Watch Human Rights Watch – A Tribute to Prof Richard Falk By Gilad Atzmon

[EDITOR'S NOTE: NGO's around the world tend to be front organizations from the get go or else orgs arising from honest beginnings that were later infiltrated by Zionists and taken over in order to confuse and misdirect the energies of the masses who are truly interested in a world of peace and harmony where no one group (tribe) or organization has any more power than the people themselves.  Thanks to former Jewish tribal members like Gilad Atzmon, who has successfully shifted his consciousness up and away from the ghetto consciousness of those who are transfixed by the Zionist ideology, we see how liberating one's mind and spirit from the confines of the Talmudic matrix-trap can be advantageous to all of  humanity in that now he can view the machinations of the Zionist zealots from a perspective that truly makes sense and pass along his viewpoint to all of humanity.]

_________________________

http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/watch-human-rights-watch-a-tribute-to-prof-richard-falk.html

Watch Human Rights Watch – A Tribute to Prof Richard Falk

By Gilad Atzmon

Saturday, December 22, 2012

This week we learned that Human Rights Watch (HRW) has expelled from its ranks top U.N. official Professor Richard Falk.

The juicy details have been kindly supplied by Israeli Hasbara outlet UN Watch blog.“We commend Human Rights Watch and its director Kenneth Roth for doing the right thing, and finally removing this enemy of human rights from their important organization,” said Hillel Neuer, a rabid Israeli supporter as well as Executive Director of UN Watch. “A man who supports the Hamas terrorist organization, and who was just condemned by the British Foreign Office for his cover endorsement of a virulently antisemitic book, has no place in an organization dedicated to human rights,”

Hasbara stooge that he is, Neuer, using every Zionist trick in the book, misinforms and misleads his readers. First of all, Hamas is not a ‘terrorist organisation’, it is a democratically elected government and the book to which Neuer refers is obviously mine – ‘The Wandering Who’ – which, was endorsed by Richard Falk and some of the most important humanists and scholars of our time– a book which has been a best-seller for six months in both Britain and the USA, has been translated into 10 languages and is available in seven editions in countries that all strictly legislate against any form of racial incitement as well Holocaust denial. The fact is that the Zionists and their ‘Progressive’ twins will have to accept that The Wandering Who is, after all, strictly kosher.

So, Professor Falk did indeed endorse my book and, like all my other endorsers, did not cave into pressure. This should indeed concern all Zionists and their agents.

“A transformative story told with unflinching integrity that all (especially Jews) who care about real peace, as well as their own identity, should not only read, but reflect upon and discuss widely.” Professor Richard Falk on The Wandering Who

But the problem is not the tribally oriented UN Watch and its Zionist Executive Director. After all, they only do what we expect Zionists to do – lie, harass, abuse, and, if necessary, fabricate evidence. No, far more interesting is the behaviour of the allegedly ‘progressive’ ‘Human Rights Watch’ and its director Kenneth Roth.

On the face of it, HRW is an independent, Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO) ‘dedicated to defending and protecting human rights’. But it takes no more than a few seconds of research to find out that the primary donor of the HRW is liberal-Zionist George Soros and his Open Society Foundation – the same Soros and ‘Open’ society that supports most Palestinian NGOs including BDS which may perhaps explain why the BDS in Ramallah was so eager to compromise on that most precious Palestinian right i.e. The Right of Return. Nor will it surprise you to learn that the same Soros funded HRW has been dedicated to the ‘exposing’ of Hamas’ failures on human rights issues? Is this not what you would expect from a liberal Zionist spin meister?

In my new satirical work, A Glossary of Zionist Power which I am now completing, I include entries for Soros and his Open Society. In the book, Soros is a ‘Jew who supports a lot of good causes that are also very good for the Jews’ and The Open Society Foundation ‘is dedicated to the transformation of deprived people into Guardian readers’. Surely I will now have to add an entry for the HRW and Roth. Both are nothing short of ‘Zionist fig-leaves’ and, like all Jewish progressive outlets that are dedicated to Jewish tribal and ethno centric campaigning, HRW is there to monitor, control and even stifle any criticism of Israel if it should ever get too close to the bone, i.e. touching on the Jewish character of the Jewish state,

Prof’ Falk had little chance of surviving within such a tribal milieu and the reason is pretty simple. Unlike Zionist Neuer, Liberal Zionist Soros, and ‘Anti-Zionist Zionist’ Roth, Professor Falk actually represents the ultimate success of the Zionist project. Early Zionism promised to transform the Jews into ‘people like all other people’. Zionism vowed to bring to life a Jew who transcends the tribal, a Jew who thinks universally and ethically. Early Zionists also believed that such a transformation could be achieved only in Palestine. Of course, they were wrong but no one can ignore the fact that the greatest and most prolific Jewish universalists are actually Israelis (Professor Yishayahu Leibovitch, Professor Israel Shahak, Nurit & Miko Peled, Gideon Levy, Amira Hass, Uri Avneri, Ilan Pappe, Israel Shamir and many, many more). But Professor Falk and a few others have managed to achieve a similar goal in the Diaspora. Those Jews whom we most admire and whose integrity we most trust such as Professor Norton Mezvinsky, Professor Norman Finkelstein, Professor Falk  – all have something in common – they do not operate within Jews-only political cells. Unlike JVP, IJAN, HRW and Mondweiss, all of whom are dedicated primarily to promoting Jewish interests, they are dedicated to universal values.

So I argue that Professor Falk provides us with a glimpse into the possibility of true Jewish emancipation – the capacity to break out of the mental, intellectual and non-ethical ghetto. Moreover, this latest tale of HRW’s Herem (Kosher expulsion) of one of the greatest humanists of our generation is actually an educational event.

For many years, many of us saw Zionism and Israel as the mother and father of contemporary evil, but now, many of us have come to realise that Jewish progressive politics is every bit as sinister but, unlike Zionism that is only tainted with deception, the Jewish progressive discourse is inherently dishonest – it speaks universal but it thinks tribal.

While our disagreements with Israel and Zionism are clear, the Modus operandi adopted by AZZs and their relentless attempt to dominate the progressive discourse while, at the same time, stifling freedom of expression leaves more and more humanists suspicious of any form of Jewish politics – be it right, left or centre.

I like to think that my Wandering Who was the first attempt to discuss these issues openly. I wrote it because I, too, am a wanderer who decided, instead of dwelling on someone else’s land, to leave my homeland. Perhaps Professor Falk endorsed my work, because, like myself, he too is a wanderer. He self-reflects, examining his identity and his notion of justice from a transcendental point of view. Like myself, he is an artist, a poet, a man who searches, against all the odds, for beauty, peace and truth. On the other hand, George Soros’ Open Society Foundation  contributed $100 million to HRW just to silence ethically and aesthetically driven souls such as Professor Falk and others.

The Wandering Who? A Study Of Jewish Identity Politics in general and Jewish progressive spin in particular Amazon.com  or Amazon.co.uk

 

 

OPEN LETTER TO RCMP COMMISSIONER BOB PAULSON by Judith Townsend

policecomhdr
judithtownsend
Judith Townsend – Jim Townsend’s Wife

OPEN LETTER TO RCMP COMMISSIONER BOB PAULSON

Commissioner Bob Paulson,

In 1996 the RCMP announced they would need more control of the internet since it was being used to distribute child porn. Being computer professionals, we gave a three inch thick report about child porn on the internet to the Langley RCMP after tracerouting the people that were posting it. They said they would contact their serious crimes division and get back to us. They never did. Less than two months later our home was broken into and all of our computer equipment was stolen. The RCMP sent out an officer, Dan Wendland, who did not bother to investigate. The same Surrey RCMP Wendland also lost all three witness reports to a hit and run car accident that left me badly injured. We no longer believe this was a coincidence.

This destroyed our lives and we moved to Alberta with our four children to piece our lives back together. When we filed our taxes we had a problem. We had no way to account for $80,000 worth of stolen office equipment that we lost in the burglary. Because Wendland did not do his job, we had no police report and could not prove to CRA that we did not owe money that they ESTIMATED we owed them. We were simply presumed guilty and then charged the money when we could not prove our equipment was stolen. We then discovered we had ex parte federal court orders, where we had not been invited to defend ourselves, to seize all of our belongings for debts owed to her majesty. The CRA would not honour their own court order when we tried to give them all of our belongings to settle their one-sided hidden illegitimate court paperwork.

(When we tried to get the police files so we could show all of our equipment was stolen so we could write it off and reduce our taxes, the RCMP did not understand why we wanted our files. They were so busy trying to cover up their tracks that they did not appear to understand that all we wanted was the police report. When we laid a formal complaint against Wendland, the RCMP referred to my husband, Jim, as a Bozo in their official files and said he laid the complaint against Wendland because it was sour grapes over losing his equipment. It shows they tried to use the complaint to cover up their dereliction rather than address the issue. We discovered the reason the RCMP had no files is because Wendland did not bother to investigate. He was completely derelict.)

