slithered its way into Canadian jurisprudence via the untiring efforts of Canada’s Jewish lobby organizations (predominantly the former Canadian Jewish Congress and B’nai Brith Canada) beginning as far back as the 1950’s, I suggest reading the following article, Bad Moon Rising: How the Jewish Lobbies Created Canada’s “Hate Propaganda” Laws.

In Part 3 of Lemire’s history, under sub-heading “Section 13: The Shit hits the fan”, he writes: “Keep in mind that the primary intent of Section 13 was to quietly keep it behind closed doors and censor individuals in a manner which “would not be attended by great publicity”.  While this was true with most Section 13 cases, it certainly was not true with Mark Steyn and Macleans Magazine. The proverbial ‘hate speech earthquake’ hit the media, once it was revealed that one of Canada’s most respected magazines and the “one-man global content provider” Mark Steyn were under investigation for hate speech.  Editorials against censorship went viral from coast to coast in Canada and spread across the globe via the Internet.”

The war to silence Canadians and stymie any public speech that the Jewish lobby felt might negatively impact them or Israel in any way (either on or off the internet), gained its foothold back in 1977 when the federal government first implemented the so-called Canadian Human Rights Act and created its attendant enforcement agencies, the Canadian Human Rights Commission and the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (CHRT). Both the commission and the tribunal were quasi-judicial, i.e. “crazy” judicial in that they basically set their own rules and guidelines and consistently changed the “legal” goal posts depending upon whatever case they were dealing with, in order to ensure a conviction. If fact, of the hundreds of Canadians dragged before these Stalinist style “Show Trial” tribunals, EVERYONE was found guilty for the simple reason that all it took was for someone to register a complain against them and that, in itself, sealed their fate. When I describe Section 13 as a “Bolshevik” type law I do so with the full knowledge that under the former Soviet system, Lenin, in one of the regime’s very first acts upon gaining absolute power, was to make “anti-Semitism” a crime punishable by death. Death, that is, without so much as a trial even. All it would take, (just as with the Section 13 “complaints”) was for someone to accuse another of said crime and the Cheka (soviet secret police) had the excuse to execute the victim.

In the case of Canada and its Section 13 “hate crime” laws, which invariably include the same accusation of “anti-Semitism”, the punishment wasn’t quite as severe or immediate but metaphorically speaking, in term of survival, the victims stood no greater chance of gaining their freedom once accused.  Many, if not most of the victims, were unable to afford to hire counsel and even if they were able to the fact that Truth was not considered a viable defence against whatever they had written or spoken, it was virtually impossible to argue against the charge. As such the defendants were at the mercy of the tribunals and the commission’s commissars were able to maintain a 100% conviction rate right up until 2007 when, Allah be praised!, the Canadian Islamic Congress and other Muslim organizations finally decided to file similar Section 13 complaints against the two self-chosen writers mentioned above who were, by their Judaic birthmarks, both members of the same conniving covenant that initially bore responsibility for creating these very censorship laws in the first place. Not only that, they were the only two Jews in Canada ever to be charged with “hate speech” under Section 13 and, surprise! surprise! the only two individuals ever to escape the snares and traps that CHRC and the CHRT had used on hundreds of non-Jewish Canadians for decades prior to then.

SteynLevantJNOMouthpieces800

It has always been this writer’s contention, based upon my last eight years of personal experience in dealing with these Orwellian censors, that had the Canadian Islamic Congress not filed a complaint against Mark Steyn and Macleans Magazine and had Ezra Levant also not been charged by a Muslim complainant over his publication of the infamous Prophet Muhammad (SAWW) cartoons, this Zionist-inspired legislation known as Section 13 that clung like a barnacle to the dark underside of Canada’s legal system for the past thirty years without the Zionist media challenging it, would, in all likelihood, have continued on unabated and still not have been repealed. It was only the final realization by the Jewish lobby that Section 13 was, in fact, a double-edged sword capable of being used against their own kind as well that spurred the Zionist media on to make a major issue out of an Orwellian, Zionist-driven law that had for decades been used against non-Jews with hardly a murmur of protest. Now that the perpetrators themselves were being held to account for the same crimes the whole dynamic changed and the war to rid the nation of Section 13 began in earnest.

It was around the same period (2007) when Steyn and Levant received their just deserts that I and my website RadicalPress.com were also caught up in the legally sticky Section 13 “hate speech” web and I suddenly found myself forcefully initiated into that elite, Zionist-created group of alleged “hate-mongers”,”anti-Semites”, “racists” and “neo-Nazis” who had come before me throughout the late 70’s, 80’s and 90’s. In my own case it was the secret, Jews-only Masonic society, B’nai Brith Canada who had filed a Section 13 complaint against me with the Canadian Human Rights Commission; one premised on the “contention that Arthur Topham of Quesnel, British Columbia, Canada and his internet publication known as Radicalpress.com contrive to promote ongoing hatred affecting persons identifiable as Jews and/or as citizens of Israel.” Please note the “citizens of Israel” portion. It was the first time in Canadian jurisprudence that the Jews, via their back-room manipulation of the CHRC, had arbitrarily introduced this novel addition to the Section 13 complaint; one which now included people of a foreign nation! [There are reasons why they attempted this but a thorough analysis of that particular subterfuge is beyond the scope of this article. A.T.]

While the Zionist news media, throughout its campaign to hasten the demise of Section 13, magnified its two pet Jewish “free speech” advocates to heroic proportions, the remaining hundreds of victims, once they had been tried and convicted, inevitably sank back into Zion’s media pit of silence and anonymity their identities liquidated and their unjust sufferings lost forever. Their names though are important, more important to the struggle for real freedom of speech than the media’s manufactured heroes, Steyn and Levant, for the nameless ones were the truly courageous Canadian heroes, those resisters whose who, on their own and motivated by their strong convictions, had stood up to Canada’s Marxist/Bolshevik commissars with little or no money and next to nil support from the general public while the Zio-media used all of its ill-gained media power to malign, vilify and crucify them in the public eye, just as they always do to anyone who stands in the way of their hate-filled agenda.  And so here I present the names of some of victims that I was able to find. God forgive me for the ones I’ve left off (if readers can provide me with additional names I’ll add them to my website as they emerge).

The list began with John Ross Taylor back in the late 70’s and carried on with Terry Long, Randy Johnston, William James Harcus, Wolfgang Droege, Kevin Lew, Derek J. Peterson, Tony McAleer, Charles Scott, Ernst Zundel, John Micka, Fred Kyburz, Eldon Warman, Alexan Kulbashian, James Scott Richardson, Tomasz Winnicki, Craig Harrison, Peter Kouba, Glen Bahr, Terry Tremaine, Alex Di Civita, Liz Lampman, Lubomyr Prytulak, Bobby Wilkinson, Jessica Beaumont, Melissa Guille, Ciaran Paul Donnelly, Jason Ouwendyk, Heather Fleming, Ronald Fleming, Jim Keegstra, Malcolm Ross, Doug Collins, Marc Lemire, Arthur Topham, David Ahenakew, Bill Whatcott, Mark Merek, Dean Clifford….

It must also be mentioned here that those pictured below, as well as Bill Whatcott, were all assisted in great measure by Canada’s foremost defender of true freedom of speech, the late Douglas Christie, who acted in varying capacities for all of the accused, including myself, right up to the point of his tragic passing in March of 2013.

DouglasHChristieFreedomFighter copy 3

SomeCanadianFreeSpeechVictims

In previous writings I’ve delved further into the creation of Canada’s “Hate Propaganda” laws and in every case of ongoing persecution and prosecution it was always the Jewish lobby groups in Canada who were clambering and crying for the use and retention of these anti-democratic, unconstitutional “laws” that for some strange reason, in practically 99% of all cases, involved non-Jewish individuals who were being critical of the ideology of political Zionism or the illegal, terrorist actions of the state of Israel toward the Palestinian people or else exposing the mendacious Jewish Rothschild central banking cartel that controls much of the world’s monetary system or the Jewish media cartel that controls the vast proportion of the Western world’s media and source of information. Those who were publishing critical articles were doing so because they firmly believed that their country, its government, jurisprudence, culture and social mores were under direct attack by the foreign influences of these Zionist organizations plus the choke hold that the state of Israel was gaining over Canada’s federal leaders and their parties. In other words their criticisms in many cases were based upon their personal belief and knowledge that Canada was under attack from foreign agents and that it was their constitutional right and duty to express their views on this vital matter of national security.

Charlie Hebdo and the ongoing Lies of the Jews

Juxtaposed against this background gestalt of brutal, repressive anti-Free Speech legislation (easily traced back to and premised upon the foundational lie of the 20th Century by World Jewry that “6 Million Jews” had been “holocausted” by gas and ovens in the work camps of National Socialist Germany during the latter half of WWII, a deception now proven to have been a fabricated event of mythical and universal proportions perpetrated upon humanity), Canada’s anti-Free Speech laws tended, in practically every case, to always benefit only one small minority  – the nation’s Jewish community – who amount to less that 2% of the country’s population. Thus all the present hoopla emanating from the Jewish-controlled media about “Freedom of Speech”, “free expression” and the West’s longstanding “liberal” tradition of justifiable satire for the likes of Islamophobic and Christianophobic writers, artists and publishers like Charlie Hebdo, the repulsively loathsome Jew ‘comedian’ Sarah Silverman, et al, resonates with even greater magnitude the same hollow sounds of bigotry and deception here in Canada today.

When the news began to break via Twitter on June 26th, 2013 that the Canada’s Senate had finally given third and final reading to Bill C-304, an Act to repeal the censorship provision – Section 13 – contained in the Canadian Human Rights Act this didn’t automatically signal the end of ALL of Canada’s repressive “Free Speech” legislation. Far from it. All the repeal accomplished was to removed the provisions within the Act that formerly gave non-Jews the same legal right to point a fierce and accusing finger at those of “Jewish ethnicity” who were out to destroy Canada’s socio-cultural and democratic way of life and demand that they also be held accountable for their traitorous actions against the nation in this regard. The demise, therefore, of Section 13, as far as the Zionist media was concerned, was the end of their coverage on the issue of “Freedom of Speech”. Their job was done and their own media was now far less restricted in its ability to carry on with their Islamophobic agenda of vilifying Muslims everywhere. As for the even more threatening, draconian legislation still contained within Canada’s Criminal Code under Section 318 to 320, “Hate Propaganda”, those heinous laws are still very much alive and currently being used to the max to take down my website RadicalPress.com and myself and thus set a new precedent that will undoubtedly be used to coerce any other Canadian citizen who might think they still have the right of “Freedom of Speech” to self-censor their opinions and beliefs and whatever historic research they may have uncovered that might support their viewpoint.

When you are immersed in the thick of a battle, be it to retain your constitutional right to freedom of expression or your fundamental right to stay alive physically, you quickly learn who the enemy is and what type of tactics they employ to overpower you. After eight long years of being in the trenches of what metaphorically (and some say realistically) might appropriately be called World War III and witnessing the stratagems used by the Zionist forces, it becomes clear how their modus operandi works. In actual physical warfare the Zionist forces, be they Israel attacking Gaza with their superior military firepower or the USA attacking Iraq with its superior firepower, they always resort to what they coined their “Shock and Awe” bombing power on their perceived enemy. This same strategy though is also, first and foremost, used pre-emptively when it comes to their disinformation “bombing campaign”campaigns that always precede any actual on the ground operations. In esoteric terms it exhibits the old adage, “As above, so below”.

At this stage of writing, the Charlie Hebdo narrative, for those whose minds haven’t already succumbed to the current “Shock and Awe” propaganda ordinance emanating forth from Zion’s big media guns, more than sufficient evidence now exists to prove that we’ve being subjected once again to another Israeli Mossad false flag operation; one deliberately orchestrated in order to provide the necessary media grist to carry out their latest “Free Speech” disinfo blitzkrieg designed to fool the traumatized masses into believing their lie that the massacre was carried out by “Muslim Jihadists” incensed over the magazine’s ongoing slander and mockery of Islam’s Holy Prophet Muhammad (SAWW). Nothing could be further from the truth.

As many writers have already revealed, including the American writer Dr. Paul Craig Roberts: “The Charlie Hebdo Story Simply Doesn’t Wash“. There’s just too many similarities to all the previous false flag events, including the greatest of all thus far in the 21st Century – 9/11– all of which were carried out with precisely the same global mind-control objective – the obfuscation, via dissimulation and outright LIES projected through Zion’s global media cartel, of the true motives and actions of the state of Israel, first by transforming, then transposing their wilful and ongoing acts of terrorism against the Muslim people of the Middle East into a completely opposite, inverted and deceptive narrative; one that portrays Israel (again and again) as the woefully misunderstood victim of the former “Nazi-insprired Holocaust of 6 Million Jews”  plus interminable Islamic ill-will, anti-Semitic chicanery and racist hatred, all of which is presently being focalized in the Charlie Hebdo incident in order to then justify their ultimate purpose in pulling off this latest cabalistic caper; one intended to be a “shock and awe” strike against the very foundations of freedom itself, that is, the fundamental, God-given right and necessity for every single human being on the face of this planet to be allowed to speak their mind and criticize whomever they feel may be attempting to stand in the way of this core human characteristic and all it entails in terms of keeping the principles of truth, honesty and moral rectitude alive.

By their past fruits we are able to recognize the Zionist’s present plot to disenfranchise the West of its basic human right to free expression via their entrenched “Hate Speech” laws which they themselves were instrumental in setting in place over the decades following WWII and have steadfastly refused to abolish in Canada and France and Germany and Australia and numerous other EU nations. It also explains the Zionist media’s refusal to deal with Section 318 to 320 during the many years that Section 13 was a hot topic across the Zionist news wires. The big question remains though, why are they waxing so eloquent about “Freedom of Speech” for the likes of Charlie Hebdo yet refusing to face the reality of these current, draconian “Hate Propaganda”laws; ones that fly in the face of the very principles and liberties that they are now espousing with such zealous vigour and haughtiness?

Dieudonne, Moi, Satire and Big Brother double standards

Je suis Dieudonne!! 1000 NEW

The most inescapable act of hypocrisy regarding the Zionist media’s trumpeting of “Freedom of Speech” is France’s disingenuous and despicable treatment of that nation’s famed comedian Dieudonne M’Bala M’Bala, without a doubt one of the finest and incisive minds, popular comedians and satirists alive today. The French officials’ two-faced approach of promoting Charlie Hebdo and the concept of “Freedom of Speech” and the right to satire anything satireable while at the same time going on a “Hate Speech” rampage around the country arresting anyone who so much as made a contrary peep about the manifestly obvious suspicious murders or didn’t append their “Je suis” to the proper name, not only showed the world what a bunch of hypocritical and dangerous clowns they were but also reinforced the fact that France’s government is totally under the control of seditious Zionist Jew forces.

Just recently, in a radio interview with Kevin Barrett where we were discussing the whole Dieudonne debacle, it was pointed out that what is happening to Dieudonne in France and myself here in Canada over the past eight years of ongoing harassment, arrests, libel suit threats and so on is indicative of a world-wide conspiracy to stop the flow of truthful information concerning the miserable machinations of World Jewry’s Zionist juggernaut whether it issues forth from writings on a blogsite or from out of the mouths of satirical comedians such as Dieudonne.

While it’s just fine for Charlie Hebdo to “satirize” whomever they like (but please don’t criticize Zionism or Israel) when I penned a satire on a hate-filled screed against the German people originally written by a Jewish writer, Theodore n. Kaufman, back in 1941 in his now infamous book, Germany Must Perish! and called it Israel Must Perish! the immediate reaction from the Jew lobby in Canada was to file a Sec. 319(2) “Hate Propaganda” complaint against me and my website alleging that I was calling for the genocide of the whole Jewish population! Did the satire aspect of the article elude their intellectual acumen or were they just grasping at straws in order to somehow get me arrested? Only time will tell.

Here in Canada it’s B’nai Brith International, one of Rothschild’s 19th century secret masonic brainchilds, who man Big Brother’s “hate speech” ghetto towers, sweeping the Cyberian landscape 24/7 with their search lights in an ongoing effort to spot a Truth Revealer lurking somewhere in the digital underbrush that they can then literally hunt down by simply filing a Section 319(2) “hate speech” complaint against them with whatever local “Hate Crime Team” may be available depending upon the province the patriot resides in.

BBDieuTop1000

In France they likely hide behind a different mask but regardless of the name their purpose is to spy on a nation’s citizens and rat out anyone who they think may be a danger to Zion’s ongoing subterfuge and then use that nation’s “Hate Speech” laws to prosecute the alleged “anti-Semitic” victim.

The notion of satire has to be the biggest joke of all when viewed within the context of the current feigned fuss over free expression and the Charlie Hebdo false flag. For the Zionist Jew media the right to be able to publish endless lies, hatred, pornography, Islamophobia, Christianophobia – all of which mock everything that humanity has held sacred for millennia – is foremost and nothing illustrates this fact more than the government/media’s full-scale promotion of the latest edition of Charlie Hebdo that came out within practically a week following the demise of its former staff. Touting this deliberate act of further promoting a magazine whose contents supposedly were responsible for the deaths of around a dozen or more people as “Freedom of Speech” has to be one of the more provocative examples of Jewish chutzpah ever witnessed, yet, thanks to such sinister machinations this jaded, derelict crime syndicate comprised of interminable moral reprobates and serial killers were then able to utilize their widespread media sorcery to cast their evil spell over millions of French citizens thus manipulating them into believing their absurd lies while at the same time dashing about the country arresting others who were theoretically exercising these same, supposed “freedoms”.

As a Christian I’ve observed the artistic, literary and mimetic actions of the Jews when it comes to “satirizing” non-Jewish religions, their churches, their leaders or their saints and I’ve seen with my own eyes too many examples of what they consider to be “free expression” and “satire” disguised as “modern art” or “satire” yet, upon closer examination reveal themselves to be nothing more than lurid, depraved exhibitions of pornographic, scatological/sexual perversion and deviancy, reprehensible to the eye and an affront to one’s spiritual and moral sense of propriety. And when I witness such moral obscenity associated with their “artistic” creations I can only conclude and agree with those who state that the ideology of political Zionism is, at its root, immoral, atheistic and demonic in nature and cannot be connected to anything truly spiritual or holy in the traditional sense of those terms.

That said it behooves me to further add that, given all of the revulsion, disrespect, contempt and derision that much of what Zion vainly attempts to portray as “art” and “satire” entails, what is even more insulting, outrageous and unjust, is the fact that, after appointing themselves the arbiters of all things permissible, including the right to insult and denigrate anyone that they so wish to (for whatever purposes), they then turn around and create, promulgate and rigidly uphold so-called “Hate Speech” laws that exist only to prohibit, by the force of the state, anyone else from exercising these same identical freedoms which they sell to the gullible public as universal rights and freedoms!  Put in layman’s language there can never be such a thing as a level playing field when it comes to “Freedom of Speech” if, as in Orwell’s Animal Farm, some people are more free to say what they want than others.

Allow me to present some examples. As a Christian I’ll use two ‘cartoons’ from Charlie Hebdo that relate to spreading Christianophobia or anti-Christian, anti-God hate propaganda rather than adding to the already existing plethora of specious, Zionist hate-motivated Islamophobic “art”. To wit:

 

CharHebGod

The Babylonian Talmud, the “bible” of the Rabbinical cult we associate with “Judaism”, consists of massive tomes of Jewish “Law” purported (by the priesthood) to have been handed down orally to Moses by the Jewish “g-d” Jehovah in the self-chosen people’s hoary past. Then, with the addition of greater masses of written commentary on said law, finally set in print around the 5th century A.D. The Talmud considered to be the ultimate authority and reference when it comes to any and all questions dealing with the religious life of an orthodox Jew supersedes the Torah in all aspects of authority.

Hidden for centuries from the prying eyes of non-Jews the Talmud was eventually translated into English in the early part of the 20th Century. Not long afterward an American author and researcher, Elizabeth Dilling, began a comprehensive study of the Talmud after returning from a visit to the Soviet Union in 1931 where she had gone to observe what the Zio-Communists were then touting as their great “humanitarian experiment”. Being able to go behind the scenes Dilling was, “shocked at the forced labor, the squalid living quarters, and deplorable living conditions, and the atmosphere of fear created by the Soviet dictatorship.” But even more so was she shocked by the “virulent anti-Christianity of the atheist Communist regime.”

Had Dilling been able, at the time, to penetrate further into the vast reaches of the Soviet wastelands she would have witnessed what, thanks to the heroic efforts of Russia’s Nobel Prize winning author and dissident Alexandr Solzhenitsyn, he described as the greatest mass genocide of Gentile Russian Christians ever undertaken in the history of the world. According to Solzhenitsyn somewhere in the neighbourhood of sixty-six million souls vanished into that frozen nightmare of terror and fear now known as the Gulag Archipelago.

SolzhenitsynGulagZioHatredquote 800

Dillings book, THE JEWISH RELIGION: Its Influence Today is a wealth of factual information on the hidden side of Pharisiac Judaism. Chapter 3 in particular, “The Talmud and Bible Believers” examines in detail how the Rabbinical priesthood views the likes of Jesus Christ and Mother Mary; both of whom are treated with the utmost contempt and disrespect. When one realizes just how vile and hateful the passages are describing Jesus and his Mother it’s not too difficult to connect the dots when it comes to understanding why this book, which is posted on my website RadicalPress.com in digital format (and numerous other websites around the world), was one of the principal documents submitted by the “complainants” in my present case as “proof” that I am willfully promoting hatred against “people of the Jewish religion or ethnic group”. Still, as the old saying goes, “The proof is in the pudding” and in the case of the Gulag Archipelago that pudding is stuffed to overflowing with the bloated and starved carcasses of countless millions of innocent people.

As such it beggars the mind to think that BC’s Attorney General, the Honourable Suzanne Anton, would have attached her name to such a sleazy and ill-conceived accusation; one that eventually led the thought police to proceed with their stalking and final arrest and jailing that then allowed them to illegally enter my home and steal all of my computers and electronic files and subsequently subject me to years of ongoing litigation in order to prove my innocence. This “law” we call Section 319(2) is a purely Bolshevik-inspired piece of Zionist double-talk and deception that allows the state to accuse me (or any other Canadian) of willfully promoting hatred against “people of the Jewish religion or ethnic group” for simply re-posting historical facts gleaned from the annals of the former Zionist Jew dominated Soviet dictatorship.

ChHebJesus

Upon reading what the Talmud has to say about Jesus Christ and Mother Mary it won’t take a whole lot of extrapolating to see why the Talmud-driven Zionist media commissars are still going out of their way to defend the likes of images such as these. Just like the New York Times, Charlie Hebdo’s messages appear to be  exactly what the Zionist media cartel deems content “fit to print”. I will leave it to viewers to decide whether they see these ‘cartoons’ as satire, humour or otherwise. They certainly aren’t the ones though that the Zionist media has been flashing about since the Charlie Hebdo incident.

One of the National Post’s well known Jewish writers, Andrew Coyne, in the comment section of its January 15, 2015 edition, penned an article entitled, “Humour busts taboos” (currently changed online to read: “Coyne: Everything can be laughed about, because everything can be discussed”) wherein he labours to intellectually justify the “humour” associated with Charlie Hebdo and Jewish ‘comedians’ such as Sarah Silverman (Coyne finds her humour “indefensibly funny”) who get their jollies out of telling anti-Christian jokes such as the example below:

 

Screen Shot 2015-01-17 at 11.45.31 PM

British Internet writer and contributor to Veteran’s Today, Lasha Darkmoon, also has a few pertinent things to say about Silverman in her recent and popular article, “The Paris Massacre: they had it coming” where she writes,  “The Jewish comedienne Sarah Silverman, the nice young lady who likes humping dogs and licking their anuses in various video skits—see here—and who gets many a cheap laugh by insulting Christianity in America, would have been a great hit with these satirical French journalists. They would have loved her for saying, “I hope the Jews DID kill Christ! I’d fucking do it again—in a second!”.

Coyne on the other hand, quoting François Cavanna, founder of Charlie Hebdo, who once stated, “Nothing is sacred” goes on to say, “I have been turning over those words in my mind ever since I saw them, shortly after the massacre. Can he really have meant it? Nothing is sacred? Why? Why was he so insistent, so absolute? …But I think it is more than that. I think it stems from an understanding that “offensive” humour is not an aberration, a warped version of the real thing, but rather that offensiveness of one kind or another is an intrinsic part of humour. Virtually all humour is offensive to someone; most humour is hurtful to some sensibility; much humour is rooted in pain and fear and the ugly reality of things.”

In his analysis of why people laugh, he tells us, “Nobody really knows why people laugh. They just do.” … “What one can say, however, is that it [laughter] emerges from some fundamentally healthy part of us.”

So I ask myself, why didn’t I laugh when I looked at the Charlie Hebdo image of God the Father being bum-phucked by my Lord Jesus Christ who, in turn, is having his own derriere desecrated by what is supposed to be a symbolic image of the Holy Spirit? The standard interpretation for Jews like Coyne would be that it’s apparently just a pun (satire) on the Catholic church’s opposition to gay marriage. No problem. Get over it guys. It’s all just “a joke”. Remember, “Nothing is sacred” and the laughter produced by such “satire” obviously “emerges from some fundamentally healthy part of us.”

But if you don’t find it funny at all and rather offensive then according to Coyne’s reasoning “…that’s also the moral answer. The first thing to ask about a joke is not, is it offensive, but: is it funny? If it is, if we laugh at it in spite of ourselves, chances are it is because there is something else to it than mere insult or grotesquerie: some larger truth, some point we resist acknowledging, because to do so would make us uncomfortable.” [Note: all emphasis throughout this article is by the author. A.T.]

Really now Andrew? Oi vey! I should truly like to know just what it is, what “larger truth” is hidden there that we, who don’t laugh at supposed ‘cartoons’ such as this, “resist acknowledging” because it would “make us uncomfortable”? How about the “larger truth” that the atheistic Zionist mindset could care less about what Christians or Muslims hold to be sacred? Is this not their standard operating procedure today just as it was after the overthrow of Czar Nicholas of Russia in 1917 when the Jew-led Bolsheviks systematically went about raping and murdering and torturing the Christian priests and nuns and destroying their houses of worship on a scale that, were it fully disclosed to the masses today on the Zionist media, would turn the stomachs of whole nations to the point where their present belief in your endless lies would suddenly cease to exist?

Commenting on Sarah Silverman’s career Coyne says, “If her routine were only about shock value, I don’t imagine she would have lasted as long as she has. Rather, she has thought long and hard about what makes us anxious — what we’re least willing to talk about.”

So, according to the atheistic Zionist mind-set of Jewish writers like Coyne, if someone has expended a lot of mental energy trying to figure out how to make Christians “anxious” about homos marrying homos by forcing them to talk about it through portraying their Saviour screwing God the Father up the ass, then this is a good thing. A funny thing. A laughter producing mechanism that gets the desired result “by turning our anxieties and discomforts in on themselves, forcing us to confront them rather than bury them.” Sigmund, I’m certain, would have been proud of Andrew Coyne’s deeply analytical diagnosis of Sarah Silverman’s perverted, sick mind.

Then of course, as Coyne goes on to say, “There’s a world of meaning in this. When an “offensive” comic says nothing is unsayable, they mean that we do not have to be afraid of words. They are not our master: we are theirs. Everything can be laughed about, because everything can be discussed.”

Now this is all fine and dandy for Andrew Coyne and his Jewish comedians and the National Post and its readership who subscribe to this type of psycho-babble purporting to be wisdom but, like all babble that arises in the Zionist media, it only caters to the self-chosen mindset, be it ethnic Jews or culturally and socially indoctrinated “mentally-cloned” chabez goy “Jews” who, because of their own life experiences growing up in a culture saturated with endless Zionist propaganda, have come to think and react and behave just like their Zionist counterparts.

But of course for all of Coyne’s sophisticated rhetoric and sophistry, specifically designed to make an ugly pile of dog shit look like a fruit cake, his arguments in favour of justifying what is nothing more than pure pornography, an “art” and an industry which the the Jews have developed to the point of perfection and now reap countless millions from its exploitation via their mass media, don’t impress me one iota.

But, and believe me when I say this is a BIG BUT (no pun or typo intended), there are the rest of us great unwashed goyim who amount to not millions but billions, who for numerous reasons don’t think at all like the Zionists would have us think. We have our own codes of moral conduct and our own spiritual views and perspectives on what we believe to be the holy and sacred side of life here on planet Earth. And yes, we also value justice and freedom of speech just like the Zionists purport to value it. Nonetheless, there is a vast and fundamental separation between the Zionist version of freedom of speech and that of the non-Zionist; a difference based upon the elemental fact that non-Zionists believe in freedom of speech for EVERYONE, not just for the Zionist Jews and their fawning sycophants who, for whatever reason, feel that Zion’s version of TRUTH and FREEDOM is somehow the only version permissible for the whole of humanity. Therein lies the rub and therein lies the one single factor that historically has made the “Jewish Question” one of continuing paramount importance for all of mankind and, as far back as a century ago, prompted the late Henry Ford, Sr. to describe this amazing occurrence with the Jews as “The world’s Foremost Problem”.

HenryQuotesTemplate 600

Given a level playing field in all the critical sectors of a nation that comprise government, banking, economics, industry, education, social and religious institutions and most important of all, openness and diversity within the most crucial area – its media/news/entertainment/communication systems – the majority of citizens in any democratic nation would have the wherewithal to manage their country for the good of all rather than be held hostage to a tiny deviant minority that now rules over us with greater and greater disregard for the essential values that do make life both sacred and worthwhile. This is a lesson that the Zionists and their obeisant sycophants are still in denial about. For the majority it’s but a matter of ignorance due to their brainwashing and were they to be told the whole truth would likely change their ways but for those in power who manage the levers of deception it’s not so much a matter of denial but one of cold, calculated, wilful, heartless premeditated criminal intent to perpetrate and perpetuate their execrable program to enslave the vast majority of humanity via the ongoing misuse of their media cartel and other control mechanisms.

Some final thoughts on Canada’s PM Stephen Harper and “Freedom of Speech”

Saving the worst for last and not wishing to subject readers to more obnoxious imagery I will forgo posting a photo of Canada’s No. 1 Zionist lackey and current Prime Minister of Canada, the Dishonourable Stephen Harper.

Before commenting on his recent reaction to the Charlie Hebdo affair I want to reiterate a fact that needs to be born in mind with respect to my legal proceedings now before the court. On April 27th, 2011, about one week prior to the last federal election, being fully conscious of the imminent threat that Harper posed to my country should his Conservative party gain a majority vote and be given the opportunity to exercise h/is-rael’s agenda via their controlled puppet, I penned an article titled, Hating Harper and posted it to my website. There you will find an image of the traitor who is now attempting to tell Canadians what a wonderful, free and democratic nation they live in; one that, were it not for those insanely envious ‘Mooslim’ terrorist Jihadists who hate our way of life, would have us all living just happy as a clam. When I wrote the article I knew full well what Canada would be facing should Stephen Harper and his Con-servative Party gain a majority of votes necessary to rule the country for next four years.

The very next day, Canada’s former No. 1 serial complainant in the vast majority of the now repealed Sec. 13 “Human Rights” cases (please note that I am under a court order NOT to publish his name anywhere on the net), filed a Sec. 319(2) “Hate Propaganda” complaint with the BC Hate Crime Team under the supervision of Det. Cst. Terry Wilson pictured below along with his partner in crime Cst. Normandie Levas. That was the first step taken in a long drawn-out clandestine process that eventually culminated in my arrest and incarceration on May 16th, 2012.

The BC Hate Crime Team’s website tells us that it “has two full-time police officers trained to recognize the specialized and multi-jurisdictional nature of hate propaganda offences.”  It was one of those “trained” police officers, Cst. Levas, who filed a report with BC Attorney General, Hon. Suzanne Anton, outlining her reasons why she felt I had committed the unforgivable crime of “willfully promoting hatred against people of the Jewish religion or ethnic group” by, (quoting Det. Cst. Wilson’s words to me while I was in jail), “calling for the total genocide of the Jewish population”. Based on this “trained” police officer’s  “evidence” the Attorney General then gave their consent to have me formally charged. Later on, during the preliminary inquiry when I cross examined Cst. Levas in court about her “training” and what it was that qualified her to make such presumptive and false accusations about me, she revealed to the court that prior to joining the “Hate Crime Team” she had worked as a . . . dental assistant!

NewWilsonPhoto

Returning to the Charlie Hebdo hoax and that other hoax, the Zionist National Post, I want to make further reference to an article that appeared on the front page of the January 9, 2015 edition titled, “THIS IS WAR ON US ALL, HARPER SAYS: PM says terror law to be tabled soon.” (My apologies to readers but I’ve been unable to find a link to the article online)

Before the blood had dried on the two young Muslim brothers alleged to have carried out the shootings at the office of Charlie Hebdo then subsequently murdered by the French security forces in order to ensure that they would never have the opportunity to tell their side of the story, Canada’s Zionist-controlled puppet, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, was already blabbering on in the media about how the “jihadists are at war with anyone who values openness and tolerance” and further stating that his government was already busy formulating new proposed legislation that would introduce “new arrest powers aimed at thwarting terrorist threats” in an upcoming bill destined to be tabled at the end of January when Parliament resumes.

He then went on to say, “They have declared war and are already executing it on a massive scale on a whole range of countries with which they are in contact, and they have declared war on any country, like ourselves(sic), that values freedom, openness and tolerance. We may not like this and wish it would go away, but it is not going to go away.

Yes, Stephen Harper, you can be damn sure that these false flag events such as we’ve just witnessed in Paris, France won’t “go away” so long as the wars which your government has plunged Canada into at the behest of Israel are slated to carry on and the necessity to manufacture greater and greater levels of fear remain a prerequisite to gaining approval for your heinous acts of genocide against defenceless people like the Palestinians of Gaza and the West Bank, the Afghans and those still surviving in other Middle East nations where the Zionist forces are constantly committing their war crimes.

Making these hypocritically absurd pronouncements given the fact that there was still no definite proof as to who had committed the murders merely shows the insidiousness and transparent bigotry of those in power who, because they are puppets dangling on Zionist strings, will mouth their aggressive lies and threats to the world regardless of whatever the people may think to the contrary. This process of accusing either an individual or a nation of crimes yet unproven applies not only to the Islamic community as a whole but to my own “Freedom of Speech” case here at home in Canada and now before the Supreme court of British Columbia. The fact that I have yet to be tried for the alleged “crime” of “willfully promoting hatred against people of the Jewish religion or ethnic group” certainly didn’t deter the Zionist media in Canada from making all sorts of false and defamatory accusations and slanderous remarks against my person when the Indictment was first handed down November 5, 2012. The same Zionist big mouth, Ezra Levant, was only too happy to interview my former counsel, Douglas Christie on his SunNews show “The Source” where he then proceeded to accuse me of all sorts of falsehoods just like Harper does when it comes to discussing issues to do with Islam and Israel’s false flag events all of which are designed to further enhance just such vitriolic rhetoric.

Within the short span of about six minutes good ol’ free speech advocate Ezra Levant managed to slander, defame and libel me as many times as possible, punctuating every comment or question to lawyer Doug Christie with at least one or more ad hominem slur,  in order to show the world just how grand and liberal the Zionist mainstream media truly is when it comes to freedom of expression.

Screen Shot 2014-02-22 at 4.55.45 PM

Yes, said Ezra, that Topham is an “anti-Semite.” He’s “offensive” and an “anti-Zionist [which is] code for anti-Semitic.” His website is “gross” and his comments “repulsive” and everything that he does is “motivated by a form of malice.” And on top of that Levant also shared freely his opinion that I was a “nobody” and an “anti-Semitic idiot and a right wing wacko” ending his “freedom of speech” soliloquy by emphatically pronouncing to all of Canada that when it came right down to it “I HATE ARTHUR TOPHAM!”

When I finished watched the interview I said to myself, oi vey! with “free speech” friends like this who needs enemies? Here he is, one of Canada’s most vocal advocates for “freedom of speech” on the Internet and he’s sitting there abusing me left, right and center telling the world blatant lies about me and making me out to be some sort of crazed Jew-hating anti-Semite! That folks is how “Freedom of Speech” works for those holding the mechanisms of mind-control in their nefarious little hands.

Getting back to Harper and his disingenuous statements to the media he goes on to say, “At the same time, we also encourage people to go about their lives and to exercise our rights and freedoms and our openness as a society as loudly and as clear as we can because that is the best way of defeating what is ultimately a movement of hatred and intolerance.” “No shit Batman” as a friend of mine used to say when confronted with such transparent posturing. That is precisely what I and many other Canadians have been doing for decades. And were we able to “exercise our rights and freedoms” without the Jewish lobbyists using their “Hate Propaganda” laws to attack and imprison us? No. Just more hypocritical smoke and mirrors and sententious sophistry that’s all.