Soon thereafter we started coming under attack by every government agency we dealt with and this has not changed for fifteen years. My husband thinks it is because the RCMP were putting much of the child porn on the internet in order to frame and entrap people. It was being put on newsgroups by computers belonging to the RCMP. The RCMP want to take down my husband’s websites because he has a blog where he shows how to traceroute the porn back to its source. It clearly shows people who own hundreds of porn sites in our country. Given the source of these sites, it looks like foreign nations are making an attack on the morals of this country. The websites also chronicle the many attacks the RCMP has made on us over the years.

In 2006 my husband was nearly killed in a tractor accident. After being unlawfully evicted when our Landlord/Tenant Arbitration was ignored and the RCMP covered up an assault and destruction of our vehicle, we were forced out of our home at Applegrove. Having no vehicle my husband tried to use the tractor to move. When we complained to the Ombudsman that my husband had been horribly injured due to the misfeasance of the Nakusp Agents Office and harassment by the RCMP, the Nakusp Agents Office made up a phoney story about my badly injured husband acting inappropriately when the truth was he could hardly stand or talk.

Our experience has been that every time we make a complaint to the Ombudsman or the RCMP Complaints Commission we are attacked and vilified by the people we complain about. There is no lawful venue a private Canadian has to complain about Crown Agent civil servants without coming under attack by them.

Being on a disability has been one long charade of constant accusations of fraud. Although we have been accused of fraud many times by MHSD, we have always proven our innocence. We finally got our records back from MHSD to find out what was going on. The records show a significant effort to whitewash their files. Rather than give us the original files so we can get to the bottom of these problems we have with them, MHSD took 30 days more than they are legally entitled to and doctored the documents. They make reference to their files and summarize them but do not divulge the actual files. The summaries are nothing more than an attempt to present their cover up as the files they have been asked to produce. It seems the RCMP have been working closely with the MHSD since the tractor accident to see if there is something they could charge Jim with.

As part of his physiotherapy, Jim likes to walk out in the wilds. Having been a hobby placer miner all of his life, Jim turned to his hobby to attract his interest. He staked many claims looking for pretty rocks for jewellery and hoping to find precious metals. When he acquired the claim at 1351 North Fork Road, things started to get nasty. Apparently the claim is on a range that is licensed by an RCMP informant named Prebushewski. Lumby RCMP Henry Proce bragged he had informants watching us and told us we had no right to privacy and no other rights either.

Soon after we acquired the claim we started becoming the brunt of complaints about being squatters. Our claim was vandalized and our property stolen repeatedly. It seemed to us that someone was watching us, as we would go down to the store and get back to find we had been vandalized. We legally licensed our claims from the Mining Titles Office. Soon after this we started coming under constant attack by Cpl. Proce from the Lumby RCMP office. We showed him our licenses to the claim but he told us we had to move as he would not know what a license looked like for a mining claim. Jim, my husband, told him that just because he did not know enough to find out what a license looked like did not give him the right to force us off legally acquired property. When you purchase a license from the Crown in this country, you have the right to quiet enjoyment of that property.

Proce brought up mining inspector John Cox, who confirmed that all of our licenses were in order and gave us instructions to clean all the dead wood out of the mining claim. Proce subsequently brought up another inspector; Don Smith who said that nothing we were doing was allowed or disallowed by the Act but he was seizing our mining claim because he had been ordered to by his superiors. Proce also claimed on many occasions that he was attacking us on our mining claim because his higher ups wanted us gone. When he showed up with Don Smith, he also had Troy Kimber in tow from the Attorney General’s office. The AG of BC was so concerned over our forty dollar panning license that he sent special agent Kimber all the way from Victoria to inspect the mining license that Jim bought online and they could have seen online in their own office.

Proce’s constant attacks on our camp were documented. Nearly every time Henry came out to attack us, Jim wrote a letter of complaint to the RCMP. We also sent registered letters to William Elliot about this debacle as it was unfolding. The RCMP could have prevented all of this at any time. This situation finally culminated with the RCMP informant trying to murder us in a drive by shooting. Jim complained to the Ombudsman about the MHSD disability officer cutting off our cheque and telling us he had done so because he was investigating the drive by shooting. We were incredulous that the disability officer had knowledge of it but discovered from FOIA files that he had been working with the RCMP to target us. A good friend of ours was at Justin Prebushewski’s wedding and heard them planning to shoot up our camp in order to drive us out of there.

After the complaint to the Ombudsman the RCMP became desperate to cover their tracks. Jim was first falsely arrested by Cst. Goodyear, even though no one had made a complaint and Crown had not laid any charges. He came out in the middle of the night to throw a blank piece of paper at us and drive off. He spent most of the time asking Jim how he could protect his investments and kept asking him if he wanted to sit in the back seat of the police car since it was cold out. The RCMP claim they have a behavioural science group that says my disabled husband is dangerous, but they obviously did not use this unit to screen this very unprofessional officer or the dozens of sexual perverts that women RCMP officers have now charged with misconduct.

We found out the person who was responsible for Jim being arrested was Dan Wendland, the derelict cop who did not bother to investigate our burglary and had caused us all the problems with CRA. The court case for the uttering threats to the disability worker has been beyond bizarre. The courts do not follow any of the rules of court that they give to their victims. When Jim showed up for the trial, his name was not on the docket and the court clerk said the Crown was not proceeding. We took down the docket and left after having all of our witnesses sign that we had showed up for the trial.

Proce subsequently announced in the paper that Jim had not shown up for the trial and was now wanted for uttering death threats, something he had never been charged with in the first place. We laid a complaint about Proce and Wendland stealing our mining claim and harassing us with the RCMP Complaints Commission, but once again the RCMP used the process in order to whitewash their illegal activity. We got a letter from RCMP Reg Burgess defending all the actions taken by his subordinates. Funny that Burgess doesn’t address any of our concerns but uses the complaint instead to bolster their allegations that my husband has uttered threats when in fact he wrote an official complaint to the Ombudsman about their criminal activity. Many copies of Burgess’ complaint coverup have been distributed and people are appalled at the way the RCMP have treated us.

We appealed to the Supreme Court for a hearing to get our mining claim back that had been stolen by mining inspector Don Smith’s malicious prosecution and Henry Proce’s’ constant attacks. His only evidence to take our claim was that Proce had told him we had the claim for non-mining purposes. They cannot say what this non-mining purpose is. We were supposed to go to court to get our mining claim back on November 21, 2011. We were prevented from doing so by RCMP Wendland and Proce, who charged Jim with uttering death threats and incarcerated him so that he could not attend court. We subsequently told the Attorney General to drop the case, as we had already nearly been killed by the RCMP and Jim did not want to spend the rest of his life in jail over it.

As a result of the constant attacks and because we have never been able to get justice from our own government and civil servants who attack us, Jim has put much of this up on web sites and videos. Over 70,000 people have watched Jim`s videos and many more have read his books and websites. This scandal is not going to go away. Too many people know about it. Yes, you have the upper hand right now, but haven`t you people learned anything?

First of all there was one female police officer that said the RCMP are porn peddling perverts. Reading her story about how she tried to complain about the RCMP certainly shows why none of the rest of us get any satisfaction with these legal perverts investigating each other either. Next the RCMP had half a dozen women step forward and they settled out of court. That speaks volumes. And what did the RCMP get for Christmas? Now they have 25 men and women in the RCMP that have laid charges against them for sexual harassment and distributing porn in their desks at work. The RCMP certainly have an addiction to porn don’t they? I read on the RCMP Watch website that a Vernon NCO has now been alleged to have been involved in sexual harassment. Would that be Burgess, Wendland or Proce?

The moral of the story is that yes, you can beat people up. Yes, you can throw people in jail. Yes, you can act unprofessional and abuse your authority. But you can’t get away with it forever. You people are not going to get away with trying to murder us, stealing our mining claim and costing us thousands of dollars in lost property and work. You have beset our dwelling, stalked our children, harassed us and it amounts to torture.

We noted that the RCMP wanted our computers at the bail hearing where they made up all sorts of nasty lies about Jim in order to have him thrown in jail. You need not bother. For years now, there have been people tracking the RCMP on the internet. This evidence sits on servers around the world. We also made dozens of copies of our files and gave them to people for safe keeping. There are now hundreds of websites in Canada that are dedicated to the corruption of the RCMP and the Canadian civil service. I see Maclean’s magazine now calls BC the most corrupt place on earth. Comments from your fellow Canadians on the many websites dedicated to exposing RCMP corruption and brutality certainly show what their fellow countrymen think of them.

MSD
My husband and I are both disabled. We were living on a mining claim in the middle of nowhere. We had no electricity and no way to communicate with the outside world. If Proce had not come out to our mining claim to attack us, the RCMP would never have had a problem. Now the only thing we have to do with our lives is fight for justice and expose the crimes committed by those that were supposed to protect us. Yes we are disabled, have no money and have no weapons. Yes RCMP have unlimited funds, regularly commit crimes like those you have against us in order to cover your tracks and have flak jackets, semi-automatic handguns at your side, all sorts of assault weaponry and even armoured vehicles. So why are you one scandal from extinction?