Commenting on the Paris demonstrations that followed in the wake of the shootings Harper, monotonously mouthing the Zionist agenda rather than taking into consideration ALL Canadians, displayed his now usual chutzpah by stating, “Today, I know all Canadians…stand together with [Israel? A.T.] the people of France…our great friends and allies” culminating his bigoted remarks with his final fatuous remark that, “When a trio of [alleged. A.T.] hooded men struck at some of our most cherished democratic principles – freedom of expression,  freedom of the press – they assaulted democracy everywhere.”

Talk is obviously cheap and meaningless when a nation’s leader can make such blatantly deceptive statements to the press and the so-called “independent” media stands by unquestioningly allowing it to go on.

Conclusion

So what are we to make of this latest false flag event that occurred in Paris, France? Will the world fall for it like most people fell for the 9/11 false flag and continue on supporting those who are the perpetrators of the majority of mankind’s problems? How long will the pretense last before the mask of Zion finally falls from the face of evil, revealing forever the primary source of mankind’s collective woes and allowing for the final liberation of the millions of people still suffering from the ignorance that’s ultimately a result of having lived their lives in a trauma-induced trance of fear and insecurity; products of deliberate mind-control by a globally elite force of psychopaths who truly believe that they were given the right by their G_d to wield unlimited power and control over the majority of humanity? How long before the majority of Jews themselves will be healed of this devastating ghetto consciousness that’s plagued the world for over two millennia?

For most people today the realization that they are going about their lives unaware of the fact that there’s a war going on around them designed to eventually enslave them is beyond belief. They simply remain transfixed by Big Brother’s media, struggle on a daily basis to pay their credit card debts and keep food on the table and a roof over their heads all the while faithfully watching the sitcoms and television news and sports and a myriad number of channels all designed with the intent of diverting their attention away from the psycho/spiritual battles that are going on behind the scenes both in Cyberspace (the Internet) where the final battle is now well underway as well as in the courtrooms of the nation where the Zionist forces are surreptitiously at work both enacting new legislation and protecting old legislation like Section 318 to 320 of Canada’s Criminal Code, laws overtly and covertly designed to  criminalize the Truth Revealers who are on to their scams and are doing their utmost with scant resources to strike the chimes of truth and freedom and connect the dots so that the majority of those still asleep might one day awaken.

Make no mistake about it. The Zionists KNOW their days are numbered and that time is fast running out for them to pull off their global coup. The fact that they know though is not something that will automatically tempt them to change their evil ways. That’s not how psychopaths operate. The stronger the resistance to their plotting and scheming the more they dig their heels in and resort to greater and greater subterfuges to prevent the tide of truth from rising. They understand better than anyone the power of their media and the power of their purse and they will not stop using either of these devices to achieve the end they’ve worked for so long and with such single-minded, albeit, malicious  intent.

It may be pointless at this juncture in the battle to remind people that this war has been going on since Lucifer first broke rank with the heavenly hosts and decided that he would rather be God and do his own thing instead of remaining a willing and loving participant in the grand scheme of Creation. God of course, having endowed all of his Creation, from the heavenly realms down to us mundane time-space mortal creatures of flesh and blood with free will wasn’t about to interfere with his design and so left his somewhat recalcitrant and sentient family to work it out on their own.

The debate over who the Zionists really are and why they’re motivated to act as they do would fill a thousand Alexandrian libraries. The origins of such primal urges to control others cannot help but lead serious thinkers to an eventual realization that such questions ultimately cannot be answered without delving into speculative philosophical, occult and spiritual realms that go far beyond the scope of this article.

The Internet at this early juncture in its nascent beginnings is already expanding at quantum speeds. The information age is gaining ground with every millisecond, exploding our preconceived notions of time and space and taking us on a transcendental journey that at this point in time is akin in terms of progress to our little toe projecting out upon the threshold of a dream that undoubtedly will continue to unfold throughout the remainder of the present Aquarian cycle, leading us onward and inward to greater and greater understanding, peace, harmony, and love.

Together humanity now faces the supreme trial of all ages past. We stand as a vast human species with one foot embedded in yesterday  and the other foot jutting forth into a future that all too often appears shrouded in grey, chemtrail-like clouds of self doubt brought forth daily through the interminable Big Brother’s flak of fear and loathing which constitute the hallmarks of the Zionist Information Media now permanently acting in collusion with its counterparts in every other phase of global involvement who are intent on breaking the will of the people to the point where they eventually give up and bow their heads to accept their chains of slavery and subservience to the satanic power  that now rules the world by default.

Bob_Dylan_-_The_Times_They_Are_A-Changin'

Bob Dylan, one of the leading American Jewish poets, songwriters and musicians of the 1960’s prophetically expressed best our current existential dilemma when, in 1964 he wrote his immortal song, “The Times They Are A-Changing”. I publish it here for readers to consider.

Come gather ’round people
Wherever you roam
And admit that the waters
Around you have grown
And accept it that soon
You’ll be drenched to the bone
If your time to you is worth savin’
Then you better start swimmin’ or you’ll sink like a stone
For the times they are a-changin’

Come writers and critics
Who prophesize with your pen
And keep your eyes wide
The chance won’t come again
And don’t speak too soon
For the wheel’s still in spin
And there’s no tellin’ who that it’s namin’
For the loser now will be later to win
For the times they are a-changin’

Come senators, congressmen
Please heed the call
Don’t stand in the doorway
Don’t block up the hall
For he that gets hurt
Will be he who has stalled
There’s a battle outside and it is ragin’
It’ll soon shake your windows and rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin’

Come mothers and fathers
Throughout the land
And don’t criticize
What you can’t understand
Your sons and your daughters
Are beyond your command
Your old road is rapidly agin’
Please get out of the new one if you can’t lend your hand
For the times they are a-changin’

The line it is drawn
The curse it is cast
The slow one now
Will later be fast
As the present now
Will later be past
The order is rapidly fadin’
And the first one now will later be last
For the times they are a-changin’

The glorious sun of Truth and Justice is now rising upon an otherwise outwardly bleak, forlorn, terror-stricken Cyberian landscape according to divine plan, casting great shadows across the wreckage of thousands of years of endless war and strife and suffering. Its radiant rays of life-giving hope are bursting forth with new and brighter intensity than ever before, defying with the full intensity of its love-driven will and determination all of the Evil and Darkness emanating forth from the present Zio-Talmudic tyranny now so frantic with fear and desperately attempting to pull off its age-long plan for absolute control of planet Earth.

In the end Truth and Love and Peace WILL prevail.

—–

 

Regina v RadicalPress LEGAL UPDATE #20

Regina v Radical Press LEGAL UPDATE #20

April 16, 2014

 http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=4771

NewLegalUpdateLogo 700

notice4RP

 Regina v RadicalPress LEGAL UPDATE #20

 April 16, 2014

 Dear Free Speech Advocates and Radical Press Supporters,

Tuesday, April 15th, 2014 was a good day for freedom of speech in Canada. B.C. Provincial court judge, the Honourable Judge Morgan, after due consideration of the arguments put forth at my bail hearing held on April 9th, 2014, decided in my favour, thus refusing all of the main arguments of Crown which would, in effect, have shut down RadicalPress.com until after the trial and also prohibited me from publishing on any internet site available to the general public.

Judge Morgan did concede on one point in Crown’s application and added an additional condition to my Undertaking. The gist of it was that I would no longer be permitted to publish on the internet the names of the two people who were responsible for laying the initial complaints against myself and RadicalPress.com with the B.C. Hate Crime Team and that I must immediately remove their names from any website that I control. While there are possibly some problems with complying with this condition which may have to be contested via another application, in the vast scheme of things it’s minor in comparison to the overall decision which, clearly states that (in the words of Judge Morgan) a “court ordered prior restraint on a person’s s. 2(b) Charter right to freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, has the risk of being overbroad and should be granted only in clear cases.”

The fourteen page decision addressed the two main arguments which I brought forth during the bail hearing; first the jurisdiction of a judge to preside at a bail hearing to hear an application on varying the original bail conditions once the preliminary inquiry had ended and the case was committed to a higher court and second, the merits of my Charter rights. In responding to these arguments Judge Morgan, in Para. 4 of his decision stated, “Mr. Topham responded with well-prepared submissions by first raising the issue of whether I, as a Provincial Court Judge, continued to have jurisdiction to hear the Crown’s application. He also provides alternative arguments dealing with the merits of the application.”

One principal point which Judge Morgan brought up in his decision at Para. 33, was that of Crown’s main objective in attempting to find me guilty of promoting “hatred”; a contentious one which I have been attempting to draw the public’s attention to from the onset of not only this case but also the sec. 13(1) charge laid back in 2007. I refer here to the clear and present danger to all Canadians should Crown’s efforts prove successful and such a precedent established. In this regard Judge Morgan had the following to say:

[33] The primary remedy sought by the Crown if successful at trial will be to prevent Mr. Topham (and thereby perhaps others) from posting hate promoted material. [emphasis added]

I believe Judge Morgan’s decision is worthy of a close reading by anyone who has serious concerns about Canada’s current “Hate Propaganda” laws as they exist in Sec. 319 of the Criminal Code of Canada and so I am including a verbatim copy of it below. I will be posting the full decision on the website in pdf format and will link to it so interested parties can read the full contents.

This is now the second failed attempt on the part of Crown to impose harsh conditions on myself and RadicalPress.com prior to a trial. Whether or not Crown will try to make a third similar application at the Supreme Court level is an unknown at this time.

And so this decision on the part of Judge Morgan must be viewed as a precedent setting victory in the ongoing war to abolish all of Canada’s “Hate Propaganda” legislation and thus ensure our Charter rights to freedom of expression on the internet remain inalienable and sacrosanct.

Here then is the full text of Judge Morgan’s decision in R. v Topham:

Decision:

[32] Considerations of bail in section 319(2) prosecutions (willfully promoting hatred) are somewhat different from the usual criminal prosecutions. This is because the central issue at trial will not be what occurred , but will be what effect resulted. The publicly communicated statements will have to be established by the Crown to promote ‘hatred’ as the word is defined in Canadian jurisprudence.

[33] The primary remedy sought by the Crown if successful at trial will be to prevent Mr. Topham (and thereby perhaps others) from posting hate promoted material. The Crown is, in effect, seeking the same remedy pre-trial through a cease and desist bail order. To be successful the court would have to be satisfied that on the test of a balance of probabilities all aspects of Crown’s case will be made out, including that the effect of the communications of concern will meet the threshold of promoting hatred. In effect, the court is being asked to decide the case on the balance of probability standard.

[34] On the other hand, it is an initially forceful consideration when dealing with material that is clearly repugnant and offensive, to ask what harm would result by simply shutting it down until the matter can be decided at trial. One can easily imagine situations where the material is so repugnant and offensive that even solely from the judge’s perspective and without direct evidence of harm, the likely risk of harm will be evident and outweigh a temporary curtailment of Charter rights.

[35] However, court ordered prior restraint on a person’s s. 2(b) Charter right to freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, has the risk of being overbroad and should be granted only in clear cases.

[36] In the case before me, the material of concern is primarily material written by others and allegedly posted by Mr. Topham on his website. The one document I was referred to that involved a minor amount of originality is entitled ‘Israel Must Perish’ and is based on a document written many years ago by someone else entitled ‘Germany Must Perish’. In ‘Israel Must Perish’ the accused is alleged to have replaced all references to ‘Germany’ with ‘Israel’ and all references to ‘Germans’ with ‘Jews’. Mr. Topham has published both versions on his website. Mr. Topham says – and is not contradicted by the Crown – that all of the material of concern is available on other internet sites not controlled by him, including notable sites such as Amazon.com and Archive.org.

[37] There is some evidence that Mr. Topham uses his website to publish other materials that are not alleged to foster hate, and to use it for other reasons, such as providing a voice to other fringe persons or groups. As of late, he has been using his website in an attempt to raise money to pay for a lawyer to defend him against the present charges.

[38] Although I give Crown credit for being open to finding ways to minimally impair Mr. Topham’s rights while at the same time addressing the concern of the publication of the offensive material, I find that in this case, ordering Mr. Topham to shut down his website may well be an over broad prior restraint and that, based on the evidence before me, the effect on reducing any harm caused may well be minimal given the material is primarily not original and is available from other internet sources.

[39] I agree with Ms. Johnston that ordering Mr. Topham to remove from his website any reference to people of Jewish religion or ethnic origin would be like having him pick out pepper. What I foresee from this is any effort to carve a fine balance would very possibly lead to breach related charges arising from confusion and misinterpretation.

[40] The Crown’s goal of stopping Mr. Topham from putting on his website offensive material will of course depend on whether Crown is successful at trial in establishing the offensive material has the effect of promoting hate. If the Crown proves its case, the sentencing judge will be in a much informed position in determining the appropriate breadth of restraint orders and other sanctions.

[41] Although I decline to order as a condition of bail that Mr. Topham stop operating his entire website or to order that he cease and desist from posting any materials referencing people of the Jewish religion or ethnic origin, I am satisfied that his Undertaking should be amended to include a condition that he not post on any internet site or otherwise publish the names of the two civilian complainants already referred to in condition 2. of his present Undertaking, and that he immediately remove their names from any internet site he has direct or indirect control of . I find that there may be a risk of harm or intimidation in posting the names of these civilian complainants.

R.D. Morgan
Provincial Court Judge

*******

My court battle has now moved on to an actual trial by judge and jury in the British Columbia Supreme Court. In doing so it now places a far greater emphasis on my having to obtain legal counsel and/or advice from legal counsellors, which ultimately requires funding. 

The trial will be the first major battle in the upcoming legal war to rid Canada of all the “Hate Propaganda” legislation that has been inserted into the Canadian Criminal Code by pro-Zionist Jewish lobby organizations since the end of World War Two. The outcome of this trial will, in all likelihood, determine whether or not the rest of Canadians will retain their right to publish the truth on the Internet about any and all injustices that may befall our country. 

I NEED YOUR HELP NOW MORE THAN EVER!!!  

Please consider a donation to the Radical Press Free Speech Defence Fund.

My PayPal button is on my website at http://www.RadicalPress.com

If you can’t send a donation via PayPay please consider sending what you can through Canada Post to:

 

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

Remember that every bit helps (all of us).

Thank you.

Arthur Topham
Pub/Ed
The Radical Press

Regina v RadicalPress.com LEGAL UPDATE #19

NewLegalUpdateLogo 700

 

notice4RP

Regina v RadicalPress.com LEGAL UPDATE #19

April 10th, 2014

Dear Free Speech Advocates and Radical Press Supporters,

The previous Legal Update (March 14th, 2014) covering The Radical Press’s battle with Canada’s unjust “Hate Propaganda” legislation, as contained in Sec. 319(2) of the Canadian Criminal Code, concluded on March 13th, 2014. It was then that Judge Morgan saw fit to commit me to trial by judge and jury in the B.C. Supreme Court.

Immediately following his decision, Crown requested that a bail hearing be held that very same day. This new bail hearing was a result of Crown having re-charged me in January of 2014 with the same Sec. 319(2) offence that had originally been laid against me back on May 16th, 2012. By laying new charges this gave the Crown an opportunity to file a new application which, in turn, would allow them another chance to vary the current conditions that were set in place back on January 3rd, 2013 by Judge Church.

Det. Terry Wilson and his BC Hate Crime Team down in Surrey, B.C. were not happy with Judge Church’s decision as it allowed me (as per my Charter rights) to continue publishing on RadicalPress.com. The RCMP would rather have had its position taken; one that presumes I’m already guilty of the alleged crime and therefore should be be prevented from publishing anything further until my trial is over.

The precise wording of the Crown’s proposed new conditions was as follows:(March 14th, 2014) on RadicalPress.com’s battle with Canada’s unjust Sec. 319 “Hate Propaganda” legislation as contained in Sec. 319(2) of the Criminal Code concluded on March 13th, 2014. It was at that point when Judge Morgan saw fit to commit me to trial by judge and jury in the B.C. Supreme Court.

Immediately, following his decision, Crown requested that a bail hearing be held that very same day. This new bail hearing was a result of Crown having re-charged me in January of 2014 with the very same Sec. 319(2) offence. By laying new charges this gave the Crown the opportunity to file a new application which, in turn, would allow them another opportunity to vary the conditions that were set in place back on January 3rd, 2013 by Judge Church.

Det. Terry Wilson and his BC Hate Crime Team down in Surrey, B.C. were not happy with those bail conditions as they allowed me (as per my Charter rights) to continue publishing on RadicalPress.com rather than taking the RCMP’s position that I’m already guilty of the alleged crime and therefore should be be prevented from publishing anything further until my trial is over.

The precise wording of the Crown’s proposed new conditions was as follows:

Requested terms:

        1) You shall not post any information on any internet site that can be read by members of the general public.

        2) You shall not operate, post to, manage or allow anyone to operate, post to or manage any internet site owned by you that can be accessed by the general public.

        3) You shall make RadicalPress.com unavailable to the general public. You shall not be in breach of this condition if you place a default page on RadicalPress.com, if the wording of the default page has been previously approved by this Court.

Also, as reported in the March 14th update, Judge Morgan declined to immediately grant Crown their bail hearing on that day and advised Crown and myself that I was to return on March 18, 2014 at 1:30 to fix a date. I came back on the 18th and the date of April 9th, 2014 was then set; one that would allow me time to prepare my arguments against this latest attempt on the part of Det. Terry Wilson and the BC Hate Crime Team to shut down RadicalPress.com prior to any determination of guilt.

There was a tremendous amount of work required to prepare for the hearing; an effort that never abated until the late evening of April 8th just prior to the hearing when, having assumed I had all of my documents prepared, I suddenly found myself having to deal with yet another bit of legal chicanery in the form of an email from Crown Counsel Jennifer Johnston which suddenly arrived in my inbox at 4:29:06 p.m. that very same day. This type of behaviour on the part of the Crown has been an ongoing source of frustration from the time that my former counsel Doug Christie passed away in March of 2013. Crown, rather than furnishing me with essential documents in advance of any court appearance, apparently prefers to wait until I walk into the courtroom and then hand me whatever document(s) that she plans to use that day. To my way of thinking this is a highly unfair, unprofessional practise and I eventually brought it to the attention of Judge Morgan during the hearing.

The last minute email from Crown contained a newly revised set of bail conditions which read as follows [emphasis is mine. Ed.]:

Crown is requesting the following terms on an Undertaking to a Justice:

1) You shall keep the peace and be of good behaviour.

2) You shall have no contact or communication, directly or indirectly, with Ricardo Warmouse or Agent Z except as follows:

(a) while in attendance at court; or

(b) through legal counsel.

3) You shall not possess any weapon as defined in Section 2 of the Criminal Code expect[sic] for purposes directly related to your employment including, but not limited to, your mining operations.

4) You shall not distribute, circulate or share all or any part of the Crown disclosure material with any person or organization save and except for legal counsel who is assisting you in your defence.

5) You shall not publish or post all or any part of the Crown disclosure material on any internet site that can be read by the general public.

6) Except as set out in Conditions 8 and 9, you shall not post any information on any internet site that can be read by members of the general public.

7) Except as is set out in Conditions 8 and 9, you shall not operate, post to, manage or allow anyone to operate, post to or manage any internet site owned by you that can be accessed by the general public.

8) You shall make RadicalPress.com unavailable to the general public. You shall not be in breach of this condition if you place a default page on RadicalPress.com, if the wording of the default page has been previously approved by the Court or by your bail Supervisor and/or if you continue to pay your website provider for the RadicalPress.com site.

9) You shall be permitted to operate, post to and manage the following two websites:

a) Cariboominingassociation.com and

b) Canadianpeoplesparty.ca

On the following conditions:

i)   That none of the posts or links on RadicalPress.com be placed on either website and

ii) That you do not post anything about Ricardo Warmouse, Agent Z or Jewish religion and/or origin in any matter whatsoever.

There weren’t any delays in getting started this session and Crown, as per usual, again presented me with another packet of papers marked “Memorandum of Disclosure” just prior to commencing speaking to her application. I quickly perused the document and discovered that it contained photocopies of screen shots recently taken off RadicalPress.com by Det. Terry Wilson who monitors the site on a daily basis as he has little else to do with his time.

The first screen shot was my post, “A Dieudonne Salute to Zionism and the Forces of Darkness and Evil”. The second was John Kaminski’s latest article, The elderly are the lucky ones, and the third shot was of my post titled “Support the Radical Press Legal Defence Fund” .

CensorshipPoster600-copy

Crown immediately launched into her argument that “Mr. Topham” was still committing the same offence that he’d already been charged with on three separate occasions and then proceeded to cited the example of my Dieudonne “la quenelle” gesture as proof positive. Crown’s argument was that I had given the salute/gesture to the “Zionists” and that meant, by association, the “Jewish people” and so it must be considered a further example of promoting “hatred” toward this ethnic group. Following that Counsel then went on to speaking about John Kaminski’s article and asked Judge Morgan to read specific paragraphs where Kaminski was making direct references to the Jews in America. This article, according to Crown, was further “proof” of my continuing disregard for the law.

The manner of Crown’s presentation to Judge Morgan, regarding these posts, might best be conveyed to readers if they were to imagine someone arguing that my posting every day on RadicalPress.com was synonymous with a bank robber who, while on bail, was going out every day and robbing another bank and nothing was being done to stop him.

Finally, after what for all intents of purpose was a thinly veiled tirade against my Charter right to freedom of expression, Crown then switched from bad prosecutor to good prosecutor and proceeded to tell Judge Morgan that Crown wasn’t trying to suggest to His Honour that everything published on RadicalPress.com was “hatred toward people of the Jewish faith or ethnicity”. Here is where she made reference to my appeal to RadicalPress.com readers in the post “Support the Radical Press Legal Defence Fund”. Posts such as these, in Crown’s opinion, were just fine but, of course, the problem was that RadicalPress.com was such a “huge” site and permeated throughout with so much “hatred” toward Jews and “Zionism” that it was virtually impossible for Crown to determine how to prevent “Mr. Topham” from publishing his “hate” posts along with all the other materials that didn’t fit into the Sec. 319(2) prohibitions and so the only logical choice must be to stop Mr. Topham from publishing anything on his website until the trial was over.

Judge Morgan listened to Crown’s arguments and then began to ask questions about Crown’s proposed conditions. Foremost in Judge Morgan’s mind was the notion of shutting down the whole website because of postings which Crown was alleging were contrary to Sec. 319(2) of the Criminal Code. The judge openly stated that he had never gone on RadicalPress.com to ascertain what was or wasn’t on the site but he suggested to Crown (again) that in all likelihood not all of the content on the website was probably about Jews and Zionism and that it was a concern for him shutting down the whole site because of these alleged infractions which, for the most part, amounted to a relatively small number of disputed posts given that the site was as “huge” as Crown was inferring.

Judge Morgan also had concerns about condition No. 9 and questioned Crown about the relevancy of trying to control other websites that I might own. At this point I notified the judge that Crown had erred in stating that I was operating the website http://www.cariboominingassociation.com. Back on March 13th when Crown first presented me with the initial conditions I informed her that my mining website was http://www.caribooplacers.ca but that she had mistakenly denoted another site which I am no longer operating. Crown quickly responded by telling the judge that she would change it but first would have to get her secretary contact Det. Wilson and have him check out the website and verify if there were any “hate” posts about Jews on the site or links to “hate” sites. If there weren’t then Crown would be willing to allow me to post mining business on it.

Crown, having made its pitch to Judge Morgan, I was now asked by the judge if I had anything to offer up in my own defence.

I explained to the judge that I had both a Defence Memorandum of Argument Regarding Crown Application to Vary Bail as well as an Oral Submission. The Defence Memorandum of Argument had been prepared by a very astute and competent law student and the Oral Submission was in the form of a written document which was basically a summary of my own thoughts on why I felt Crown’s application was a draconian attempt to circumvent my Charter rights. I told Judge Morgan that I wasn’t an orator and would prefer just to read it into the court record and he was fine with that. Both these two documents were then presented to Crown and Judge Morgan. Along with the Defence Memorandum of Argument I also submitted a binder to each of them with my List of Authorities which I had referenced in my Memorandum of Argument. It contained nine cases plus a copy of Judge Church’s bail decision from January 3rd, 2013. Each binder amounted to a total of 411 pages so they were a rather formidable contribution.

BailHearing Image copy

A total of 1233 pages had to be printed off in order to complete the Memorandum of Argument

Judge Morgan proceeded to read through the Memorandum of Argument and appeared immediately satisfied with the calibre of the presentation and how it was laid out. I was basically arguing two different positions; the first being the jurisdiction of Judge Morgan to actually preside over the bail hearing now that the case had shifted to the Supreme Court and an Indictment had been handed down on March 27th, 2014. The second argument revolved around a number of Charter issues dealing first with presumption of innocence, then prior restraint to my right to freedom of expression contrary to Section 2(b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. That was followed by the argument the conditions sought by Crown were not rationally connected to any pressing and substantive objective. The final arguments stated that the conditions sought by Crown didn’t minimally impair my right to freedom of expression and that the deleterious effects of the conditions sought outweighed any salutary effects that might be achieved.

Following some commentary by Judge Morgan I then read out my Oral Submission to the court and the judge thanked me. I will present one excerpt from the Oral Submission that pertains to the oft argued issue about the meaning of the word “hate” and its relation to Truth.

“The Truth, no matter how mortifying; how revealing; how awkward; how embarrassing; how shameful; how humiliating; how disconcerting; how ignominious; how upsetting; how distressing; how mortifying or how painful, can never be construed as being concomitant with the word “hate” no matter how much sophistry or contortions of meaning are applied to it. The Truth, simply IS, and no amount of pretence or subterfuge can ever negate that fundamental fact, even though during periods of history it has become temporarily amenable to usurpation by cold, calculating logic or other surreptitious means. Otherwise, taken to its logical conclusion, if Truth, in any context, were to be equated or aligned with the emotive term “hate” then by the same reasoning Falsehood or Lies would, in turn, become “love” and all rational discourse and communication would ultimately become moot and meaningless.”

Judge Morgan then decided around 11:00 a.m. to take a recess and said we would resume again at 1:30 in the afternoon. This would give both himself and Crown an opportunity over the lunch break to read through the materials that I had presented them with and also allow Crown some time to respond to the arguments.

We then left the courthouse and went for lunch.. Once again I was pleased that my friend and associate Paul Fromm, Director of the Canadian Association for Freedom of Expression (CAFE), had traveled to Quesnel from Ontario to attend the hearing and offer support to myself and my wife. Paul and I had lunch and discussed a number of issues related to the case as well as other matters of a general nature and then returned for the afternoon session.

Crown, I believe, wasn’t expecting the argument which I brought forth during the morning session and had obviously scrambled during the time we recessed to recoup her position. She returned to the courtroom at 1:30 p.m. with a number of case law files which she then used to argue that the judge did in fact have jurisdiction to hear Crown’s application even though Judge Morgan was a provincial court judge and the case was now in Supreme Court. That was the main thrust of her argument and when she was through Judge Morgan then told Crown and myself that he was going to reserve his decision until April 15th, 2014 at 1:30 p.m. Court was then adjourned.

——

My court battle has now moved on to an actual trial by judge and jury in the British Columbia Supreme Court. In doing so it now places a far greater emphasis on my having to obtain legal counsel and/or advice from legal counsellors, which ultimately requires funding. 
 
The trial will be the first battle in the upcoming legal war to rid Canada of all the “Hate Propaganda” legislation that has been inserted into the Canadian Criminal Code by the pro-Zionist Jewish lobby organizations since the end of World War Two. The outcome of this trial will, in all likelihood, determine whether or not the rest of Canadians will retain their right to publish the truth on the Internet about any and all injustices that may befall our country. 
 
I NEED YOUR HELP NOW MORE THAN EVER!!!  
 
Please consider a donation to the Radical Press Free Speech Defence Fund.
 
My PayPal button is on my website at http://www.RadicalPress.com
If you can’t send a donation via PayPay please consider sending what you can through Canada Post to:
Arthur Topham
4633 Barkerville Highway
Quesnel, B.C. Canada
V2J 6T8
 
Remember that every bit helps (all of us).
 
Thank you.
 
Arthur Topham
Pub/Ed
The Radical Press

 

 

Bad Moon Rising: How the Jewish Lobbies Created Canada’s “Hate Propaganda” Laws by Arthur Topham

BadMoonRisingHeader 800 copy 4

 

Bad Moon Rising: 

How the Jewish Lobbies Created Canada’s “Hate Propaganda” Laws

By 

Arthur Topham

“Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them,
I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:
And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and
beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.
And everyone that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not,
Shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:
And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and
Beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.”
~ Jesus Christ, St. Matthew Ch. 7, vs 24 -27

 

My assertion, as stated in the title to this article, that Canada’s judicial system has been infiltrated and co-opted by foreign Zionist Jew lobby groups operating in Canada since 1919, will automatically be met with a loud hue and cry of “preposterous! outrageous!” followed immediately by much hand-wringing and declamations of “anti-Semitism”,”hate”,”racism” and further punctuated, dramatized and broadcast across the nation via the the Zionist-controlled mainstream media.

So be it. It doesn’t detract one iota from the facts. All such reactionary responses only reinforce the premise of my argument that Canada’s Zionist Jew media cartel is, and always has been, an integral part of their overall plan to formulate and establish Orwellian laws inimical to the rights and freedoms of the people. Frankly stated it’s the modus operandi of these foreign-controlled Jewish lobbies to react precisely in this fashion for that is how they mendaciously twist and stifle debate on any issue of national importance to Canadians; be it our Charter rights or our fundamental right (and responsibility as patriotic protectors of our country) to question the direction of the nation’s foreign policies which, under the current Harper regime, are deliberately replacing the nation’s longstanding principles of common sense and aligning our once relatively respected political ideals with the present agenda of the Zionist Jewish state of Israel, considered by most intelligent people to be the most rogue, racist, supremacist, violent, atheistic and apartheid nation on the face of the planet.

It’s my fervent contention that the template for Canada’s “Hate Propaganda” legislation was, from the start, designed in such a way as to function as a legal shield; a mechanism which the Zionist lobbyists use to defend themselves against any allegations aimed at exposing their covert actions; all of which are meant to benefit their inordinate influence over Canadian politics and the criminal actions of the foreign state of Israel; Harper, of course, being their current Trojan Horse, front man in this deliberate, ongoing, slow motion coup to capture the nation’s political and legal systems.

When we go back in history and retrace the steps that these legal interlopers have taken since the end of World War 2 it’s clearly evident what they’ve been up to, especially in light of the now increasing displeasure that more and more Canadians are showing toward the actions of the Jewish lobbies when it comes to their relentless, telling attacks upon our Charter of Rights and Freedoms which include our fundamental right to freedom of expression as stated in Sec. 2b of the Charter.

For those still unfamiliar with this fundamental right it states:

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication.

All that’s required in order to verify this war against our rights and freedoms, including our most basic right of speaking out and expressing our views on issues vital to our national well being, is to delve into any and all of the legal cases over the past forty four years associated with the issue of freedom of expression and one will see immediately that in practically every instance the first special interest lobby group lining up and vying for intervenor status is inevitably a Jewish one. And furthermore, concomitant with their zealousness to intervene is usually the underlying fact that it is they themselves who were instrumental in bringing forth the charges. And if that isn’t the norm then they’re undoubtedly there to make sure that the complainant (usually an agent in one form or another) gets the maximum support of their power and influence in the courts and the media.

The foundation for all of this pretense and deceit was laid at the end of the last world war when the Zionist-controlled U.K. and USA began cranking up their deliberately orchestrated accusations that Hitler and the German military were guilty of having attempted to wipe out the Jews in Europe by gassing millions of them and then cremating the innocent souls in ovens to cover up their horrendously heinous crime. The Nuremberg Trials at the war’s end were the focus of these fantastic claims of willful genocide by gas and fire and the West, still mesmerized by the massive amounts of anti-German hate propaganda which they had been saturated with for the past six years, as well as being shell-shocked from all the fighting, killing, bombing and destruction, fell prey to this massive deception and was unwilling or unable to garner the moral fortitude or financial resources necessary to counter these outrageous lies of the powerful Zionist lobby.

Little did it matter that every confession by the captured German military commanders had been gained by torture. Little did it matter that the majority of those running the trials were of Jewish ethnicity. Little did it matter that laws which had been followed by nations for decades were suddenly revised in secrecy just prior to the war’s end and the former International Geneva protocols cast aside and new standards of jurisprudence abruptly introduced into the equation by Jewish judges and the Zionist forces who had gained firm control of the whole charade. This was the hour that they’d planned for and were awaiting since first declaring war on Germany in 1933 when Hitler and the National Socialist Party gained power through legal, democratic means.

Now that the Allies had gained their victory, the Zionists via subterfuge, deception, political pressure and the willing assistance of their controlled media and Hollywood, were finally in a position to have their long sought “6 Million Jewish Holocaust” footings poured, thus assuring themselves of a firm propaganda foundation for the erection of their fabricated phantasy; one that would then allowing for the rest of the subsequent monkey business of taking over and manipulating national and international laws, all of which was based upon their cunningly crafted pretext for tyranny known as the “Holocaust”.

After that landmark lie was accomplished it was merely a matter of time, patient plodding, and endless, inordinate propaganda and pressure placed upon the rest of the population of the world who had still to accept the “Holocaust” hoax and be subsequently convinced of the dire and urgent necessity for enacting legislation that would make it illegal to promote either “genocide” or “hatred” toward any identifiable group.

In principle (and of course based upon the lie of the “6 Million”) these proposals might have appeared laudable and worthy had the mythical “Holocaust” actually occurred and in that context they would most definitely have been noble pursuits to accomplish but that, unfortunately, wasn’t the reality. Only now that the real history of the last eighty years is finally coming to light, thanks to the free and open Internet, are we finally getting to see the original, unadulterated script as it was so cleverly designed by the Zionist forces of the day; a program of diabolic, Machiavellian political pragmatism designed to destroy democratic institutions and replace them with a Zionist-based illuminist, occult vision of a macabre New World Order where they, and only they, would hold all the power and control over the world’s people along with all the resources of the planet.

Such was the set and setting here in Canada when the Jewish lobbies started their underhanded campaign to create “Hate Propaganda” laws that would be and are being used against Canadian citizens today.

One might legitimately say that these deceptive measures to control freedom of speech actually began even before the commencement of WW2. After Hitler and the National Socialist Party came to power in 1933 the Jews in Canada were already growing fearful that Canadians might begin to believe what Germany was saying about the International financiers and the Jewish control of their own beleaguered nation and so in the province of Manitoba, (of all places) the government passed a statute to combat what was apparently perceived to be a “rise in the dissemination of Nazi propaganda”. The premise of which (The Libel Act, R.S.M. 1913, c. 113, s. 13A (added S.M. 1934, c. 23, s. 1) was later to become The Defamation Act, R.S.M. 1987, c. D20, s. 19(1) and was in all likelihood the first volley launched against freedom of expression.

Up until 1970 Section 181 of the Criminal Code, which reads: “Every one who wilfully publishes a statement, tale or news that he knows is false and that causes or is likely to cause injury or mischief to a public interest is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.” was the only provision in the Code even remotely connected to the offence of group defamation but it didn’t, at the time, specifically make mention of “hate propaganda”.

As stated above, when WW2 ended the work of the Zionist lobbyists began in earnest when their “Holocaust” card began appearing as the foundational pretext to any and all discussions surrounding “human rights” and “discrimination”. The first step in the direction of censorship was the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 with its references to “hate propaganda” and by 1953 we find that the Canadian Jewish Congress was already diligently pursuing efforts toward this end with their attempt to insert anti-hate propaganda provisions into the Criminal Code which was being revised in that same year.

Their deceptive labours eventually bore fruit when the lobby was finally able to convince Canada’s federal Justice Minister Guy Favreau in 1965 to appoint a special (interest) committee to look into the purported “problems” connected with the dissemination of “hate propaganda” in Canada.

Surprisingly (not) what became known as “The Special Committee on Hate Propaganda in Canada” and later abbreviated (for propaganda purposes) to the “Cohen Committee” was headed by a Jewish lawyer, Dean Maxwell Cohen, Q.C., Dean of the Faculty of Law, McGill University. While not all members of the committee were Jewish there was one other notable lawyer instrumental in aiding the Jewish lobby in their relentless quest for censorship laws. This was none other than Professor Pierre E. Trudeau, Associate Professor of Law, University of Montreal, soon to become Canada’s Prime Minister.

The committee studied the alleged “problem” from January 29th to November 10th, 1965 and their conclusions called for new legislation that ultimately affected the Post Office Act, the Customs Act, and most critically in today’s context, what is now Section 319 of the Criminal Code, the very same section that’s being used to shut down RadicalPress.com and threaten its Publisher and Editor (me) with a possible two year jail sentence for having expressed opinions and facts on Zionism, Jews and the state of Israel.