What has been happening to my family and myself is a scandal.  The attempt on our lives is a serious criminal offence.  We are not going to go away.  We are tired of being treated like criminals when we are not.  We have legitimate concerns and complaints and they will be heard.  Are you listening Mr. Paulson?  What is it they say?  What goes around comes around.  I have enclosed a document of my complaint about the RCMP for your perusal, I intend to submit it to the new independent civilian office for complaints against the RCMP that will be opening up. The ‘complaint investigation’ that we just went through with Mr. Burgess was nothing short of disgusting and we can certainly sympathize with the dozens of poor women working for the RCMP that have been under attack because they also complained. Can you do anything about this other than passing it on to the Complaints Department and allowing these people to investigate themselves?

Sincerely,

Judith Townsend

THANK YOU CANADA AND NATO: You Murdered My Precious Family

[Editor’s Note: By the time I had put together all the photos, uploaded them and got the text of the article checked over I was pretty well exhausted and overcome emotionally and mentally by a gnawing, nauseating sense of the grossly sordid and evil nature of what Canadian has done to the innocent, gentle people of Libya. I have never felt so ashamed of my country in my entire 65 years of living here. The utter disgust and loathing that I now feel for Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and all those MPs who voted to go along with the criminal, Zionist-controlled North Atlantic Terrorist Organization (NATO) agenda of war and destruction goes beyond any descriptive words that I could possibly dredge up from the darkest, foulest thesaurus in existence.

Harper's actions, as the so-called “leader” of this once semi-civilized nation, have so degraded the country in the eyes of the non-NATO world that I am literally embarrassed to call Canada my home any longer. Such absolute repugnance for another human being I never thought possible until the reality of what he and his governing party of psychopathic war criminals have done to the once prosperous and peaceful nation of Libya finally sunk in to my heart and mind.

I can only wonder and stand in awe and silence at the horrible intensity of grief that Khaled El Hamedi must feel knowing that his precious, loved, pregnant wife and his sweet, darling babies were all blow to pieces in a split second because of the monstrously evil and deliberately vile terrorist decisions of our elected officials in Ottawa. And I include every single one of those miserable excuses for members of parliament who never spoke out against Harper and his Zionist, boot-licking traitorous sycophants.

Every MP in Ottawa who didn't have the courage and heart to vote against the decision to join NATO in its wanton killing spree stands accused of complicity in committing war crimes. Each and every one of them ought to be arrested and then given a fair and just trial and hopefully found guilty. And once convicted the whole worthless lot of them should either be strung up from the nearest and tallest tree available on Parliament Hill or else sent to Iraq or Libya  or Afghanistan to spend the remainder of their destitute days doing penance by having to remove, bare handed, all the DU contaminated rubble now littering the landscape of those innocent nations!

This former nation of “peacekeepers” Canada has, thanks to the criminal insanity of the Harper Conservatives and their lackeys, plummeted to the lowest depths of demonic depravity ever and those responsible for this degeneracy deserve to be treated by all peace-loving, decent Canadians as a hostile, renegade, traitorous and alien power.

Never has this country ever had such a sick mind leading it. If Harper were a dog it would be time to put him out of his misery. It’s little wonder that he's forever suck-holing and groveling at the feet of the leader of that racist, war-mongering shitty little piece of stolen real estate in the middle of Palestine called “Israel”. Between himself and his unctuous, fat-assed side-kick Jason Kenney they’ve both managed to drag the (now) bloodstained country I once proudly called home down to the same gut-wrenching, nauseous level of savagery as the psychopaths from Tel Aviv.

At this point all I can say is WAKE UP CANADA! Wake up before this seditiously sick, Zionist-worshipping excuse for a human being destroys Canada once and for all. And yes, I know my words may appear to some unduly harsh but God knows they are all I have available at this point to voice the intense loathing for what this national disgrace has done to my former democratic, peace-loving nation. We once held in our hands a priceless pearl of beauty and now this traitor in Ottawa has thrown it to the swine of deception, greed, murder and destruction.]

thankyoucanada


http://uprootedpalestinians.blogspot.com/2011/12/return-to-sorman.html

Uprooted Palestinians

Sunday, December 18, 2011

Return to Sorman – Anatomy of a NATO war crime

Franklin Lamb
Sorman, Libya

It was a warm early Monday morning along the Libyan coast on June 20, 2011.

At approximately 0200 GMT the next day in NATO Headquarters in Brussels and 30 minutes later in its media center in Naples, staffers finished tabulating NATO’s 92nd day of aerial attacks on Libya and began to post the data on its website (www.nato.int).

Nato

Twenty four hours earlier an Atlantic Alliance command unit, located approximately 30 miles off the Libyan coast, in a direct line with Malta, and NATO’s targeting unit had signed off on 49 bombing missions for June 20th, the last day of spring and the last day of NATO’s original UN bombing mandate.

Tripoli
NATO carnage in Tripoli

The authority for NATO’s bombing, which far exceeded earlier estimates, killing or wounding of between 90,000-120,000 Libyans and foreigners, and the displacement of more than two million Libyans and foreign workers was claimed from the hastily adopted UN Security Council Resolutions 1970 and UNSCR 1973. UN resolutions 1970 & 1973 gave NATO UN Chapter 7 authority to enforce a no-fly zone over Libyan airspace, initially for 90 days which ironically ended the day before  its bombing at Sorman.

The two UN Security Council Resolutions were insisted upon by their main sponsors, France, the UK, Italy and the US who claimed that ”a limited no-fly zone would protect Libya’s civilian population from the wrath of the government of Libya’s leader, Muammar Gadhafi.” NATO requested and was granted two additional 90 days extensions to continue its Libyan mission which gave its air force until the end of 2011 to continue Operation Unified Protector.

It was early Monday morning, June 20, 2011.

google of sabatha

Sorman Libya. A quiet and peaceful Libyan town, Sorman is located 45 miles west of Tripoli, near the Mediterranean coast, in the Zawiya District of the Tripolitania region in northwestern Libya. Many of the town’s children grew up exploring the 3rd Century truly magnificent Roman Ruins at nearby Sabratha.

sabratha

Some archeologists consider Sabratha, located almost in direct line with Rome across the Mediterranean, and built on a high cliff above the sea, as the most complete extant Roman architecture  with only a small part of this large Roman city having been excavated. This observer has visited Sabratha a few times since the mid-1980 and each visit presents more awe. Families from Sorman and nearby villages regularly visit and picnic there.

In the early hours of June 20, 2011 it was dark in Sorman except for some muted half-moon light. A few dim street lights and some partially illumined homes in provided some light as residents began to rise and prepare for the Al Fajr (“Dawn”) prayers.

Khaled el Hamedi
Khaled El Hamedi, President of the International Organization
for Peace, Care and Relief

At the homestead of Khaled K. El Hamedi, the 37 year old President of the International Organization for Peace, Care & Relief (IOPCR), one of Libya’s most active social service organizations everyone was asleep following a rambunctious birthday party for his three year old son. The Hamedi family members included Khaled’s three year and one day old son Khweldi, four and one half year old daughter Khaleda, his beautiful pregnant wife Safa, his aunt Najia, and his six year old niece Salam, among others.

At NATO’s Control and Command Center, the 49 bombing missions planned for early morning of June 20, included a target at Sorman, which would push the number of NATO reconnaissance sorties over Libya to 11,930. This number would become 26,500 by midnight on October 31, when NATO would end its air campaign. The days bombing sorties would also bring the tally of rocket and bombing targets to 4,521. This figure would increase to more than 11,781 by late fall, when NATO was instructed to end OUP (Operation Unified Protector).

NATO’s prepares to bomb Dorman’s “command and control center”

Before the bombs were fired at Khaled K. el-Hamedi compound, NATO staff conducted a six step process the first of which was surveillance using the MQ-9 Reaper UAV, which sometimes is also used to fire missiles. Also above Sorman was the Predator drone with full-motion video. During June 19 and the early hours of June 20, the drones locked on the Hamedi homestead target and relayed updated information to NATO’s command center.

The Hamedi home was not what NATO labels a “time-critical target” so there was plenty of time for its staff to transmit information about the site from unmanned reconnaissance aircraft to intelligence analysts. Almost certainly, according to a source at Jane’s Weekly, NATO UAV’s watched the Hamedi compound over a period of days and presumably observed part of the birthday party being held for three old Huweldi, the day before the order to bomb was  issued.

NATO Rules of Engagement for Operation United Protector, constitute a set of classified documents which present specific and detailed instructions about what is a legitimate target and who can approve the target, whether pre-planned or “on the fly” when a pilot happens upon a target of opportunity.

The Sorman attack on the Hamedi home was planned as part of what NATO calls its “Joint Air Tasking Cycle (JATC). A target development team put the Hamedi home on the June 20th daily list of targets.