My case is designed to be the test case for the Jewish lobbyists working in Canada. Should they win and find me guilty under Sec. 319(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada then that precedent will undoubtedly unleash a flood of subsequent attacks upon the rest of the bloggers and publishers and writers and artists living in Canada who also see an imminent threat to their freedom of expression encapsulated in this draconian, Marxist legislation designed with malicious forethought to censor truth and stymie any and all attempts to achieve and maintain justice and freedom of speech in Canada.

Conclusion:

Just as the great parable of Jesus Christ regarding the foolish man who built his house upon the sand has come down through history so too has the foolish attempt by those who call themselves Jews to build an occult house of invisible governance upon the sands of deception, usury and an insatiable lust for power and control over their fellow mortals.

Now that the rains of the peoples’ outrageous indignation and the floods of perceived injustice and repression of personal freedoms and the winds of Truth and Freedom are beginning to beat with greater and greater intensity upon the once mighty and powerful House of Zion (thanks to the miracle of the Internet), the underpinnings of this deceptive, age-old hoax are giving way and, should the people continue to unite and persevere in their staunch resistance to and abolition of all the “Hate Propaganda” laws now being used against them then soon, and with great relief and thankfulness, will come the fall of this House of Horrors and a new beginning for those who want only peace and love and justice and brotherhood to reign supreme.

—-

 

Justice: Should Arthur Topham Have Sexually Assaulted 23 Women Instead? by Christoper di Armani

allegory-of-justice-and-peace800

Screen Shot 2014-02-23 at 11.24.07 PM

 Justice:

Should Arthur Topham Have Sexually Assaulted 23 Women Instead?

By

Christopher di Armani

 

That may seem a strange title for an article about our legal system, but after reading about Campbell Ernest Crichton, the former Duncan, BC, physiotherapist who faces charges he sexually assaulted at least 23 of his former patients, it seems to be the correct title.

A February 21, 2014, article in The Province started thus:

A hearing has been ordered in the case of a former physiotherapist who successfully argued he was too poor to pay for a lawyer to defend himself against charges he sexually assaulted 23 female patients.

Last year Campbell Ernest Crichton of Duncan, B.C., had his charges temporarily set aside after a judge found he was indigent and needed a government-funded lawyer for the complex criminal trial.

Anyone following my writings on Freedom of Speech will be well familiar with the case of Arthur Topham, the Quesnel, BC, publisher of RadicalPress.com, an alternative news website.

Mr. Topham currently faces criminal charges under Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada for “inciting hatred” against an identifiable group.

What, you ask, is the connection between Arthur Topham’s Freedom of Speech case and an [alleged] degenerate serial sex offender?

Quite simply, neither man can afford legal counsel for their criminal trials.

In the case of the [alleged] sex offender B.C. Supreme Court Justice Keith Bracken said there was a “real and substantial” risk to Crichton’s right to a fair trial if if did not have legal counsel. As a result of that “real and substantial” risk Justice Bracken ordered Crichton be provided a government-funded lawyer.

Arthur Topham is facing criminal charges for exercising his Right to Freedom of Speech. There is no “victim” here other than a few people whose actions lead me to believe they self-identify as victims. Topham sexually assaulted nobody. He physically harmed nobody. He never forced a single person on Planet Earth to read what he wrote.

Despite those facts Arthur Topham’s right to a fair trial with adequate legal counsel seems unimportant to the very same judiciary that ruled an [alleged] serial sex offender ought to have a government-funded lawyer.

Arthur Topham is not a wealthy man. He’s a modest man living on modest means in his rural home outside of Quesnel, BC. His application for legal aid was denied. His application for government funding under what is known as a Rowbotham Application was similarly denied.

By these standards it is far more important that a sexual deviant’s rights be safeguarded than a man who dared write a few words someone found objectionable.

That is a very dangerous precedent to set.

Sending a man to prison for the words he writes ought to scare the crap out of every single writer in Canada. Sure, today it’s Topham’s views that are “politically incorrect” and therefore fair game for our legal system, but what about tomorrow? Whose views will be deemed “incorrect” then? Who will stand up for you then?

Campbell Ernest Crichton is charged with sexually abusing 23 human beings. That is real, substantial physical and emotional trauma all for one sick man’s own sexual gratification.

There are real human victims.

Arthur Topham wrote an article someone didn’t like. For that the BC Hate Crimes Unit of the RCMP and the BC Attorney General want to send Mr. Topham to prison, while refusing him any chance of a true legal defense.

Shouldn’t we be far more concerned about sexual predators? Nope. We’ll happily pay their legal fees and send that darned writer to prison. After all, ideas are far more dangerous than sexual predators, right?
—–

Christopher di Armani is the editor and publisher of Canada’s Rights and Freedom Bulletin. This article appeared in Issue No. 167, Feb. 22, 2014. Visit Mr. Armani’s site at: http://Bulletin.RightsAndFreedoms.org

Frost on the Ground: Name’m & Shame’m plus A Peaceful, Political Solution or? by Frank Frost

FFVideoHdr

CLICK HERE TO VIEW WEBSITE: www.theministryofchildrencorruption.wordpress.com/

Screen Shot 2014-02-18 at 4.09.28 PM

CLICK BELOW TO VIEW YOUTUBE CHANNEL:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgtHZyCc-grAZ7G6YV2BZsw/videos

Screen Shot 2014-02-18 at 8.49.57 PM

Screen Shot 2014-02-18 at 8.26.45 PM

CLICK BELOW TO VIEW PART ONE:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGUOl1FVxeg

Screen Shot 2014-02-18 at 8.50.10 PM

Screen Shot 2014-02-18 at 8.29.32 PM

CLICK BELOW TO VIEW PART TWO:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DRnXWiIUCM

Frank Frost: Chilling Accounts of Pedophilia, Murder and Corruption in B.C.’s Judiciary, Ministry of Children & Family Development & the RCMP

FrostInterviewHdrFinal

Preface

“I wish sometimes that I had another medium than words, those pale and empty sounds and symbols.
I would like to tell a tale in acid, in poison, in vitriol, in fire and brimstone,
a tale that would sear and singe and scorch and curl up the pages as you read them.”

~ Douglas Reed, Disgrace Abounding, 1939

“Now the wintertime is coming,
The windows are filled with frost.
I went to tell everybody,
But I could not get across.”

Bob Dylan, It Takes a Lot to Laugh, It Takes a Train to Cry, 1965

RadPressEditorNew1 150

The incidents of rampant, overt corruption and cover-up of abominable criminal activities within the upper and lower levels of B.C.’s provincial government ministries, the federal and provincial judiciaries and the RCMP continue to expand with increased alacrity as new revelations by whistle blowing citizens, sickened and disgusted with what’s going on behind the smokescreen of media, court and police complicity in heinous acts of sexual abuse and pedophilia, step forth into the light of truth with their hitherto suppressed stories.

For the vast majority of victims who find themselves caught up in this vortex of venal depravity and perversion, without the financial means to hire high priced attorneys, there’s little recourse for them but to vainly cry out for help and recognition to avenues of public recourse such as  the RCMP Complaints Commission, the Human Rights organizations, the BC Civil Liberties Association, the Ombudsman and other miscellaneous agencies and government ministries that ostensibly exist to protect the victims of crimes here in this province, only to end up with the realization that all of them, ultimately, are but false and disappointing ruses whose primary purpose is to act as firewalls of protection for the criminals themselves.

When we tally them all up and then toss in the corporate, mainstream Zionist-controlled media whose primary purpose is to promote and protect these criminal elements within our judicial and social infrastructure we end up slamming our heads into what’s essentially a granite wall of collusion and criminality that not only boggles the mind but strikes fear into the hearts of those who once believed that their government and their courts and their police system were there to protect the honest and innocent and uphold the ideals of justice and fair play.

The sad and growing reality for all of the thousands upon thousands of victims of these forms of abuse is that the psychopaths have taken over the levers of government and foreign lobby groups representing the most voracious, avaricious, vile and decadent nation on the face of the planet have filled our national and provincial judiciary with cold-blooded, cruel replicas of themselves whose primary purpose is to serve and protect the sickos that are raping, abusing and murdering our youth and instilling fear and psychoses into their hearts and minds so that their lives are forever lived in terror and anxiety thus ensuring that they live dysfunctional lifestyles that again only benefit the courts and the corporate prison system (run by their demented brethren from the U.S.A.) which profit even further from the ongoing abuse of our present and future generations.

Were it not for the courage and tenacity and will of individuals like Frank FrostLonny Landrud and Byron Prior and Frank Martin & Helen Michel and Jack Cram and Jimi Townsend and Robert White-Erickson and Werner Bock and numerous others who’ve thrown off their shackles of fear and servitude and challenged this serpentine system of “law and order” and openly exposed the underbelly of these slithering slime balls the rest of the world would still be unaware of just how evil and psychotic the system really is once the veneer of media rhetoric is scraped off and the ghastly truth is revealed.

Here at The Radical Press I’ve been covering these and other tales of woe and misery and government misfeasance for well on to fifteen years and in doing so I’ve also had to pay the price that comes with challenging the authority of those who, in their deluded hubris and megalomania, still believe they have some god-given right to control and exploit and abuse our individual liberties and freedoms as human beings. For the whole of this duration I’ve been constantly in legal battles with the provincial government and  with the Zionist Jewish lobby groups who wield such inordinate and perverse influence over all levels of government in this once democratic and free nation we call Canada.

SLAPP-STIK 1000

I’ve been harassed, intimidated, charged and taken to the BC Supreme Court by the highest levels of this province’s government for exposing pedophile activities within the same Ministry of children and Families (as it was then called back in 2001) during the reign of the former NDP government then under the leadership of Premier Ujjal Dosangh. Now, fifteen years later, nothing has changed and the criminal activities of these same sick, satanic perverts continues, aided and abetted by their No. 1 mind-control weapon, the Zionist Jew criminal media that dominates 95% or more of Canada’s information technology.

SLAPPSTIK700

It was only recently while covering the legal case of criminal injustice involving Robert White-Erickson of McBride, B.C. that I became aware of Mr. Frank Frost. What made it even more uncanny was to find out from talking with him that, although he also resides in McBride, he once lived and worked in my own home town of Quesnel where for many years he worked as an advocate for the very same Ministry of Children and Family Development that he is now openly criticizing and exposing.

Like all stories of sexual perversion and abuse involving pedophilia, rape and murder Frank Frost’s story is not pleasing to either the ear or to one’s sense of moral serenity. What will very quickly become apparent for viewers of this two-part interview (filmed, incidentally by Robert White-Erickson who, as I write, is once again sitting in jail in the Prince George Regional Correctional Centre on additional trumped up charges laid by the same crooks that Frank Frost exposes) is that Mr. Frost is a man to be reckoned with. He’s someone who displays the traits of a determined and fearless fighter and to therefore suggest that his video presentation is “frank” would be an understatement of magnanimous proportions. Frank Frost holds no punches and when it comes to naming names he gives viewers the whole nine yards, sparing his adversaries  any of the niceties of language and protocol that many people today will likely find a bit shocking.

Like all the others Frank Frost has gone to the limit to try and exercise his Charter rights and to obtain justice via the standard procedures set up for such purposes. All of his efforts thus far have been in vain and realizing that his country has betrayed not only himself but his family and his friends and everyone one who has ever been unduly wronged Frost is not at this stage of his life what one would call a “happy camper.” Viewers will soon grasp that fact as they watch his presentation, one of the most riveting that I’ve ever encountered in my years of publishing.

Do share this post with others. We need to work together as Frank repeatedly states if we’re ever to end this seemingly endless cycle of perversion and injustice that’s permeated every level of our country’s legal system.

The only means of communicating with Frank Frost is to call him on his phone. The crooks in the RCMP and the Attorney General’s office have made it virtually impossible for him to access the internet or maintain an email address. Call Frank at 1-250-569-0338 if you wish to contact him.

Red spacer copy

THE FRANK FROST INTERVIEW PART ONE:

FRANKVID#1

CLICK HERE TO WATCH

Red spacer copy

THE FRANK FROST INTERVIEW PART TWO:

FRANKPT2

CLICK HERE TO WATCH

BC RCMP Continue Their Criminal Racist Hate Crimes Against Native Paraplegic Helen Michell and Her Husband Frank Martin by Arthur Topham

Screen Shot 2013-08-07 at 2.59.39 PM

PigBeatingTelquaa

The beatings and abuse and injustice never stops.

Helen Michell (shown in the photo above) and also known by her native name Telquaa, and her husband Frank Martin, both B.C. native-born residents, have been the victims of ongoing police brutality, stalking, harassment, racial profiling and hateful prejudice for the past twenty-five years and longer and the abuse continues to this day despite endless attempts at peaceful pleading to all levels of government ranging from the provincial to the federal to International agencies such as the United Nations to have the injustices committed against them halted.

The fact that this tortuous, incessant assault upon two now elderly First Nations people and their family, whose only ‘crime’ over the past decades has been their peaceful and ceaseless support for and advocacy to protect their unceded territories, the natural environment and their way of life as reflected in the wisdom and ways of their traditional hereditary ancestors, begs the question as to the type of justice system being reflected here in British Columbia by these heinous acts of deliberate terrorist against two innocent indigenous people.

What dire threat do these two sovereign-minded individuals pose to the province of B.C. that they have been profiled by the RCMP to the extent they have then subjected to endless attacks based upon either petty vehicle infractions or simply the fact that these victims of police abuse dared to venture out on our public highways?

What’s more astounding yet is the fact that due to all the repeated attacks over the years that have included deliberate acts of forcefully running their vehicle off the road and causing a near fatal accident that left Helen Michell a paraplegic and blind in one eye, these cruel, vindictive “peace officers” who hide their vicious actions behind a mask of police badge and uniform authoritarian legitimacy, are now dragging this same helpless, crippled woman out of her van and beating her, breaking her finger and bruising her body out on the public highway in broad daylight and in view of her children and then, if only to add insult to their despicable injuries, they turn around and deliberately twist the whole affair out of context like some cheap Mossad maneuver and lay charges of criminal assault against Helen, the very victim who they’ve intentionally and wrongfully battered and beaten for the supposed “crime” of not having a goddam signal light that worked properly; an accusation that both Helen and Frank adamantly deny!

AGBond

There’s something is extremely vile and wicked with is whole scenario and it’s beyond time that B.C.’s Attorney General and Minister of Justice Shirley Bond stepped in and put a stop to this endless legacy of lunatic behaviour by these belligerent, para-military mercenaries of the state otherwise know as the RCMP before one of these asinine, psychos eventually loses total control and pumps either or both of these innocent people full of lead; a scenario that is becoming more and more prevalent during these times.  An investigation is overdue into who the people are responsible for stalking and threatening and terrorizing these people and that investigation should be commenced by the AG’s office and not any RCMP organizations like the RCMP Complaints Commission.

Frank&Telquaa

The Radical Press has been following the story of Frank and Helen and documenting their ongoing plight with the provincial authorities and their decades long efforts to get their territory located at Maxan Lake in the Burns Lake region of the province returned to them; land that that was stolen from under them back in the 1990’s by the actions of crooked government-elected chiefs and band counsels. In an Interview first published in the now defunct monthly tabloid called The Radical, back in June of 2001 readers can get a good glimpse of the possible reasons why these two indigenous sovereingtists have been subjected to this ongoing abuse for so long. I highly recommend that viewers look at it.

The list of repeated abuses, beatings and harassment is phenomenal and stands as a stark reminder of just how brazen and ugly the so-called justice system truly is here in B.C. if you’re not a member of the dominant, privileged society or a person of wealth and influence. The following story published by RadicalPress.com back on February 27th, 2011 is a vivid account of the life that Frank and Helen are living in Lotus Land, also touted as the most beautiful place on earth to live. It’s not a pretty tale at all. Frank Martin has been subjected to police violence again and again all for the simple crime of standing up for his rights as a free and independent thinker and a man who refuses to buckle under to the oppressively constant pressure to not question the criminal activities of his own “red apple” brothers or those who’ve created the current system of native governance across Turtle Island.

FrankMartinPic

Almost daily in the controlled media we hear of horror stories of abuse after abuse by estranged RCMP officers who now behave more like the old bolshevik Cheka secret police did in the Soviet Union rather than decent, honest, sensitive protectors of the public. It’s these types of aberrant behaviour on the part of the cops that makes it so plainly obvious to Frank and Helen that the safety of their lives and their family members is becoming more and more precarious as time goes by and sooner or later one of these maniacs with the yellow striped pants will blow yet another fuse and end up murdering either them or their children.

This story is being sent to the mainstream media here in B.C. and elsewhere plus it is going directly to the Attorney General’s office and to Shirley Bond. Will she actually do something about these crimes against Frank and Helen and put an end to legacy of injustice? Let’s find out.
_______

Helen Michell can be reached at: helen michell telquaa@hotmail.com

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

ARRESTSTATEMENT

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

“Willful Promotion of Hatred CC 319(2)”

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

By

Arthur Topham

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I asked my wife to open the glove box and get the vehicle insurance out. At the same time I reached for my wallet in order to get my driver’s license ready to show the police.

By the time we did these two tasks more police vehicles arrived and there were suddenly four or more of them along the side of the highway. I rolled down my window and in the rear view mirror could see three or more officers approaching the rear of the truck. One of them called out to me by name saying “Mr. Topham, would you get out of the vehicle and come to the rear of the vehicle.” Knowing that I was driving my business partner’s 2009 Chev Silverado and wasn’t registered to me, I knew immediately that these officers were not not just stopping me on a whim or that they didn’t know who they had been following. I called out of my window, “Do you want to see my driver’s license. One officer, who I realized later was the leader of the pack (Terry Wilson), repeated his command that I get out of the vehicle and again I asked him if I should bring my license to which he answered in the affirmative.

Leaving Shastah inside I got out and walked to the rear of the truck. I was immediately approached by an officer who I assumed was in charge. He introduced himself as Terry Wilson and then told me that I was being placed under arrest. Immediately following that another young male officer came up to me on my left carrying a clipboard in hand and told me that he was going to read me the charge and then proceeded to state, “there are reasonable grounds for believing that the following offences have been committed: “Wilful Promotion of Hatred contrary to Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code.”

He then asked me if I heard and understood what the charges were and in the same breath also said that I had the right to remain silent and that anything I said could and would be used against me. I told him and the rest of the cops standing around that they had no right to be charging me with said crime and their alleged “hate” crime was nothing but more bogus charges likely brought on by Agent Z and B’nai Brith Canada and that this whole charade was nothing more that an extension of the Section 13 complaint charge that Agent Z had filed against me back in 2007. Meanwhile Wilson and his crew were all standing by with their trusty little digital voice recorders going.

After my little rant I acknowledged that I understood the charges even though I disagreed with them and the Terry Wilson proceeded to tell me to turn around and place my hands on the back of the truck so that he could handcuff and frisk me. When I turned around I noted that other officers, including a female one, had gone to and were talking with my wife Shastah on the passenger side of the vehicle.

When I realized that they were going to haul me off to jail I told Wilson that I would like to leave my personal effects that I had on me with my wife before he handcuffed me and he said that would be okay. I emptied my pockets of cash, keys, a memory stick that had on it a jpg of a Cariboo Placers Mining and Exploration Co business card that I had recently designed and was planning on taking to the printer in Quesnel. Wilson immediately grabbed it and asked what I had on it. I told him but I could sense that he already had it in his mind that possibly he had in his possession some incriminating evidence to back up the phoney charges and he held on to it. I also removed a small Swiss Army pen knife, diamond grit knife sharpener, lighter and then my regular Swiss Army knife which I was carrying in a leather case on my belt. I also removed my wrist watch and laid all of these articles on the retractable cover that was over the box of the truck.

After placing all of my personal effects on the deck cover I put my arms behind my back while Wilson did his thing and placed some plastic cuffs on me. All the while his manner and that of the other arresting officers was civil and congenial and ‘friendly’ to the point of being extreme. They addressed me as “Mr. Topham” and then asked me if I preferred to be addressed as either “Mr. Topham” or “Arthur.” I told them that Arthur was fine.

After Wilson fastened the handcuffs on me I asked him if I could go around the truck and speak to my wife before they took me away. He said that would be okay and then when I went to move another officer came up and held my arm when I began to walk saying that I should be careful not to fall down. I had to laugh to myself at their overly feigned concern for my physical welfare given that I normally am out either in the bush or on my mining claims where I’m climbing over logs or boulders. When I approached Shastah I told her that they had arrested me and were going to take me into town to jail and that she should come to the back of the truck and get my personal belongings. At this point my wife had a look of incredulity on her face and looked at the officers standing around her and said something to the effect, “Are you guys serious? You’re going to arrest my husband?” She was obviously becoming quite distraught. I told her that she would have to drive the truck when they took me away. She was unfamiliar with it as we had just acquired it as part of the business venture that we were in. She got out of the vehicle and came around to the rear where I had placed my personal effects and began putting them in a plastic bag. I then asked her to give me a kiss good bye as I had no idea of how long we might be separated from each other.

Wilson then told me that he would be taking me in to the Quesnel RCMP station and then two young officers held me and steered me toward a smaller, unmarked police vehicle. As we walked along the shoulder of the highway the female cop on my left introduced herself to me saying that her name was Normandie Levas and jokingly remarked that she was the better looking of the lot and that she would assist me in getting into the vehicle with the handcuffs so I didn’t have any trouble. They placed me in the back seat on the passenger side and then the two of them got in and proceeded to drive toward Quesnel with Normandie Levas driving. The female cop placed her digital voice recorder on the divider between the two seats and repeated to me that I was being recorded and then proceeded to elicit conversation from me. Having already told me first off that she was the better looking, attractive cop I jokingly commented to her that little good would it do me as there was no way I could even grope her with my hands behind my back.

It was about a 15 minute drive to the Quesnel police station and as we drove along the two cops got into talking about one thing or another. Again, Normandie Levas asked me if I preferred to be called “Arthur” or “Mr. Topham” and I told her the story about how I had been a school teacher for a number of years and that I had grown tired of hearing “Mr. Topham” “Mr. Topham” all the time from the children that I taught. She asked me what grades I had worked with and I told her that I mainly worked in the elementary level although I had later subbed in the high schools in Quesnel. I also described to her how I had started out my teaching career working in the federal Indian Day School system and from there moved to Wells, B.C. back in 1975 and had since lived in the area for the greater portion of the last forty years.

At one point while we were travelling down the highway I noted that Normandie was speeding well beyond the limit which was max. 90 km and I told her and she slowed down. The conversation turned to gold mining and I asked them if they were aware of the tv series called Gold Rush Alaska and they intimated that they were. I then proceeded to tell them about a local placer miner who was doing very well and was planning to start a made in BC version of a tv series similar to Gold Rush Alaska and that I’d just watched a trailer for it. The BC version was called “Gold Diggers.” I jokingly told them that maybe I could get them parts in the new upcoming drama and the male cop said that he had always wanted to be a movie star. I laughed and said that he would be better off being an honest cop rather than getting involved with Hollywood as it was run by the Jews and he’d eventually have to sell his soul to the Devil if he got caught up in it. Neither of the two cops reacted outwardly to my remark but I was certain they were thinking that they had got a juicy bit of racist hate mongering against the Jews regardless of the fact that what I had said was the truth.

When we arrived at the station and Normandie pulled in to the parking lot at the rear where all the cop cars were parked I asked her if they were going to put a hood over my head so that the local folks wouldn’t see them marching me into jail with handcuffs on. I was of course being facetious but she then turned around the car and proceeded to drive it into the building itself where a door was opened and we entered in. The two cops got out and Normandie then proceeded to remove her gun from her side and placed it in a  box outside the door leading into the station. When she did so I noted that a digital clock on the box read: 12:12 p.m.

I was then escorted into the station and led to the booking desk where I saw Terry Wilson standing in the hallway waiting for me. A young cop inside the office came up with a form in his hand to fill out and for me to sign regarding my personal effects and as he approached me asked me how I was. I thought to myself, “Do they really expect you to give them an honest answer given the circumstances?” and then remarked something to that effect. Terry Wilson then proceeded to ask me some questions about whether or not my home was locked or was wired with any explosive devices or if I had any firearms? I told him, facetiously, to watch out for the “grow op” and that yes, I did have firearms in my home and that two of them were loaded (a Marlin 22 and a Winchester 30-30) and in my bedroom and he should be careful. I also told him that I had two other unloaded rifles upstairs, a 22 calibre and a 30-30 Winchester.

It was at this point that he told me he was going to frisk me again before putting me in a cell and that I should remove me belt and my suspenders and my shoes. I said yes, I guess I’d better remove my suspenders so I couldn’t hang myself while in jail by “suspending” myself from the ceiling!

I then signed the form for my belongings and we proceeded to the jail cell with me walking in my stockinged feet. Wilson said that it would likely be two or three hours before I heard from him and also asked me if I had a lawyer that wished to call. When I mentioned Douglas Christie Wilson said that he knew Doug and would call him. He acted as if he and Doug were old high school buddies but then I thought to myself that yes, being in the “hate” business I’m sure that he would be aware of Mr. Christie. It was about 12:20 p.m. when I was placed in a cell and the door locked. Wilson said he’d come and get me if he could get in contact with Mr. Christie.

Not too long afterwards Wilson came and opened the door and asked me to go down the hall to a small room where there was a seat and a phone hanging on the wall. He said he had got a hold of Mr. Christie and that when Doug called that a staff person in the office would re-direct the call to the phone in the room and that I would then be able to speak to Mr. Christie in confidence. I just smiled at Wilson when he said this knowing how the system works. I waited in the room and then the call finally came through and I spoke to Doug Christie. He advised me not to tell the police any more that I had to and that he would monitor the situation. I briefly explained what took place and then let the cops know I was done and they escorted me back to the jail cell.

I remained incarcerated throughout the afternoon and into the evening. One one occasion Wilson came again to the cell and got me to go and speak with Mr. Christie who had told me that he would be concerned if I was still being held after a few hours and not released. I didn’t realize at the time that Wilson was telling me it would be just a couple of more hours that the search warrant was for 1700 hours to 2100 hours and that I wouldn’t be released until after they had completed their search of my home.

Around 5 or 6 p.m. someone came by and opened a slot in the door and placed a tray on it with what appeared to be food and drink. They then hit the door with what sounded like a dog chain and left. No voice to say a meal was there. I stared at the tray and thought to myself that there was no way in hell I would accept food under these circumstances. I began to reflect that just a day or so before I was reading about a massive hunger strike that has been going on in Israel where thousands of Palestinians were being held in jail for upwards of years without having been charged with anything. There had been a world-wide call for solidarity with the hunger strikers, their conditions being extremely worse than mine, and so I said to myself that I would fast in solidarity with these political prisoners of the apartheid, Jews-only state of Israel rather than eat upon command. About a half an hour later another shadowy figure walked past the door and hit it again with the chain presumably to remind me that there was food on the tray. No human voice just the sound of metal on metal.

Later on when Wilson returned he asked me why I hadn’t eaten any of the food and I told him about the Palestinians and how I was fasting with them in solidarity. I doubt whether he knew what I was talking about and he said that if there was something else I might like to eat that he would try and get it for me. I hadn’t looked at what was on the plate so I didn’t know what it was. The styrofoam cup likely had coffee or juice in it.

Eventually around 10 p.m or later Wilson finally arrived and I was let out of the cell. He told me that he would be taking me upstairs to an office where my personal belongings would be returned and where we would be having a discussion regarding the charges that would be, of course, digitally recorded. At no point in our conversation did Wilson indicate that our conversations were being video taped. As I was emerging from the cell I looked Wilson in the eyes and asked him just what the charges were. He said that I was being charged for publishing “hatred toward the Jewish population.”

He also told me that even though I was now out of the cell that I was still considered to be under arrest. I proceeded barefoot upstairs to a small office and sat down. Wilson then laid his digital voice recorder on the desk and left the room for about three to five minutes without telling me where he was going. When he returned he gave me copies of the Search Warrant, the Undertaking Given to a Peace Officer or an Officer In Charge which contained the alleged offence of “Wilful Promotion of Hatred” under Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code occurring in “Quesnel, BC” from April 28, 2011 to May 14, 2012 plus a “PROMISE TO APPEAR” document. I informed Wilson at that point that my council had instructed me not to sign any documents and he was fine with that.

Wilson then began his attempt to initiate conversation with me. I had been instructed by my council not to engage in any discussions but I failed in that regard when Wilson began talking about how he had been reading the materials on my website RadicalPress.com over the course of the past year and longer and that he had concluded, based upon particular articles,that it was indeed a “hate” site. I countered his remark by stating to Wilson that possibly in his mind he felt it was a “hate” site but that was pure speculation on his part for the alleged complaint by Agent Z and Agent Y was far from substantiated nor was it determined yet by a court of law at this point. He then went on to compliment me on my writing abilities saying that I was a very good writer but immediately launched into the same old standard arguments used by the Jewish Zionists making mention of the fact that I had on my website articles by Eustice Mullins plus the the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. Surely, he remarked, I must know that that small booklet was just a work of fiction designed to implicate the Jews in crimes for which they were innocent. I replied that whether the work was fictitious or not it now stands as a roadmap of the 20th Century clearly delineating the proposed agenda for the Zionists and that the record of events shown throughout that period were solid evidence that the booklet was a preconceived agenda for global hegemony on the part of the Rothschild/Zionist Internationalists. I told Wilson that anyone who had seriously studied 20 century world history (and here I made a point of stressing that I was referring to history written by those who were not pushing the Zionist version of history as it is found in the mainstream media) could easily see that the all the major pieces of the puzzle fell into place in terms of understanding how the Protocols, in fact, outline what the Zionist Jews planned to do in order to gain absolute control over the media, the economy, the judicial system and the political and social structures that comprise the framework upon which the world’s democratic system is based. I could see that Wilson was struggling with the notion of differing versions of history as opposed to just one.

Wilson then brought up the subject of an article which I had posted on my site titled, Israel Must Perish!  He began to tell me how it was an extremely hateful piece of writing and that he wondered why I had written and published such a hate-filled book. I had to laugh aloud (and I did). At the same moment I also thought to myself, “This person is supposed to be the head honcho in charge of determining what is and isn’t to be determined “hate” literature and he doesn’t have a clue what is going on here.” When he said, in a matter of fact tone that I had gone to the trouble of actually publishing this book and posting it on my website I told him that he had the whole thing wrong. I had NOT written such a book. The truth of the matter was that all the vile, hateful statements contained in the supposed book which he thought I had written were, IN FACT, verbatim, direct quotations from a real, actual book written by a Zionist Jew by the name of Theodore N. Kaufman and published in the United States of America back in 1941. The original book was called GERMANY MUST PERISH! and I had taken this booklet and written a parody of it in order to enlighten the public as to who the real perpetrators of supposed “hate literature” were. I don’t think that Wilson understood what a “parody” was and I could also see that he was having trouble understanding what I was explaining to him. I had the distinct impression that he was not happy with the fact that the one article which he apparently felt was conclusive proof that I was publishing “hatred toward the Jewish population” was, in fact, merely a poignant example of their own style of writing being turned upon itself in the form of an imitation in order to highlight their utter malfeasance when it came to denigrating the German people. It was also quite evident to me that the choices of articles which Wilson had used in his interrogation had been supplied to him by Agent Z and Agent Y as absolute examples of “hatred”.

Wilson kept on going on about other materials but I was done with any further discussion and told him so. He then asked me how my experience in jail was and whether or not I was satisfied that I had been treated well. I said that I felt I was generally treated in a respectful manner with one exception. Oh he said and what was that. I then point-blank asked him whether or not he wiped his ass after taking a shit. He looked a bit taken aback but replied that he did. Why then did he put me in a cell for close to twelve hours without providing me with the basic necessity of toilet paper so that in the event I had a bowel movement that I could at least wipe myself? Did he expect me to take a crap on camera and then attempt to wash my ass in the little stainless steel sink that was provided and afterwards use my T-shirt to dry my hands? His response was that I could have called out to a guard or the jail keeper down the hall if I was in need of having a crap and that they would then provide me with the necessary accoutrement for the job. I told him that he should have informed me of this process prior to locking me up and leaving me without the bare essentials to attend to any toileting that might arise. Wilson had no further comments to make and then an attendant arrived with my personal belongings and after putting my belt back on Wilson walked with me down to the front entrance of the police station where he let me out the front door. There waiting for me was my dear, distraught wife Shastah.
———-

Letter to Chief Judge of British Columbia from Jim Townsend

JIMTNewsUPdate copy

Letter to Chief Judge of British Columbia

Wednesday, April 17th, 2013
 
Office of the Chief Judge of British Columbia
 
Mr. Chief Judge,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Read more…]

Fracking. The One Per Cent. Collapsing Canadian Courts. Jessica Ernst of Rosebud, Alberta. by Robin Mathews

FrackingMathews photo hydrolic-fracking-1000_zps51cf6cc2.png

Fracking. The One Per Cent. Collapsing Canadian Courts.  Jessica Ernst of Rosebud, Alberta.

by Robin Mathews

April 6, 2013

The One Per Cent, we know, control ‘the banks too big to fail’ and  the corporations too powerful to regulate – which includes (among other things) fracking enterprises worldwide.  The Canadian courts, we are beginning to know, operate – increasingly – outside the Rule of Law in matters concerning The One Per Cent … and fracking.

All over the globe fracking is fouling drinking water, lowering water tables, and endangering agriculture in the search, especially, for what is called “natural gas”. It is doing that in the area of Rosebud, Alberta, where Jessica Ernst makes her home.

All over the globe people are being affected, waking up alarmed, calling for investigation, research, regulation, laws to control fracking.  Jessica Ernst, scientist, oil patch operative, has been doing that for … for going on a decade.  Jessica Ernst has a 33 million dollar lawsuit against Encana*, Alberta Energy Regulators, and the Alberta government, a suit being propelled forward (very, very, very slowly) by the law firm called Klippenstein of Toronto, Ontario.

The fight is tough.  The Alberta Regulator – The Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB) has argued it’s immune from lawsuits and has “no duty of care” to citizens complaining of groundwater contamination. That indicates the ‘style’ of the conflict about fracking: just who is working for whom?

As if to underscore that “style”, a sort-of shake-up is going on in Alberta energy regulation. A new chair of Alberta energy regulation has been named: Gerald J.  Protti, fifteen year officer at Encana and its predecessor PanCanadian Energy. Deborah Yedlin of Calgary Herald uses this phrase about his appointment: perhaps, she says, “putting the fox in charge of the hen house” (April 2, 2013).  That doesn’t quite describe the appointment: the fox, after all, wants to eat the hens. Maybe the poetic image should be “putting the Mafia chief in charge of criminal investigations”. Whatever, Mr. Protti is not believed by many to be an objective choice.  Par for the course.

Which takes us to the court and the astonishing (I don’t like to say it), almost unbelievable behaviour in the Court of Queen’s Bench, Calgary. (Par for the course?) To put the matter in very simple terms, I believe the administration of justice – in relation to Jessica Ernst’s case – is being brutalized and shredded by a combination of forces including the Stephen Harper forces in Ottawa and the Chief Justice of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench (with, doubtless, a cheering section from Alberta government and “the industry”).

The people behind the behaviour of Stephen Harper and Queen’s Bench are not openly visible.  You might say they’re The One Per Cent.

In brief, the judge on the Case Management process, Justice Barbara Veldhuis, about to rule on whether Jessica Ernst can sue the government regulator, was promoted from the Court of Queen’s Bench to the Alberta Appeals Court, removed, and prevented from making a finding. By the merest chance, the Chief Justice of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench Neil Wittmann volunteered to take over the matter.  And has done so.

All that, I suggest, is probably fraudulent behaviour.

To begin, the promotion of Barbara Veldhuis stinks to high heaven.  Why did she need to move?  She didn’t.  Who moved her?  The only person in Canada who could move her is Rob Nicholson, minister of justice, Ottawa – by which we may say Stephen Harper. Why would Stephen Harper want to reach into the Alberta higher court system and move Barbara Veldhuis?

The answer can only be, I suggest, someone feared that she was about to rule against the interests of The One Per Cent.

The promotion of Barbara Veldhuis, we may say, was ridiculous, unnecessary, and timed to destroy her work on the Jessica Ernst case.  We may say more.

Members of either of the senior Alberta courts mentioned – Queen’s Bench and Court of Appeal – are ex officio members of the other court (if the Wikipedia material on the Alberta courts is correct).  Members of those courts are – at the very least – able (at the direction of the Chief Justice) to work in the other court. And so Barbara Veldhuis could be promoted to the Alberta Appeals Court and could also make the ruling on the Jessica Ernst application in the Court of Queen’s Bench.

The whole business of promoting Justice Veldhuis and moving her and preventing her from making the ruling is … I suggest, sham, smoke-and-mirrors, a fraud. The shifting of judges on sensitive cases must be seen for the dangerous activity it is.