The team used a report from NATO intelligence analysts who determined that retired officer Khaled al Hamedi’s father, one of the original members of the Gadhafi led 1969 coup against King Idris in 1969, and a former member of the Al Fatah Revolution’s Revolutionary Command Council was living on the property. His assassination had been ordered by NATO because they hoped to weaken the regime in some way even though the senior Hamedi was retired and had no decision making role in Libya.

On June 19, the day before bombing attack on the Hamedi family at Sorman, NATO was obliged by its own regulations and by the international law of armed conflict to conduct a“potential for collateral damage review” of this mission.

There is no evidence that this was every done.

A requested US Congressional NATO Liaison Office review of the Sorman bombing, initially requested from Libya on August 2, was completed in early September 2011 and found no documentary evidence or other indication that Bouchard or anyone in NATO’s Target Selection Unit, evaluated, discussed, or even considered the subject of potential civilian casualties at the Hamedi home in Sorman.

Following Bouchard’s green light to bomb the Hamedi home, the coordinates were fixed at 32°45′24″N 12°34′18″E . Specific aim points on the Hamedi property were chosen and eight bombs and missiles were readied and attached to the strike aircraft.

At Sorman, NATO used a variety of bombs and missiles including the “bunker busting” BLU-109 (Bomb Live Unit) which is designed to penetrate 18 feet of concrete. NATO also used the American MK series of 500 lb, (MK 81) 1000 lb, (MK-82) and the 2000 lb (MK-84) that Israel  used so widely during its 2006 invasion of Lebanon. The MK series and the BLU-109 are reportedly being stockpiled in Israel is preparation for both countries anticipated next war in this region.

BunkerBuster

Following the infernal at Sorman, NATO denied responsibility but the next day NATO admitted carrying out an air strike somewhere in Sorman but denied that there were civilian deaths even as its drones filmed the scene close up. NATO’s media office in Naples issued a statement claiming “A precision air strike was launched against a high-level command and control node in the Sorman area without collateral damage.” NATO spokespersons also told Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch that “the facility was a legitimate military target and that all necessary precautions were taken before conducting the strike which minimized any potential risk of causing unnecessary casualties”.

The official NATO record of its bombing of Libya for June 20, 2011 reads as follows and remains unchanged:

“Allied Joint Force Command NAPLES, SHAPE, NATO HQ.
Over the past 24 hours, NATO has conducted the following activities associated with Operation UNIFIED PROTECTOR:
Air Operations Sorties conducted 20 JUNE: 149
Strike sorties conducted 20 JUNE: 52

Key Hits

20 JUNE: In the vicinity of Tripoli: 1 Command & Control Node, 8 Surface-To-Air Missile Launchers,
1 Surface-To-Air Missile Transport Vehicle. In the vicinity of Misratah: 3 Truck-Mounted Guns, 2 Self-
Propelled Anti-Aircraft Guns, 1 Tank. In the vicinity of Tarhunah: 1 Military Equipment Storage Facility. In the vicinity of Al-Khums: 1 Military Vehicle Storage Facility. In the vicinity of Zintan: 1 Rocket Launcher.”

Oddly, NATO records for June 20th as well as subsequent reports of bombing attacks listed for June 20th and June 21st in its daily logs have never included the bombing attack on Sorman or the attack on the Al-Hamedi residence which indisputably killed 15 civilians.

Just before the bombs hit, eye witnesses, reported seeing red specks in the sky and then flashes of intense light, immediately followed by thunderous ear splitting blasts as eight American bombs and rockets pulverized their neighbors homestead.

In an instant Khaled El Hamedi’s family was dead. The children were crushed, blown apart or shredded into pieces, along with friends and extended family members who had slept overnight.

The attack resulted in killing a total of 13 people and injuring 6 people with severe injuries:

Killed:
1 – Eng./ Safa Ahmed Mahmoud, wife of Eng. Khaled El Hamedi
2 – Child / Khaleda Khaled El Khweldi El Hamedi (4 and half years). (Daughter)
3 – Child / El Khweldi Khaled El Khweldi El Hamedi (3 years and one day ). ( Son)
4 – Child / Salam Mohamed Nouri El Hamedi (6 years). the niece of Eng. Khaled ElHamedi
5 – Njie Belkacem El Hamedi, the aunt of Eng. Khaled El Hamedi
6 – Child / Amnha Issam Jomaa (8 years). The daughter of the neighbor
7 – Child / Amira Issam Jomaa (8 months). The daughter of the neighbor
8 – Mohammed M’hamed El Hamedi . The cousin of Eng. Khaled El Hamedi
9 – Imad Abu Aoueigila Trabelsi. The house guard
10 – Abdullah Al Nabi. The house guard
11 – Bashir Isaac Ali (Sudan). Working cook at the house
12 – Aisha Al Cleih (Morocco). Housekeeper
13 – Bushra Yali (Morocco). Housekeeper
Injured:
1- Mr. Khweldi El Hamedi badly injured in his leg (Father )
2- Mrs. Khweldi El Hamedi badly injured in her arms and joints (Mother )
3- Msra Khweldi El Hamedi, student at Medical College, badly injured and had a
complicated surgery in her mouth (Sister)
4- Ayaa Mahmoud ( Cousin )
5- Fathiya , badly injured and lost her leg ( Babysitter from Morocco)
6- Moftah Elgmatti , several injuries in his legs and had a number of operations (driver)

Khaled was working late, attending meetings with displaced Libyans driven from their homes and urgently in need of IOPCR help. As he returned home, Khaled saw from his car window the sky light up and heard exploding bombs. He was frozen in horror as he entered his property and observed rescue workers frantically digging and futilely trying to move the thick concrete slabs of his home hoping against hope that they would miraculously find survivors.

Funeral

HamediHouseDestr

KhalidMourning

Libyan government spokesman Mousa Ibrahim announced the death of 13 people, including six children,  who were killed at Sorman. He slammed the NATO bombing as a “cowardly terrorist act which cannot be justified.” Investigators, who visited Sibratha hospital 10 kilometers from Sorman, saw nine bodies, including three young children. They also saw body parts including a child’s head.

For those who visited the El Hamidi family compound back in June following the NATO bombings, as this observer did less than a week after the crime as part of an international delegation, the scene was one of total devastation.

Collapsed and blown apart concrete and tiled homes, small body parts, and bits of family belongings and memorabilia, trees, some blown over, others bending and nearly denuded of their foliage, dead, terrified and dying petting zoo animals, including exotic birds, Ostrich, Deer, small animals and large moose killed or left near death and most in a blind stupor staring blankly from what remained of their shelters while dying of wounds and from trauma.

HamediBombedHome

Outside one of the bombed houses I noticed crushed cartons of spaghetti pasta and cans of tomato sauce, stockpiled for distribution to the needy as part of the work of IOPCR during the summer and in preparation for the coming Holy month of Ramadan observances which includes doing performing charitable works and individual humanitarian acts.

Under growing pressure from the international community including NATO member states, NATO HQ claimed equipment malfunction, missed target, poor intelligence and pilot errors. Finally US Defense secretaries Gates and his replacement, Leon Panetta admitted that NATO lacked effective intelligence on the ground to identify military targets with certainty. Former Defense Secretary Gates, in criticizing NATO’s operation in Libya implied that NATO used a ‘bomb first ask questions later’ paradigm in Libya. And this appears to have been the case.

These excuses in no way absolve NATO and its 28 NATO member states of responsibility.

Canadian Lieutenant General Charles Bouchard insists to this day that only Libya’s military was targeted: “This important strike will greatly degrade Gadhafi regime forces’ ability to carry on their barbaric assault against the Libyan people,” he told the media from his office in Brussels. The civilian deaths at Sorman came just hours after NATO acknowledged that one of its missiles had gone astray early on Sunday, hitting a residential neighborhood of Tripoli.

At the request of Khaled El Hamedi, himself being sought by Libya’s new government, and aware that I was going to return to Sorman, I felt honored as I made my way to his loved ones’ grave sites on the family homestead where he and I first met, in order to deliver a message from him to his loved ones.

Picking my way through debris in the dark, under the cold and suspicious eyes of a couple of local militiamen, I stood at the same spot, where on June 27th his family’s freshly dug graves bore witness to what Khaled was describing to our shocked delegation concerning the details of the horror and hellfire that NATO unleashed upon his family.

Back in June I had moved to the rear of our group as Khaled spoke to us about the loss of his babies, his beauties and his precious pregnant wife. I was embarrassed because for some reason, uncontrollable tears would not stop streaming down my face and, despite averting my eyes, I saw that Khaled noticed. I was touched when this young man, to whom I was a total stranger, came to me and put his arm around my shoulder in comfort. Clearly he understood that each of us can feel the pain of others, even of strangers, as well as connect them with our own losses of loved ones in life.

Later, as I learned more about Khaled’s family and saw their most expressive and revealing photos, I came to believe that with respect to the wanton criminal aggression that caused thousands of needless deaths of innocents over the period of nearly nine months against this simple, gentle society, that Najia, Safa, Salam, Khaleda, and Khweldi, and the others slaughtered at Sorman, are forever iconic representatives of all the innocent civilians who were slaughtered in Libya since March 2011.