Remember that in British Columbia in 2010 a similar action occurred.  That action directly connects the Alberta Jessica Ernst case with the B.C. Supreme Court BC Rail Scandal case. And … Neil Wittmann, Chief Justice of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, is involved in both events.
Supreme Court of B.C. Justice Elizabeth Bennett was swiftly removed from the BC Rail Scandal trial as a result of her promotion, by Stephen Harper, to the Appeals Court.  She was replaced by Madam Justice Anne MacKenzie who, some allege, was placed there to protect premier Gordon Campbell, his team, and all the powerful private operators who are alleged to have corruptly transferred BC Rail to the CNR.

There is more. Anne MacKenzie was, within weeks, raised by Stephen Harper to the position of Associate Chief Justice of the B.C. Supreme Court.  And then in some months she was raised by Stephen Harper to the B.C. Appeals Court.

A key fact of her time as judge on the BC Rail Scandal (Basi, Virk, and Basi) case, was that she permitted in her court a Special (Crown) Prosecutor who she was told, formally, was appointed to his position in flagrant violation of the legislation governing the appointment of Special Prosecutors.

Such appointees have to be completely objective and wholly unconnected to political power and civil service officers. But the Special (Crown) Prosecutor, William Berardino, was appointed to the case by a ministry of the Attorney General in which the Attorney General had been his partner and colleague for seven years, and the Deputy Attorney General had been his partner and colleague for eleven years.

The evidence of the Special Prosecutor’s illegitimate appointment was so stark that I wrote to the Chief Justice, the Associate Chief Justice and the judge on the case – on two separate occasions, formally reporting the illegitimate appointment.  They answered, refusing to act.

Two of the accused were cabinet appointed aides reporting to cabinet members and acting on their behalf. And so the appointment of the Special Prosecutor, as I say, was in flagrant violation of the legislation governing such appointments. He was simply too connected (in fact and in perception) to the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General to have been appointed. There is not the slightest question about that.

Unsatisfied with the replies I received from the top judges of the B.C. Supreme Court, I decided to address a complaint to the Canadian Judicial Council – the highest body in the country. I made a formal complaint of misconduct on the part of Associate Chief Justice Anne MacKenzie in the matter of knowing the Special Crown Prosecutor in her court was there by illegitimate appointment.  She was conducting herself as if he was a legitimate appointment and so she was sullying the administration of justice.

The Canadian Judicial Council elected to have the Chief Justice of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench Neil Wittmann deal with my complaint.  On his behalf (as is standard practice) his agent on the Council replied to me.  He declared that Chief Justice Neil Wittmann concluded that the conduct of Associate Chief Justice Anne MacKenzie (which I had pointed out) was a not matter of conduct.  He dismissed my complaint.

I allege that his action supported an illegitimate trial, supported the major wrong-doers in the BC Rail Scandal, and supported the action of Stephen Harper in ‘conveniently’ promoting Justice Elizabeth Bennett, making way for Justice Anne MacKenzie.

That is the same Chief Justice Neil Wittmann who did not protest when Justice Barbara Veldhuis was promoted, did not exercise his discretion as Chief Justice to permit her as ex officio of both courts to make a finding on the Jessica Ernst application, and who volunteered himself to take over the Jessica Ernst action in Case Management with what must be deleterious results.

If he decides to re-hear arguments on the application that were presented in Calgary court in January 2013, he will be choosing to force Jessica Ernst to exceptional expense and delay.  If he chooses merely to read the transcripts of the arguments presented, he will be placing Ms. Ernst at risk of being misunderstood in the presentations made both for her by her lawyers and against her by those opposed to her

A fundamental convention of such cases is that judges are not changed – for the obvious reason that they carry all the information forward as the case develops. Plainly, Chief Justice Wittmann is at sea on this case, wallowing, and is going to have, somehow, to start afresh, causing anxiety, financial cost, delay, and stress to Jessica Ernst.  But, for all we know, that may be precisely (with Neil Wittmann’s and Stephen Harper’s cooperation) what The One Per Cent (who seem to be in charge of this case) want to have happen.

Chief Justice Neil Wittmann can’t help being suspected by many people of simply being a “plant” on the case to make certain that justice will never be done. The strange, sudden, and unusual shifts in the case bring the administration of justice into disrepute, even in the unlikely possibility that they are honest shifts. For all we know, additional facts calling Neil Wittmann’s role into question may well surface in the coming weeks and months.

What Canadians have to see clearly in these two important cases is that, I allege, the Stephen Harper forces in Ottawa interfered with the administration of justice in a manner that prevented justice from being done.  I believe they interfered intentionally to pollute the administration of justice.

Canadians must also see clearly that all the other judges of the higher courts in British Columbia and Alberta – and the Law Societies of both provinces – consented (by inaction) to the pollution – even when they were not a material part of it. We are witnessing the collapsing Canadian courts … and the eroding  Canadian legal system.

We are witnessing here, in particular, what I take to be a highly organized and concerted attack upon Jessica Ernst and her case by the federal ministry of justice (directed by Stephen Harper) and by the most powerful officer of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench -with the silent assent of legal experts who should be protesting loudly and publicly at the attack on the most basic foundations of democratic society.

* ENCANA CORPORATION. Annual General Meeting, April 23, 2:00 p.m. Hotel Arts Spectrum Ballroom, 119 – 12 Avenue Southwest, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

——–

Contact Robin: rmathews@telus.net

Radical Press Legal Update #8

 

NewLegalUpdateLogo-700

notice4RP

 

Dear Supporters of Freedom of Speech,

January 3, 2013 was a good day in B.C. and across the nation for those who have taken up metaphorical arms in defence of Canada’s fundamental right to freedom of speech on the Internet.

Here in B.C. and out in Ontario those battling against the forces of media censorship and repression were, in both cases, successful in their efforts and thus, for once, I have only positive news to report.

I should preface this update with a short apology to some readers who were sent an alert yesterday indicating that I had unexpectedly been called to court. That was an error on my part due to some confusion arising from the previous bail hearing that took place on December 19, 2012 wherein I got the date for my next appearance mixed up. Call it a senior moment if you will. 🙂

During the last court appearance in December presiding Judge Church, after hearing arguments from both the Crown and Defence regarding the Crown’s rather strident and persistent effort to reimpose the original bail conditions that were placed on me by Cst. Terry Wilson of the BC HATE CRIME TEAM back on May 16, 2012, reserved her judgement on the issue until January 3, 2013.

My lawyer Doug Christie attended by telephone from Victoria, B.C. and I and my wife were in the Quesnel Court room at 1:30 p.m. to hear Judge Church’s decision.

The Judge first gave an overview of the Crown’s arguments and those of Defence lawyer Mr. Christie before presenting her own position on the issue. According to Judge Church the Crown’s basic argument was that while I had legally resumed publishing on RadicalPress.com on November 2, 2012 I was still publishing material that the Crown felt was of the same calibre as that originally complained of by Agent X and Agent Y of B’nai Brith Canada. To back up Crown’s argument Crown Council Jennifer Johnston had submitted to Judge Church on December 19, 2012 a couple of screen shots taken from the radicalpress.com website that had supposed controversial headings which CC Johnston felt were significant enough that they warranted reinstating the original draconian restrictions that Cst Terry Wilson had unilaterally saddled me with on the day of my arrest in May.

Having considered these apparently pithy examples of willful promotion of hatred against “people of the Jewish religion or ethnic group” Judge Church went on to say that while the screen shots may have (as Crown was alleging), indicated an “undertone” of hatred toward those of the Jewish faith, Crown had not gone so far as to state that the captured text was in fact hateful. Furthermore, Crown had not disclosed to Judge Church any additional corroborating information pertaining to the screen shots in question which Crown was alleging were displaying such sentiments and so, according to the Judge, she had no way of determining whether or not the screen shots or the accompanying articles were, in fact, contravening sec. 319(2) of the CC of Canada.

Judge Church then went on to review Defence council Doug Christie’s arguments which basically stated Crown was attempting to pre-judge the published materials before a trial was held to determine whether or not they were in truth a contravention of sec. 319(2). It was also established that I am, in fact, a publisher and that under Canada’s constitution I have the right to publish articles deemed to be of interest to the general public and until such time that said articles are proven in a court of law to have contravened Canada’s hate crime legislation that my right to publish should not be pre-emptively prohibited simply because of allegations of wrong doing by those who feel particular materials are wilfully promoting hatred toward an ethnic minority. Throughout the course of her comments the Judge referred to the cases cited by both Crown and Defence during the previous hearing on December 19, 2012.

Another issue that had come up on December 19, 2012 was that of Disclosure. The Crown had then argued that they were withholding disclosure from my attorney because of a breach of protocol that had occurred back in the summer when a confidential document released to Doug Christie was later found to have been posted on a third party website (FreeDominion.ca). The Judge went on to describe the event which had to do with what is called a “Warned Statement” which was a digitally recorded conversation between myself and the arresting officer Cst Terry Wilson on the day of my arrest. The Crown alleged that the breach (committed by me due to ignorance of the nature of the document) posed a serious threat to the safety of the two complainants in the case and for that reason Crown had filed a further application demanding that my lawyer not provide me with any further disclosure because I might intentionally publish it or give it to someone else who might publish it and in the process endanger the complainants. CC Johnston had cited the case of the Basi-Virk Trial involving the BC Rail/BC Liberal government scandal as reasoning for her allegations.

The Judge then went on to state that the case law cited by Crown in fact dealt with examples where secondary parties who were testifying may have been at risk but that in my case it was information which I personally had given to Cst. Terry Wilson and was, as my lawyer had stated, not of the same nature and certainly did not pose any direct threat to either of the two individuals who had complained to the RCMP. As such the Judge did not feel that the Crown’s argument that Mr. Christie be restricted in sharing disclosure with me was valid.

Judge Church also considered Doug Christie’s counter argument that it would be an unreasonable and onerous position to be placed in were he not allowed to share the information in any disclosure with his client unless I was under his direct supervision given the fact that he was in Victoria and I was 700 km away in Quesnel. Mr. Christie had indicated on December 19, 2012 that he and his client would be more than willing to sign an undertaking prohibiting me from disclosing any further confidential information in order to insure that no such breach occurred a second time. The Judge was able to see the logic of Mr. Christie’s arguments while at the same time dismissing Crown’s position that the breach in question could have endangered the two complainants and went on to say that while she would not be imposing the two original conditions that prohibited me from publishing on radicalpress.com or writing articles for publication wherever I so chose she would be issuing an order that would make it illegal for me republish any further disclosure. At this point she also stating she would not impose upon Mr. Christie the condition that he be in attendance whenever disclosing confidential documents to me.

Having read out her decision regarding the matters at hand the Judge reinstated the new bail conditions and asked me if I understood them. I acknowledged that I did. As such here are the new bail conditions under which I am now to legally abide by:

CONDITION ONE: You shall keep the peace and be of good behaviour.

CONDITION TWO: You shall have no contact or communication, directly or indirectly, with Agent Y and Agent X except as follows: (a) while in attendance at court; (b) through legal counsel.

CONDITION THREE: You shall not possess any weapon as defined in Section 2 of the criminal Code except for purposes directly related to your employment.

CONDITION FOUR: You shall not distribute, circulate or share all or any part of the Crown disclosure material with any person or organization.

CONDITION FIVE: You shall not publish or post all or any part of the Crown disclosure material on any internet site that can be read by the general public.

Having listened to the conditions of the new undertaking and given my consent to obey them the Judge then concluded the hearing. My wife and I then went for coffee and returned later to the Court Registry office where the undertaking was waiting for my signature. After signing it and obtaining a copy we left the building.

Included in the new undertaking was a notice stating that I would appear in court on April 2, 2013 at 1:30 pm PT in Quesnel for the preliminary hearing.

For some unknown reason Crown Council Jennifer Johnston was absent from the court room and another assistant Crown Council was sitting in for her.

So by all indications it looks like I will finally have some temporary respite from all the legal machinations that have been occurring over the past three months and I can focus on raising funds and adding further information to radicalpress.com that will assist others in understanding both the importance of this case and why it is that Canadians must sit up and pay much more attention to what these foreign lobbyists are doing to wreck our inherent right to freedom of expression and censor any and debate that focuses on the criminal and racist actions of the state of Israel and its dangerous and supremacist ideology known as Zionism.

 

Sincerely

 

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

The Men Who Taste Jews in Their Sandwiches by Jim Goad

[EDITOR’S NOTE: Currently there’s some serious cyber fistacuffin’ going on in the alternative media ring between proponents who, as this poignant piece below points out, see everything as being a direct result of Jewish malfeasance and every “Jew” equally culpable when it comes to the multi-faceted query known historically as “The Jewish Question” and those who tend to discriminate (oi!) and assign guilt or responsibility only to the ones (and their sycophants) directly responsible for the woes that befall the self-chosen.

The article below is one of the best interpretations of this problem that I’ve come across. Please take the time to read and share it with others.

Oh yes, and lest I forget… This particular post is also for Det-Cst Terry Wilson of the BC HATE CRIME TEAM who arrested me, traumatized my dear wife, put me in jail and then illegally entered my home and stole all of my computers and firearms back on May 16, 2012. Ever since his shameful, ignoble performance he faithfully reads all of the posts on www.radicalpress.com each day (when he’s not reading all of my thousands of personal emails that were on my computers) in order to scrape together “evidence” that he then sends along like a good little school boy tattle tale to Crown council Jennifer Johnston in Quesnel, B.C. who further flaps pages of all of my posts before the eyes of the Judges so as to reinforce the Queen of England’s (Regina) false sec. 319(2) CC charge of willfully promoting hatred against “people of the Jewish religion or ethnic group.”

On occasion I like to reinforce this person’s traitorous behaviour with a graphic showing the evidence covering his face. I know how important it is for Terry to have his mugshot in the media as it helps him and his accomplices to justify in their own petty little minds not only their existence but also that fat pay cheque they get for acting as Orwellian thought police for the foreign lobbyists who currently control Canada’s Prime Minister and all of the opposition parties. I am, of course, referring to B’nai Brith ‘Canada’ the Israeli lobby 5th Column Mossad agency that is responsible for attacking me in the courts for the past six years.

WilsonFramedFinal-copy-2

http://takimag.com/article/the_men_who_taste_jews_in_their_sandwiches_jim_goad#axzz2GSd5taZI

Notes From the Edge

The Men Who Taste Jews in Their Sandwiches

by Jim Goad

November 19, 2012

I woke up this morning with a bit of a chest cold and decided not to blame the Jews for it. Some mystical yearning deep inside my heart—I believe it’s called “common sense”—led me to surmise that I am probably not afflicted with the Jew Flu.

It’s not that I hold Jews blameless, because they are human beings, too, Shylock, and are therefore not to be trusted. I hold other groups—blacks, feminists, and homosexual sausage-gobbling rump-wranglers—to the same standard. Merely because they find it fashionable to hide behind a shield of historic persecution to further their group interests and seemingly insatiable hunger for power doesn’t mean they are presumed innocent in all situations. I see Jews as human and therefore likely to be up to no good at any given moment.

Then again, neither do I blame the Jews for everything. But there is a tiny, bitter, and relentless subset of individuals who tend to do this reflexively. I call them “The Men Who Taste Jews in Their Sandwiches.” They also taste Jews in the soup they slurp and in the apple pie they eat for dessert.

Merely by stating this, I’m certain I’ll be accused of being afraid to admit that Jews control the sandwich industry.

These types inevitably turn any conversation toward Jews, no matter how little the topic at hand has to do with Jews. If Godwin’s Law predicts that every Internet discussion will inevitably lead to Nazi and Hitler comparisons, these creeps who eagerly leap across the line from logical to pathological are apparently bound by the inexorable forces of Goldman’s Law…or Goldstein’s Law…or Goldberg’s Law. In their diseased brains, all neurons lead to Jews. Perhaps one day this psychological disorder will be diagnosed and a book written about it called The Man Who Mistook His Hat for a Jew.

What’s ironic is the fact that although I don’t personally taste Jews in my sandwiches unless I’m eating a Reuben with kosher pickles, I likely ask some of the same questions as do the schmucks who even taste Jews in a slice of Wonder Bread with mayonnaise. I’m drawn to the Jewish Question merely because it’s such an untouchable topic. I realize that the mere act of questioning Jewish power and influence is a career-killer in much of the West, and that in certain countries asking certain questions about the Holocaust is enough to get you jailed. It’s one topic about which most “irreverent” and “non-PC” people are extremely reverent and effusively PC. I’ve also noticed that it’s a topic that many people are eager to talk about off the record but terrified to mention in public.

So here’s where I stand on Jews…OK, wait, roll back the tape…I don’t literally stand on Jews, because that would clearly be anti-Semitic. Here are some ancillary questions I have concerning the Jewish Question, and if it makes me anti-Semitic merely to ask them, I suppose I won’t be invited to your son’s Bar Mitzvah. If you want to crucify me merely for asking questions, well, I guess you’re one of The Men Who Tastes Nazis in Your Sandwiches.

The Jewish Question always seemed to lead to more questions than answers, so here goes:

• Are Jews members of an ethnic tribe or members of a religion? If the latter, how do you explain Jewish atheists? What exactly is a “Semite,” and why does the term “anti-Semitism” seem to embrace people who appear to be of Eastern European derivation while it tends to exclude Arabs and other indigenous Middle Easterners?

• If you’re so secure that the evidence surrounding the Holocaust is irrefutable, then why jail people who question the evidence? Why does the Western media feel compelled to mention the Holocaust almost daily while it routinely ignores the 30-50 million non-Jewish civilians—not soldiers, but civilians—who were killed in World War II? Were their lives not nearly as important?

• Why are certain “right-wing” writers brave enough to criticize communism, open immigration, the liberal media, and political correctness while they’re mortified to even consider that Jews were often the primary architects behind such movements—or at least disproportionately represented?

• Isn’t the idea of “God’s Chosen People” cosmically racist and supremacist? Is the Talmud not hostile to goyim? Haven’t the Jews historically been racially separatist, all while accusing other groups of “racism”?

• Is it even remotely possible that Jewish behavior, rather than a murkily mystical and ultimately unprovable notion such as “anti-Semitism,” sometimes led to negative perceptions about Jews? Even once throughout history?

• In a European Union document calling for “equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin,” why does it urge that we should focus “in particular” on “anti-Semitism” if everyone is to be treated equally?

• Why does our current cultural climate allow one to decry “white privilege” but never “Jewish privilege,” especially since Jews are undeniably overrepresented statistically when it comes to wealth and power?