During my recent visit to Sorman, I stood at the same location as last June. I surveyed the area and then approached the graves of Najia, Safa, Salam, Khaleda, and Khweldi. In the cold darkness it was and the piles of rubble still in place it was eerie.

I knelt close, felt a strange source of warmth and looked over my shoulder.

I whispered in the silent night that I had a message from your loving Husband, Father, Uncle and Nephew that he asked me to deliver to you.

I read to them the message entrusted to me. And I left a copy in Arabic, pinned to a bouquet of flowers:

The message read:

“Please say a very big hello to them and tell them I am coming.
Please tell them “I won’t leave you alone
And I miss each of you so very much.”
And please write them each a note.
Najia, Safa, Salam, Khaleda, and Khweldi.
Franklin, Tell them, “You are my life.
You are my love.
I miss you very, very much.
Life without you is so painful, so hard and completely empty.
I won’t stay and live away from you. I promise.
I’ll return and be close to you. Baba will be back.
I love you.

As I made my way back to the main road in search of a taxi, a militiaman stopped me and interrogated me about why I was there, confiscated my camera and ordered me to leave the area at once.

I paused for a moment and looked back toward what had been a loving family home, a petting zoo and bird sanctuary that had delighted the children in this neighborhood.

A little boy and girl, perhaps siblings, maybe six or seven years old, approached me with their Ethiopian nanny and asked: “Wien, (where is) Khaleda? Wien Khweldi? metta yargeoun ila Al Bayt (when will they come home?)
“When will they come home?”

Unable to speak, I kissed and patted their sweet heads and continued on my way.

——

Nato's child victims

Khaled K. Al-Hamedi is strong, deeply religious, and fatalistic. He has pledged to family and friends around the world that he will continue his work with the International Organization for Peace, Care & Relief in spite of the life shattering loss of his loved ones.

An honorable family, a peaceful and welcoming town, a devastated country, and a shocked and angry international community demand justice from those who sent ‘Unified Protector’ and NATO’s no-fly zone to destroy Libya in order to “protect the civilian population.”

Source: Al-Manar Website

————

FranklinLamb
Franklin Lamb is doing research in Libya. He is reachable c\o fplamb@gmail.com He is the author of The Price We Pay: A Quarter-Century of Israel’s Use of American Weapons Against Civilians in Lebanon.

He contribute to Uprooted Palestinians Blog

Please Sign the petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/ssfpcrc/petition.html

PalestineFlag
Shatila Palestinian Refugee Camp
Beirut Mobile: +961-70-497-804
Office: +961-01-352-127
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

—-

Hating Harper by Arthur Topham

Photobucket

Hating Harper

By Arthur Topham

April 27, 2011

“What constitutes “hatred” is not defined in the Canadian Human Rights Act. It is a question of fact.
It is generally accepted to refer to extreme ill-will and is an emotion which allows for “no redeeming qualities” in the person at whom it is directed.
“Contempt” is similarly extreme and includes circumstances in which the object of one’s feelings is looked down upon, belittled, despised, dishonored or disgraced.”

~ email excerpt from Sandy Kozak, Investigator, CHRC to Arthur Topham, Pub/Ed of RadicalPress.com, Dec. 10, 2007

“What kills a skunk is the publicity it gives itself.”
~ Abraham Lincoln

“But when you want money for people with minds that hate,
All I can tell you brother is that you have to wait.”

~The Beatles, Revolution, 1968

Plainly stated Canada is a Zionist Jew-controlled colony of the state of Israel. In terms of the alternative media such a designation is referred to as a “ZOG” nation, i.e. “Zionist Occupied Government.” While hidden for over six decades from the majority of Canadians by the Zionist-controlled media’s ‘Iron Curtain’ of deception it is nonetheless an established fact and a reality that must be faced if the nation is to ever recover its former independence and sovereignty.

Anyone who desires to dispute this assertion has to explain and justify to the people of Canada why there is not a single federal political party in the country willing to stand up to the Zionist Jew lobby that now wields such a sinister political influence upon the nation. To attempt a negation of the argument without speaking to this issue can only be construed as evasion and denial.

In the thick of yet another federal election, with Harper and his Conservative party striving with utmost intent to gain a majority government, this pseudo-Semitic elephant in the midst of Canada’s political/judicial/cultural/social living room blithely goes about its business of knocking over, crushing and destroying the country’s constitutional rights along with trammeling its domestic and foreign policies, all the while aided and abetted in its traitorous actions by a colluding, fifth column ‘mainstream’ media; itself but another monopoly controlled weapon within the Zionist’s plethoric armory of subterfuge and deception.

History, once freed from the controlling machinations of the Zionist Jews and re-established upon the firm foundations of actual, factual truth, will one day support this seemingly radical view of Canada.

The overall subject of the Zionist Jew’s seditious back-room dealings within Canada’s political, social, cultural and economic infrastructure in favour of Israel and Zionism’s stated goal of creating a one world government is much too complex an issue to deal with in one short essay and, needs be, must be highlighted here by a focus on just one aspect of their sell-out of Canada’s sovereignty to the foreign interests of the state of Israel; that being the lobby’s relentless attack upon Canadians’ constitutional, God-given right to freedom of speech, especially as it pertains to the internet.

Over the past three decades and longer there has been a slow, steady, incremental, subversive process taking place within Canada’s federal judiciary designed to weave into the warp and woof of Canada’s Constitution Act, Charter of Rights and Freedoms and miscellaneous human rights acts, legislation that would at first appear benign and beneficial to the nation as a whole but ultimately, in the end, when push came to shove and the population began waking up to the fact that their country was being unduly influenced and coerced and manipulated by the Zionist Jews within its borders, this seemingly laudable legislation would suddenly shape shift into what it was originally designed to be: a set of draconian, totalitarian laws having one, and only one, purpose in mind: to protect and justify all of the insidious actions on the part of federal government and its representatives that continually bring not only increased power and influence to the Zionist Jew lobbies themselves but foremost, to their official handler, the racist, supremacist, apartheid state of Israel. This, I submit, is and was the sole intention of the “human rights” legislation here in Canada. Everything else related to the subject is subsidiary and mere window dressing to satisfy the gullible, the marginalized and the intelligentsia. It is a classic case of Zionism in action and also a reflection of the very same process used throughout the first half of the 20th century to gain, via similar subterfuge, the Arab lands now known as the ‘state of Israel’.

The rather graphic, controversial image above that accompanies this essay is meant to represent many of those players who are, in one way or another, secretly and subversively playing a role in undermining Canada’s sovereignty and allowing the Zionist Jews now residing within its borders to wield a level of undue influence that is quickly destroying Canada’s ability to stand in the world as an independent and sovereign nation. The results of this unhealthy and egregious relationship between the atheistic, criminal state of Israel are clearly portrayed in the bloody imagery symbolized by Harper’s appearance in the aforesaid humourless cartoon. Necessity, at this point in our history, and in the face of all that the Zionist-controlled media is doing to manipulate this realistic image of the Harper government and its Zionist controllers, justifies such an apparently raw, grotesque portrait of Canada’s Prime Minister.

The start…

Over the past five years I and my website RadicalPress.com have been involved in a deadly struggle with the Jewish lobby here in Canada. This explains why I’ve chosen the topic of freedom of speech to illustrate my thesis that the Harper Conservative government, the most unabashed and blatantly manipulated of all the federal parties to date, must be resisted by the electorate in the most adamant manner possible and prevented from establishing a majority in the House of Commons come May 2, 2011.

My case, I feel, illustrates most succinctly and clearly the intent of the current “anti-hate,”  anti-free speech legislation now contained within the Canadian Human Rights Act and known as “Section 13.” I propose to show the discerning reader how it all ties in with the present and the proposed legislation of the Harper Conservative government with respect to laws enacted concerning “anti-Semitism”, “racism” and “hate crimes.”

On November 20th, 2007, while operating a small renovation business in British Columbia, Canada, I was on an out-of-town job when I got a phone call from my wife informing me that I had received a large, white, unaddressed envelope containing what appeared to be legal documents from the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC).

Being unable to return home immediately I asked her to look the papers over and see what they were all about. She did and informed me that a Jewish group in Canada by the name “League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada” and the group’s B.C. representative, Harry Abrams of Victoria, B.C., had filed a complaint with the CHRC regarding myself and my website RadicalPress.com. The precise wording of the allegations, as stated in the document, read:

“We wish to file a complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission seeking relief for discriminatory publication under prohibited grounds caught by  Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

The premise of this complaint is a 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.”

It should be noted and must be noted immediately the precise wording of the premise for the complaint. This Jewish lobby group, actually a secret, Jewish masonic order under the auspices of B’nai Brith International (created by the Rothschild Jewish banking cartel back in the mid-19th century) was using the Canadian Human Rights Act’s notoriously worded Sec. 13 to claim that I was promoting “hatred affecting persons identifiable as Jews and/or as citizens of Israel.”

The bold, italicized, underlined phrase, “citizens of Israel” is the operative term to keep in mind throughout this article regarding the Jewish lobbies’ efforts to undermine our democratic structure in Canada. What we’re witnessing here, for the first time in Canadian jurisprudence, is a precedent-setting case wherein the Jewish lobbyists, conspiring with a foreign country, Israel, are claiming that it is illegal and criminal on the part of a Canadian citizen to openly criticize the FOREIGN state of Israel and that to do so should be construed by Canadians as “promoting hatred”!

HRCHarry&I

From that point in November of 2007 until today I have been embroiled in an extended legal battle to defend my constitutional right to freedom of speech and to retain my freedom, as a Canadian citizen, to criticize and expose any individual, group or nation that poses a direct or indirect threat to the sovereignty of the nation that I, as a loyal member, am morally, ethically and legally bound to defend and preserve. It should also be noted by readers that since this case began it has been completely blacked out in the Zionist media, aka the ‘mainstream media’.

It has not been an easy task going up against the most powerful lobby group in the world. One need only think of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) in the USA, which is one arm of B’nai Brith International, to realize the extend and influence of this Jewish secret society. At the onset of the complaint by Harry Abrams and the “League” I was already surviving financially in a marginal manner. Winter was setting in and funds were low when suddenly I was confronted with a legal attack by international Zionism and world Jewry. It was a scenario not all together that unlike the proverbial David and Goliath story.

Contained in the documents of the unmarked white envelope were instructions to respond to the complaint within a period of weeks or else face being unilaterally excluded from the quasi-judicial process that was about to unfold whether I liked it or not. I had no choice but to stop working and do my utmost to defend myself by whatever means at my disposal.

The most crucial factor of course was the fact that I was unable to hire a lawyer to defend myself against the charges. That meant I had to assume that role myself and thus began a protracted period of learning all of the legal aspects of dealing with such a complaint. It also meant that I would have to give up any future employment until the case was resolved, a double-bind situation that, to say the least, was demanding and enervating and put me behind an 8-ball of financial insecurity that continues to exist up to the point of these words being typed.

Of course I soon learned that my case, although unique in the sense that I’ve explained above, was not the only case of its kind occurring in Canada. There were others, actually clandestine cases wherein even Jews were apparently involved in similar Sec. 13 pseudo-law suits. I’m referring here to those of Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant, two Zionist Jews of Canadian origins who for similar reasons had offended another group, this time the Moslems. Both of their cases played out in the Zionist media over the period of my own trials and tribulations but due to the fact that they were part of the conspiracy itself these two Zionist conspirators were absolved from their supposed crimes. Unfortunately for all the rest of the Canadians who weren’t members of the self-chosen fraternity of Zionist Jews but were also accused of similar indiscretions weren’t so lucky.

Most uninformed yet decent Canadians have no idea of just how corrupt the human rights commissions have become as a result of Zionist intrigues within the legal system. Since these organizations began trying to control the thoughts of Canadians a total of 100 complaints were received by the CHRC and out of that 37 cases were ruled on by the CHR Tribunal. What may interest free speech advocates are the following facts regarding the victims:

•  NOT A SINGLE respondent has ever won a section 13 case before the tribunal.
•  100% of cases have Whites as respondents

•  98% of cases have poor or working class respondents

•  90.7% of respondents are not represented by lawyers

•  So far, $93,000 has been awarded in fines and special compensation since 2003.

•  35 respondents have lifetime speech bans (Cease and Desist) orders and if not followed the victims could face up to 5 years in prison.

•  72.4% of complaints specifically identify “jews” as victims.

•  Truth is NO DEFENSE when attempting to justify one’s opinions and writings

•  48.8% of all cases are by Richard Warman (all but 1 case since 2002)

Throughout all the legal battles and media hype one thing became excruciatingly clear for all the non-Israeli dual citizens respondents (defendants). The deck was stacked in favour of the Zionist Jew regardless of who had been accused of what particular “hate crime”. The most notorious of those laying an assortment of sundry hate crimes charges, using Section 13 of the CHR Act, was a former lawyer for the Canadian Human Rights Commission by the name of Richard Warman. Warman’s forte was to use stealth combined with the Zionist Jew constructed bogieman known as the “neo-Nazi” to slither forth on to websites under aliases and then, via subterfuge and lies, entrap others to write something that he could then use as “evidence” to subsequently lay a “hate crimes” charge against the person or the website owner. This same method, by the way, was also being used by CHRC officials to accomplish similar ends; a sort of make-work project for the organizations.

It was a very lucrative scam for Warman as he had not only the legal wherewithal to snare his unsuspecting victims but also the full backing of the Canadian Human Rights Commission and the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, both of which had been carefully crafted over decades to fulfill the exact agenda that now was unfolding across the nation where any individual or group who tried to explain to their fellow Canadians the truth about the Jewish lobby and the racist, apartheid, warlike actions of the Jewish state was liable to be charged under this section of the CHR Act for promoting “hatred” toward “Jews”. How convenient, now that the realities of Zionism were finally gaining momentum globally on the one medium of communication that the Zionists still were unable to fully control, i.e. the internet, that such a law was on the books to protect the guilty.

Apart from the injustice of such a specious piece of “human rights” legislation, which actually acted as a safeguard and protective shield for the guilty party, recent precedents set over the past couple of decades of legal cases also insured that victims of a Section 13 “hate crime” could, and usually would, be saddled with not only restrictions on their right to self-expression but also hefty fines. It was here that Warman was found to be exploiting this questionable practise to the utmost and as a result reaping the ignominy of those battling to have this unjust Section 13 repealed.

Continuing on through 2008 and 2009 my case slowly wended its way through the quasi-legal channels wherein flow these two infamous rivers of Zionist deception, the CHRC and the CHRT. By the grace of God I was able to obtain free legal assistance from Canada’s internationally renowned human rights and freedom of speech lawyer Mr. Douglas Christie, of Victoria, B.C. Thanks to Mr. Christie’s organization, known as the Canadian Free Speech League (CFSL), his assistance from early on in my ordeal with the Jewish mafia who control the Harper government proved vital and beneficial to my case.

On top of that I was also fortunate to have another organization in Canada known as the Canadian Association for Free Expression (CAFE) under the direction of Paul Fromm also intervene on my behalf. Both these courageous and much-maligned organizations (by the Zionist media) worked with me in my deliberations with the CHR Commission and then with the CHR Tribunal and are still, like myself, awaiting word on another Section 13 case involving Richard Warman and Marc Lemire, one which, thanks to a decision by Tribunal member, Athanasios Hadjis on September 1, 2009, had the salubrious effect of eventually staying my own case in the spring of 2010 pending the final outcome in the federal court system of the CHRC’s appeal in the Warman v Lemire case.

And… today

Throughout the past few years of battling with the CHRC and the CHRT various freedom of speech groups and individuals have worked hard to keep the subject of the internet censorship alive and to inform the public of the imminent threat that exists within the coiled Zionist serpent now operating behind the public view in Ottawa and working in tandem with the Harper Conservative government.

Apart from all the vile, treasonous and demeaning statements made by PM Stephen Harper in the media with respect to the state of Israel and to Canada’s foreign policy which ultimately led to our nation being booted out of the UN security council; and apart from all the scandals involving Immigration minister Jason Kenney and Co and the the government’s financial punishment of any Canadian groups desirous of helping the Palestinian people, the Zionist Jews have been working relentlessly and surreptitiously to further their mendacious censorship objectives within parliament itself under the guise of yet another coalition of willing bigots, hypocrites and traitors who have chosen a sycophantic relationship with the Jewish lobbyists over truth, honesty and justice for Canada.

Calling themselves the “Inter-Parliamentary Coalition for Combating Antisemitism (ICCA): The Inter-Parliamentary Coalition for Combating Antisemitism (ICCA)” and working in concert with such notable Israel First zealots as former Zionist Jew Canadian Governor General, Irwin Cotler, [below, center stage at table] this small group of Canadian parliamentarians have been conspiring with other parliaments in Great Britain, and the EU as well as the US government to implement even greater amounts of repressive legislation to silence those who see through the Big Lie of the Zionist Jews and are intent on exposing it to fellow Canadians and the world at large. Their endless, worn-out cry of “anti-Semitism! anti-Semitism! anti-Semitism!” which they chant over and over like a group of Hari Krishnas on methedrine throughout the halls of Canada’s parliament and in their controlled media in the vain hope that all the rest of Canada will join them is but one more exercise in futility on their part and an even greater expression of their ultimate duplicity toward Canadian democracy.

CotlerCrew
Back row (left to right): Congressman Chris Smith (USA), Minister Yuli Edelstein (Israel), Guillaume Ngefa (Democratic Republic of Congo),
Gert Weisskirchen (Germany), MP Vivienne Teitelbaum (Belgium), Father Nortbert Hofmann (The Vatican)
Front row (left to right): Hon. Dr. Fiamma Nirenstein, MP (Italy), Hon. Irwin Cotler, MP (Canada), MP John Mann (UK)
_________________________________________________________________________________________

And so here the problem stands. While our democratic institutions are being ripped apart and shredded from within by the Zionist Jews who control Canada’s government there’s not a single federal political party with the conviction or the intestinal wherewithal to stand up for Canada and speak out on this critical issue.