• At the moment, Israel and some of its enemies are lobbing missiles at one another. Why should I care about Israel? Why should I deem this dubiously founded and eternally disruptive nation so important that it’s worth starting World War III, shoveling out tax dollars, and enduring much of the world’s wrath to protect it? What do I get out of the deal?

So those are my questions. I won’t hold my goyishe breath waiting for you to answer them. But dismissing them outright as “paranoid” or “anti-Semitic” is either dishonest or naïve.

My questions are honest and sincere rather than “hateful,” and calling me all the nasty names in the Torah won’t budge my feelings or cause me to relent. And I believe that a huge quotient of the population has similar questions but have been terrorized into silence at the mere thought of asking them. As a truth-seeker rather than a team-joiner, I find this troublesome. So sue me!

And this is the main reason why The Men Who Taste Jews in Their Sandwiches are such a pain in my tuchis. They live up to the crude stereotype of rabid, delusional anti-Semites, and by so doing, they tend to allow all criticism of Jews to be painted with the same broad Jew Brush. They’re the ones who tend to give so-called “anti-Semites” a bad name. It almost makes me suspect that some of them may be Mossad agents.

Making EVERYTHING about Jews gives Jews far too much credit. So ease up, fellas. There are no Jews in your sandwiches. There are no Jews in your soup. If you have a chest cold, you likely didn’t get it from shaking hands with a Jew…or maybe you did, but that’s what you get for being friendly to Jews.

——–

Please share this article by using the link below. When you cut and paste an article, Taki’s Magazine misses out on traffic, and our writers don’t get paid for their work. Email editors@takimag.com to buy additional rights. http://takimag.com/article/the_men_who_taste_jews_in_their_sandwiches_jim_goad/print#ixzz2GSfhBxgg

 

Zionist Terror Tactics – a political cartoon from RadicalPress.com

ChekaWilson

News Update from Jim Townsend

JimTNewsUpdate

Arthur my friend,

Here is the letter I have just written to the registrar of the Supreme Court. You may want to publish this and send it around as a legal update and show people that how you are being treated is how anyone that stands up for our country is treated.

I am in Vernon Court on Dec. 5, 2012 to be sentenced even though I have PROVEN MY INNOCENCE and all charges have been dropped AND I have already been unlawfully imprisoned for six months and this illegal bail condition was dropped. Now I am to be sentenced for it? It is time ‘our servants’ faced a people’s court.

Do you still have my book Freedom Canada that I wrote when I was president of the Alberta Party? Read what I wrote about the Star Chamber Courts and why the Habeus Corpus Act was enacted in the first place. This is not the first time in history that Crown Courts have used their sacred trust to swindle the people they ‘serve’.

much love,

Jimi
—–

Dear Mr. Bilodeau; December 1, 2012

Photobucket

I did receive your voice message you left on my telephone. You asked what had changed since I made an application in June.

What has changed is that I have proven my innocence and the malicious charges that the RCMP laid in order to cover up the theft of our mining claim, the attempt to murder our family, the theft of our disability cheque and to aid and abet their own crimes; have all been dismissed. There are no charges that I am facing that would warrant me being on bail. This is simply another abuse of process and a denial of my right to due process.

As a consequence, I again applied to the Supreme Court of British Columbia to hear my writ of Habeus Corpus to release me from bail detention. This was heard in the Supreme Court of British Columbia on November 2, 2012 and it is why I am now appealing this decision to your court. I asked the judge to dismiss the bail because I have proven my innocence and the charges have all been dropped. The Crown argued that since there were no charges against me, there was nothing to support a Habeus Corpus hearing. This is an erroneous argument and in dismissing my application and maintaining bail conditions against me, the Judge made an error in law.

Bail is to legally constrain people who are up on charges. A Habeus Corpus hearing is to determine whether a detention is lawful. This brands the contention that there is nothing to support a Habeus Corpus hearing a reductio ad absurdum. If one examines the bail conditions we find that one of the conditions that is left is that I can not talk about the Crown Agents that laid the malicious charges against me in the first place. Why? Since the charges are no longer outstanding and I have proven my innocence it is clear the only reason for the bail is to keep me from talking about the people that have abused their authority and unlawfully used the courts to cover up their crimes and attack me. This is aiding and abetting the crimes that were committed against us.

Further, even though the charges are all dropped the Crown still seeks to sentence me for a bail violation. One of the conditions of my bail was that I not access the internet. This condition was never justified by Crown, they merely asked for a long list of onerous conditions and were granted them carte blanche. Believing they had me at their absolute mercy, CRA Crown Agents then unlawfully seized our disability cheque. This is a crime called theft. They have no authority to seize a disability cheque.

Since the Crown merely laid malicious charges against me when we went to them for help, I once again used the internet to make a video about CRA unlawfully stealing my disability cheque. For this I was seized and thrown into prison for six months. In June I finally managed to get a Writ of Habeus Corpus before the court because the bail condition to stay off the internet was not only never justified but it was a violation of my Charter Right to Freedom of Speech.

The Crown agreed that the bail condition violated my Charter Right to Freedom of Speech and released me from unlawful imprisonment and removed the unlawful condition from my bail. They contended at that time that since I still had charges against me that the bail should remain. However, since then, the charges have all been dismissed and now the only thing that is remaining is the Crown still wants to sentence me for the violating the bail condition even though it was unlawful in the first place. This is another reductio ad absurdum.

The bail condition was a crime against me. It was a violation of my Charter Right to Freedom of Speech. The six month jail term was a crime against me. It was an unlawful incarceration. Crown Prosecutor Iain Currie tried to rectify the situation by removing the bail condition, releasing me from prison and finally dropping all the phoney charges. In spite of this, the Judge that abused his authority to aid and abet these crimes still wants to sentence me?

What it all boils down to is that all of my Charter Rights have been used as toilet paper by this judge who is supposed to be upholding the law. Either the Charter applies to me as well, or it applies to nobody in our society and judges have carte blanche to destroy our lives at will. This is Justice? Either I have the Charter Right to Freedom of Speech and the Criminal Code Right to publish the crimes that Crown Agents abuse their authority to commit or I am a slave. Slavery is a Crime Against Humanity. This is a fundamental case Mr. Bilodeau. Either we Canadians have the right to say something when Crown Agents commit crimes against us or we are absolute slaves with no rights whatsoever.

It should be noted that you people call yourself the Justice Department. It is obvious then that your industry is marketing your services to provide Justice to your fellow countrymen. One wonders then why they see Justice Blindfolded on a poster upon entering the court to get Justice. Is this a symbolic way of communicating that the courts are nothing more than a constructive fraud? That we will not be getting Justice in these courts?

Mr. Bilodeau, I am sick of criminals in the government hiding behind the courts to attack us. What you are facing right now is the righteous indignation of one of your fellow countrymen that has been force fed humble pie to JUSTIFY the crimes committed against us by Crown Agents. After years of abuse and the total destruction of our lives the Crown has now unlawfully imprisoned me and still want to sentence me after violating my rights. I have had enough. I would ask that you please schedule a hearing for my application to your court. Though lawyers might get quite a kick out of blindfolding Justice and using her to play pin the tail on the donkey with their victims, the rest of your society does not pay you people for Justice so that you can use our own courts to victimize us. The foreign owned Crown contributes nothing to our society. We Canadians pay our own way. We Canadians pay you people to provide us with a service called Justice. It is your lawful duty to ensure we have exactly that.

Crown Agents that incarcerated me illegally and arrested me unlawfully claimed they were only doing their jobs and following orders from their higher ups. Mr. Bilodeau, their ‘higher ups’ as the cop that harassed us from our mining claim calls them, do not have the right to commit crimes against their fellow countrymen and just because their ‘higher ups’ order them to, does not mean they have the rights to abuse their office, violate their oaths and commit crimes against their fellow countrymen.

It has been said Mr. Bilodeau, and argued quite compellingly, that you are entirely corrupt and regularly abuse your authority to deny Justice to your fellow countrymen by covering up for the criminal behaviour of others in the ‘Justice’ Department. These are online at http://www.waterwarcrimes.com/4/post/2012/11/criminal-activityat-supreme-curt-of-canada-spotlight-on-registrar-rogerbilodeau.html and http://rogerbilodeau.blogspot.ca/     Most interesting insider information on ‘our’ civil servants.

I have studied all of the rules and know that I am doing exactly as the criminal code explains. I knew before I went to the Supreme Court of BC that I could appeal their decision to the Supreme Court of Canada. I have been compelled to court and maliciously prosecuted over FIFTY TIMES! And yet still proved myself innocent. If you would like me to make a Youtube video of all that is going on, to post my appeal to your court on my website on the internet and to appeal to you with an online petition for all the world to see, I can do that. I am sure that is an effort that neither one of us needs but we both know that I am willing to do whatever it takes to get Justice. You are Canadian and I am Canadian and the Right to Freedom of Speech is something I am sure you do not want to lose either. Please honour your oath and your office and schedule a Habeus Corpus hearing for me. I seek nothing but Justice and ‘your job’ is to provide me the venue to do so.

With much love and hope for the future,

I remain your fellow countryman

Harry James Townsend

RadicalPress Legal Update #5

NewLegalUpdateLogo 700

notice4RP

Dear Free Speech Supporters,

On Tuesday, November 27, 2012 my wife and I once again wended our way into Quesnel to attend what I thought was to be a meeting with a Justice of the Peace who was going to speak with my lawyer Douglas Christie via telephone at 1:30 pm and arrange dates for an arraignment and a preliminary hearing regarding the sec. 319(2) criminal charge of “Willful promotion of hatred against an identifiable group, people of the Jewish religion or ethnic origin” brought against me by B’nai Brith Canada via their two agents X and Y. That was what the JP stated during the previous meeting held on November 20, 2012.

Just prior to 1:30 pm the Justice came and told us that the meeting would be held in Judge’s Court instead at the same time.

When I was called up before the Honourable Judge Morgan the court clerk called Mr. Christie on the phone and upon answering Judge Morgan began to discuss the dates for the two issue and it was agreed upon that the arraignment would take place on April 2, 2013 at 1:30 pm and that preliminary inquiry would be set for the week of June 3 – 6, 2013.

Initially my lawyer had requested five days for the preliminary inquiry but for some reason unbeknownst to anyone present it was set for only four. Mr. Christie stated that he didn’t feel four days might be enough and given the fact that he was still awaiting disclosure from Crown Council Johnston of the relevant documents supporting the Crown’s reasons for the charge after a delay of over six months he felt that it was unreasonable to expect him to be able to ascertain the amount of time that might be required. That said the Judge still left it at four days.

Then the issue of the application to address bail conditions came up again. Crown council Jennifer Johnston told the Judge in no uncertain terms that the Crown was going to be pressing to have all of the original bail conditions reinstated when the bail hearing took place citing the “fact” that Det. Wilson had informed her that I was still posting articles on my website that Wilson deemed to be of the same calibre as those complained of by Agents X and Y.

The previous undertaking given to a judge which I am presently bound by came into effect on October 13, 2012 and did not include the following two conditions which were originally given to me by Det-Cst Terry Wilson back on May 16, 2012 when I was released from the Quesnel jail. At the time of my release I did not sign the document but that didn’t matter to the Crown who insist that it still is in effect.

These two conditions (and possibly more planned) are:

1. “You shall not post any information on any internet website that can be read by members of the general public.”

2. “You shall not operate, post to or manage or allow anyone to operate, post to or manage any internet site owned by you that can be accessed by the general public.”

It must of course be recognized that both of these Orwellian ultimatums fly in the face of my Charter of Rights and Freedoms as guaranteed by Canada’s so-called “Constitution.” This fact also appears not to have entered into the mind of Crown Council Jennifer Johnston.

Mr. Christie’s response to all this was that he finds it extremely difficult for him to argue against the Crown’s position when he is still waiting for the disclosure of the documents that would indicate the reasons why the Crown was taking such a hard line approach in defiance of my constitutional rights.

This of course brought up the subject of said disclosure materials which Crown Council had assured both Judge Morgan and Counsel Christie that she would be supplying Mr. Christie with when we last attended court on the 20th of November. That information, apparently on cd discs, never arrived at Mr. Christie’s office prior to November 27th.

Judge Morgan asked the Crown what the problem was stating that he thought the Crown had had sufficient time to get this matter together.

Crown Council Johnston then gave the Judge a swan song about how she really, really wanted to get it done but that she was just so busy and then launched into all the things that she had on her plate that prevented her from accomplishing what she had said she would do last time we met in court. She then added that the material on the cd’s had to be “vetted” prior to sending them to Mr. Christie and that there were so many pages that had to be gone over and examined and it was soooo important that the accused not be privy to these documents before they were vetted and so on and so forth.

When it came time for setting a date for the next bail application to be heard there was no agreement between either Crown Council or Mr. Christie as to when they would be able to meet and so Judge Morgan decided that he would set a date and that both parties would have to make sure they were in attendance. At this point Judge Morgan also told Mr. Christie that this would likely be the last time he would be permitted to attend via telephone and that after that he would need to appear in person. The date was then set for Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 1:30 pm and the allotted time for Mr. Christie to argue against the Crown’s proposed conditions would be 45 minutes.

That said Mr. Christie then asked the Judge if he would ensure that the Crown furnish him with all the documentation required so that he would have time to prepare his arguments and Crown Council immediately said that she would get the information to Mr. Christie well in advance of the 13th of December. Judge Morgan then stated that Crown would have to furnish Mr. Christie with the information by no later than December 11, 2012. Hardly sufficient time in which to prepare a proper argument especially in light of the fact that Crown most likely was going to argue that all of my posts on RadicalPress.com since November 2nd, 2012 were indicative of more “hatred” being published against the ‘victims’ of this alleged “hate” crime.

That ended the session.

Some final comments:

It has been over six months now since Det-Cst Terry Wilson and his “BC HATE CRIME TEAM” swooped down upon my wife and I while we were travelling up to Prince George, B.C. in order to arrest me on this bogus charge, outraging me and traumatizing my dear wife. All the drama and hoopla surrounding Hate Hunter Wilson’s premeditated assault upon my constitutional right to freedom of speech on the Internet was simply that – a staged performance designed to lend some form of legitimacy and authenticity to what was simply an attack by the state upon an otherwise law-abiding citizen; one who has been openly informing the public about the very foreign agents who were responsible for making the complaint to the RCMP that precipitated this subsequent ambush on my legal and human right to freedom of speech and freedom of expression.

Yet, for all the hullabaloo and the gravity of this said “hate crime” – one based solely upon the contents of my website RadicalPress.com – the Crown still refuses to supply my defence lawyer Douglas Christie with the required disclosure documents that they apparently used to determine that such a charge was justified.

Instead, they used this bogus allegation to justify obtaining an illegal search warrant which was then used to invade my home and steal all of my computers and electronic files. And, in addition to that, they also stole my firearms (my only means of personal safety in the rural area where I live) and then had the audacity to add a further bogus charge of “unlawful storage of firearms” to the initial false charge. All this was of course done in order to furnish their controlled media with yet another juicy bit of misinformation that could then be used to smear and slander my person and give the impression that I was not only a vile hate-mongerer but also armed and dangerous!

The whole gist of this massive scam is to cover up the fact that the Jewish lobbies here in Canada have the judiciary and the RCMP and the media by the balls and whenever they wish to silence someone who is revealing this fact to the people of Canada all they have to do is put the squeeze on RCMP Hate Hunters like Det-Cst Wilson and Levas and the legal system suddenly kicks in to carry out the bidding of their task masters the Zionist lobby acting at the behest of its controlling arm B’nai Brith International. The perps in this charade then sit back and let the taxpayers of Canada pay all the expenses while I, a senior citizen on a very limited, fixed income, am forced to defend myself against this specious, anti-Charter of Rights charge.

Must be nice to have that sort of influence upon a nation that purports to be “free and democratic.”

One final note regarding my website.

Suspended

Readers were informed that my website host Netfirms.com has issued a decree at the behest of a complaint from Hate Hunter Wilson that my website would be “terminated” in 48 hours unless I removed all the supposed “hate” content alleged by Wilson to be on the site.

Upon receiving said notification I replied to the Corporate representative for Netfirms.com, a person going by the name of “Zach P”, requesting further information as to what exactly I was expected to remove in order to meet Netfirms.com policy rules. I also requested of my readership that they write to Zach P and let him know that they did not agree with Hate Hunter Wilson’s assessment of my website and that Netfirms.com ought to leave it alone. All of these efforts of course proved to be futile. Zach P never had the decency to even respond to anyone, a clear indication that he and his company Netfirms.com could give a shit about what Canadians think and feel about the issue of freedom of speech on the Internet.

Realizing that I had but 48 hours to save my site I had it moved to a different server and now it is still alive and functioning but for how long is anyone’s guess.

The fact that Hate Hunter Wilson has been sleuthing about behind the scenes doing his damnedest to destroy my website speaks volumes in terms of the underhanded tactics that these supposed ” ‘Royal Canadian’ peace officers” will resort to in order to due the bidding of their foreign controllers. My lawyer tells me that even though Hate Hunter Wilson’s tactics are unethical and immoral and deplorable they still are not illegal and so there’s nothing that I can do about it. I’ll leave readers to judge whether or not H.H. Wilson’s actions ought to be allowed.

And  so it goes as the wheels of justice here in Canuckistan slowly grind away and erode my rights and freedoms along with yours.

Again I would ask of readers that they assist me financially in my battle with the censors by sending donations to the cause. Due to the fact that the Crown is refusing to give the required disclosure to my lawyer I am not able to furnish legal aid with the required documents that they demand before looking at whether or not I might qualify for legal financial assistance. This leaves me in the unenviable position of having to rely solely upon donations to pay for my legal expenses and while I have been receiving some assistance from a few kind souls who realize the importance of this case to all Canadians the amount of money thus sent comes nowhere near that necessary to pay for my lawyer to appear in court in Quesnel to defend me against these false charges.

As such I would once again implore readers to give serious consideration to helping me out by either sending a donation via PayPal using either a PayPal account or a credit card or else sending a cheque or Money Order to me via snail mail at the following postal address. Cash of course also works.

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

To access my PayPal button please go to my blog http://www.quesnelcariboosentinel.com The button is up on the right hand corner of the Home Page.

Thanks for all the support from those good folks who had the courage of their convictions to write a letter to Netfirms.com on my behalf. While these excellent letters may have had no effect upon the corporate heads at Netfirms.com they certainly provide a strong and positive endorsement for both myself and RadicalPress.com and for that reason alone they are gratefully received and acknowledged.

For Peace and Love and Truth and Justice for All,

I remain,

Sincerely,

Arthur Topham
Pub/Ed
RadicalPress.com
“Digging to the root of the issues since 1998”