It truly poses some interesting moral and ethical dilemma’s for those who want to see Canada return to a state of independence, sovereignty and integrity.

In the beginning was the word and the word was “hate”

“What constitutes “hatred” is not defined in the Canadian Human Rights Act. It is a question of fact.
It is generally accepted to refer to extreme ill-will and is an emotion which allows for “no redeeming qualities” in the person at whom it is directed.
“Contempt” is similarly extreme and includes circumstances in which the object of one’s feelings is looked down upon, belittled, despised, dishonored or disgraced.”

~ excerpt from an email from Sandy Kozak, Investigator, CHRC to Arthur Topham, Pub/Ed of RadicalPress.com, Dec. 10, 2007

The Zionist Jews, of all the vested interest lobby groups in Canada (and the USA, Great Britain, EU and Australia, New Zealand, etc.), are the ones who promote, exploit and benefit from the four-letter word “hate”. Like the original term “anti-Semitism,” (also coined back in the late 19th Century for similar political purposes), the use and abuse of this latest linguistic lure to further their one world government agenda is too transparently recognizable to overlook. It’s one of their main sources of propaganda, giving them the much needed chutzpah to plod on in their questionable and endless quest for more and more power and control over the democratic nations of the world. Unfortunately it’s a ruse that is as false as all the other ruses that they use over and over to befuddle and confuse the minds of the unaware and brainwashed.

As is apparent in the definition of the term which Sandy Kozak, “hate crimes” Investigator for the Canadian Human Rights Commission, conveyed to me upon request, what constitutes “hatred” isn’t defined in the CHR Act. As she says, “It is a question of fact.” Really? A question of fact? Like a rock on the ground? Like a tree in the bush? Like a mole on a cheek? Like a car on a road? Like a dead Palestinian child in the ditch? Or, as is more likely the case, like an aberrant thought, hidden in the undefinable depths of a psychopath’s mind? I suggest that the type of “fact” which Sandy Kozak was referring to in her email of 2007 was akin to the latter in the list.

Hate, in the eyes of the CHRC and, theoretically, in the minds of those who inserted and imposed it upon the Canadian public via the CHR Act, is an “emotion”, “extreme ill-will” that supposedly includes no possibility of any “redeeming qualities” in the person who may be the recipient of this emotion. Don’t you just hate it when suspect sophists take a word, manipulate and crunch it up and distort and twist it into a particular shape and then expect the rest of the world to unconditionally accept it in its “brand new” form as the one and only definition worthy of consideration? I certainly do.

Well that is precisely how the human rights commissars conceive the word “hate” will be understood by Canadians and that is why the Zionist agents, working in earnest within their committees and their “think” tanks, demand and expect that the quasi-judicial bodies like the CHRC and the CHRT will ensure that this word, above all words, remains poised at the zenith of their “Hallmarks of Hate” like the sword of Damocles which they use to determine whether or not someone’s words or deeds fits into the linguistic straight jacket that they’ve so carefully contrived over years and years of deceptive deliberations behind the scenes.

But, like all fanatics, the Zionist Jews are not content to have just one term with which to silence their critics and so they solicited yet another word, “contempt”, to add to their arsenal of prohibited language. Now this second linguistic bombshell is also considered much too “extreme” an emotion for all the good little goys and gals to be feeling should their world and/or their country be crumbling before their eyes and such feelings of outrage, anger, disgust suddenly begin to arise from within their beings. As a theoretically free and sovereign nation of people we must not; we can not; even though the very actions and behaviour of the Zionist Jews within our nation are putting us in a position where we are being belittled, despised, dishonoured, disgraced, deceived, disenfranchised, deluded, robbed, poisoned, lied to, cheated, and disempowered, be allowed to legitimately feel emotions such as hatred or contempt toward those responsible for our plight. Just how sick, twisted and contemptible this truly is I will leave up to the reader to decide.

It would be fair, I believe, to assume that there are literally thousands or possibly millions of Canadians who find not only the sight but the actions of Stephen Harper and the Conservative government to be so repulsive as to bring forth at least one of these prohibited emotions. Contempt rather than fear springs to mind immediately. To do so; to feel so; I suggest, is not an unhealthy thing but merely a strong indication that within the human breast of Canadians there still resides the eternal spirit of resistance to tyranny; a spirit that holds fast to the belief that no government has the right to lay claims upon the inner light or spirit that guides each and every one of us through this darkened world of treachery, war, destruction, deceit and misery. We were given these immutable qualities at the beginning of our sojourn upon this planet in order that we would never be forced into living as slaves under any particular power group, be they Zionists, Communists or otherwise and we must never forget them.

To conclude

All this said I still feel, from a personal perspective, that to hate is not the best motive for rationalizing or acting. To love (and be loved) and to be moved by feelings of love to stand up and resist all that the hatred created by the Zionist Juggernaut brings forth in this world is a much stronger, truer basis upon which to not only think and reason but also to live and be and to motivate one’s actions.

Israel’s star is on the wane. It has, as once was prognosticated by the Jewish writer Nathan Weinstock, turned out to be, like political Zionism itself, a “false messiah”; a deceiver of nations and the offspring of the Synagogue of Satan. Thus it would be a grave error on the part of Canada to hitch its nationhood – government and reputation within the community of free nations – to Israel’s failing influence. As Lord Curzon once stated: “It must never be forgotten that a nation, to be great, must pay due regard to the fact that it must build up its greatness on the foundation of the eternal verities of truth and justice.” In the case of the illegally created state of Israel, and as time will eventually prove, these words are more apt than any to describe the Zionist’s futile attempt to take over and institute a New World Order.

ChabadLubingHarper
PM Stephen Harper with skullcap surrounded by the extremist Jewish Talmud cult known as the
Chabad Lubavich – the hidden advisors controlling the Harper government.
______________________________________________________________________________________

The Conservative government of Stephen Harper is a contemptible Trojan Horse. Like previous governments it was dragged into Ottawa under the pretense of being the best option for Canadians to preserve not only their integrity as a free and democratic nation but to set a good example for the rest of the world; one that other nations might look up to and aspire after in the hope that someday they would also reap the benefits that a free society and sovereign democracy can offer to its people. This has not been the case. As we can see from the graphic immediately above there is a specific, self-chosen group of zealots who, through subterfuge and the power of their usurious ‘purse’ plus their Babylonian Talmud-inspired ideology known as Zionism, have a totally different agenda in store for the nation.

Voters, who for the most part have been deceived by the pundits and the Zionist-controlled talking heads within their media, remain unaware of this insidious threat to our sovereignty. Were Canadians fully apprised of the seditious nature of the Zionist Jews within our nation’s walls they would likely vote en masse to rid the country of this omnipresent danger. But they aren’t and so the country once again teeters on the brink of the unknowing. Should the false saviour of Canada, Stephen Harper, achieve his mandate to rule over us with his Zionist rod then maybe that will be the time for a new movement to arise and a new federal party to germinate; one that will address the issues I’ve delineated in this essay plus all the others not covered. The key to our future as a sovereign nation is to understand how the Zionist agenda operates, not only in Canada but throughout the world. Without the key we will continue to remain prisoners of Zion.

Until May 2nd, 2011….
_____________________

PLEASE NOTE: Arthur Topham is a writer and the Publisher and Editor of RadicalPress.com living in British Columbia, Canada. Like all alternative Internet news outlets not on the Zionist payroll he relies upon the good will and generosity of those in cyberspace for financial assistance to help him with his work. Any donations therefore would be most welcome. Please see the PayPal donation button at the top right of the RadicalPress.com home page. Feel free to use it if you can help out. :-) Thanks.

Arthur welcomes all feedback to his articles and can be reached at radical@radicalpress.com or via telephone at (250) 992-3479.

For the Full Monty on the sec. 13 complaint case involving RadicalPress.com and B’nai Brith Canada please see: http://www.radicalpress.com/?page_id=995

POLICE ABUSE, HARASSMENT, DISCRIMINATION & RACIAL PROFILING OF INDIGENUOUS NATIVES CONTINUES by Helen Michell

POLICE ABUSE, HARASSMENT, DISCRIMINATION & RACIAL PROFILING OF INDIGENOUS NATIVES CONTINUES

by Helen Michell

Sunday, February 27, 2011

Frank&Helen

                   Frank Martin and Helen Michell in Vancouver, B.C.
___________________________________________________________________________                   

[Editor's Note: I have known Frank Martin and Helen Michell for 22 years now and have worked with them on different issues to do with native sovereignty, Residential School abuse and basic human rights issues. Both Helen and Frank are hard core, dedicated activists who have given their adult lives to the struggles that indigenous natives face around the province. As Helen states in her article below she would need to write a book just to record all of the incidents in her and Frank's life where they've been unduly stopped, pulled over, forced off the highway, accosted, harassed, beaten up, forced into courts of law and teased and terrorized by the so-called authorities whose job it is to uphold the law and treat all people equally. Their trials and tribulations epitomize what is a daily occurrence for so many indigenous natives here in "beautiful" B.C. Please read Helen's story and do what you can to pass it along in the hope that someone, somewhere, may find it in their heart to assist these folks and help them in their quest for justice.]

POLICE ABUSE, HARASSMENT, DISCRIMINATION & RACIAL PROFILING OF INDIGENOUS NATIVES CONTINUES

by Helen Michell

Sunday, February 27, 2011To all who may be concerned:  This letter is about the abuse, intimidation, harassment, discrimination, racial profiling that we as indigenous people of British Columbia, Canada have to put up with regards to the authorities of of this unceded province called British Columbia. Authorities such as the Vancouver City police, the Royal Canadian Mounted police and the Social Services of this province. As indigenous people, we have gone through so much discrimination and intimidation and racial profiling from these so called authorities.

I am an indigenous woman. I am also a disabled indigenous woman and an elder  who has to live in a wheel chair since 2000. In the year 2000, at the end of July, I and my husband Frank were forced off the highway by an R.C.M.P cruiser that rammed our vehicle off the highway north of Cache Creek, B.C., and left me disabled.  Since than I have come a long way along the road to recovery but I’m still not fully recovered. I will always have to get around in an electric wheel chair.

I am also a witness to many of the abuses we as indigenous people have to live with on a daily basis. I am also an indigenous human rights defender and an outspoken indigenous activist who really cares about her indigenous people.

As a child, I witnessed my elders being threatened by the RCMP with prison or Esendale which was a place they put crazy people. Back then the police used ‘the mental health act’ to force indigenous people into jails or off the streets. This ‘mental health act’ was put on the shelf for most of my life time. Now this ‘Mental health act’ is being re-enacted and put back into action once again. This act has forced many of our indigenous people off the streets and many have been given huge fines which most cannot pay. Fines such as ‘jay walking’ and for ‘being drunk in a public place’. Just being seen on the streets of Commercial Drive of Vancouver, B.C. is now a crime if you are indigenous. Age does not matter but the color or your skin matters. The Vancouver city police have become judge, jury and executioner when it comes to indigenous peoples of B.C. and so has the Royal Canadian Mounted Police of B.C.

In the past few days, the indigenous youth of the Vancouver Indian Center have also come to us and asked us for help from the abuse  of the Vancouver City police. They are also being chased around by the police. They are also being forced off the streets of Commercial Drive. Where are these indigenous youth going to go? There is no other place to go. Late at night we witnessed 12 and 13 years old indigenous youth at the Vancouver Indian Center being questioned by the Vancouver police. Why are they allowed to question the indigenous youth without the presence of the elders? This is abuse of their authority in attempting to scare the youth off the streets.

This is only one example of the city police abuse of their authority: On February 24, 2011, we were at the Vancouver Indian Center for a memorial for one of our elders who passed away. This memorial was held from 7 pm until 10 pm.  We left the Indian Center to go to our vehicle. On our way to the car we noticed the police cars around one of the apartments near our vehicle. We didn’t think anything of it then. But when we got into our car and drove up Commercial Drive one of the police cars started to follow us for quit a few blocks before they turned the police lights onto us. We immediately pulled over our car. At first the police officer said we were being stopped for a traffic infraction where my husband, who was a passenger, was not suppose to be driving. He wasn’t as I was in the the drivers seat and was the driver with a valid drivers license. The police officer took my driver’s license and the registration papers for the car.

The police officer was gone with our papers for quit a long time before he or she came back. I say he or she because I could not tell if he or she was a male or a female. All along I thought he or she was a male but when the police officer finally gave us a card, the card said the name was Jocelyn Deziel, pin 2067. This whole incident went from a traffic matter to a drug matter within a few minutes. The police officer said that the RCMP informed her that we were busted at our house for a ‘grow op’ marijuana matter, which was false. This officer said we had a few pounds of marijuana in our car. He/she ordered us out of our car so he/she could illegally search our vehicle. I, being disabled, had to sit on the back bumper of my vehicle for the whole one hour while the car search was going on. Plus, it was 5 degrees below zero outside and freezing. I was so cold my legs practically froze by the time I was allowed to go back into my car. This treatment toward us was ‘inhumane treatment’ and was uncalled for. This police officer practically took the inside of our car apart, front to back, top to bottom, and found NOTHING. This police officer was extremely rude and discriminating.

Frank&HelenArticle

An all too familiar scene on Vancouver’s streets with flashing police lights
___________________________________________________________________________

 
This police officer has a name on the street of Commercial Drive: The Name is ‘Super Cop’, because he/she gets what he/she wants. This officer terrorizes indigenous people. I was terrorized by this officer’s abuse toward us. I am 58 years old and my husband and I are elders and we have lived through this type of abuse through out most of our lives. We are human beings, we are not animals to be pushed around nor penned up whenever the police feel we are in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Here are some dates of when we were stopped by the Vancouver City police and the RCMP during  the past year only:

February 1, 2011 at 11:25 pm. Abbotsford police stopped us while on our way home, gave my passenger a no driving ticket, which was illegal. No business harassing my passengers.

February 10, 2011. RCMP pulled us over east of Port Mann bridge at 9:15 pm.

January 19, 2011, at 11:55 pm. Pulled over by RCMP from Hope BC, only to tell me my license was expiring  at the end of this year.

January 25, 20011, 12:15 pm. I was followed for a while on a side road before I pulled onto the main highway where I was pulled over by the Agassiz Police, for nothing, then let go.

December 16, 2010 at 11:30 pm.  Chilliwack, B.C., RCMP pulled us over on the Freeway in Chilliwack for no apparent reason.

December 17, 2010 at 8:45 pm. Agassiz police pulled us over on a very dark side road, off the main  highway. He had no lights going, he just came out of the dark to harass me while I was at a stop sign. He scared me, as I thought he was a regular person trying to stop me. I didn’t know he was a police officer until he was at my window.

December 31, 2010. Stopped once again at 9:15 pm by Agassiz police on Evans Rd. No apparent reason.

September 8, 2010 at 12 pm. Pulled over by Agassiz police. There were two police cars for this stop. I was close to home when I was pulled over. I consider most of these stops by police as ‘racial profiling’ of me, as an indigenous person.

September 17, 2010 at 9:30 pm. Pulled over by Langley RCMP, again no apparent reason.

July 4, 2010 at 8 pm. Pulled over by Vancouver city police on Commercial Drive. Again, no reason. This occurred after attending a Jazz Festival.

June 29, 2010, at 11 pm. After attending a pow wow night at Vancouver Indian Center the Vancouver city police pulled us over only to tease me that I was wanted Canada wide for stealing chocolates!!!

May 24, 2010, at 9 am. Chilliwack Police pulled us over on Freeway in Chilliwack. Ordered us out of the car. Searched our vehicle and found nothing.

February 20, 2010 around 9:30 pm. My husband, Frank Martin, was arrested and beaten up by four Vancouver city policemen on Commercial Drive and 1st ave; beaten up with their batons and knocked unconscious. Then he was taken by ambulance to the Vancouver General Hospital where he awoke, with no clothes on, laying on a bed. He escaped from the hospital with the help of a Chinese fellow who gave him some clothes that he found. At home, I saw all the black and blue bruises that he sustained by the police beating. It was horrible. Why do we as indigenous people have to put up with this kind of abuse and inhumane treatment, and no one will help us to stand up and fight this police brutality? Are we not considered as human beings?

FrankMed

                                Frank Martin
______________________________________________________

January 21, 2010 at 5:50 pm. We were pulled over on Commercial Drive by the Vancouver city police on our way to attend a B.C. Civil Liberties meeting on police brutality at Vancity Theatre. Scare tactic?

January 30, 2010, at 10:45 am. Two policeman, in an unmarked police car, parked outside our house for 10 min. but did not come in. Very unusual.

Now this is only one year’s span of our 58 years on this earth where we’ve been pulled over by the police. How many times in the past, that we were pulled over and our vehicles confiscated will have to be printed in a book, as it will not fit in this article and I do not have enough time to write it all down.

Now does this article prove that we are being harassed, intimidated, discriminated against and been ‘racially profiled’ merely for being indigenous people of British Columbia, Canada? You must be the judge of that.

Besides all of the police abuse of us as indigenous people of B.C., we are also being abused by the authorities that are put in place to take care of us.

During the past few years, we have been “kicked out” of the welfare office in Chilliwack, B.C. for trying to stand up to a bad social worker who did not like us one bit. We have been banned from going into that welfare office for a few years now. Our welfare files were then transferred to the nearest Salvation Army social services, where they have been these past few years. I guess we are considered a ‘mental’ case for trying to get what we are entitled to from the welfare office, so that is one of the reasons for transferring our files to the Salvation Army. All we were doing was questioning the welfare worker why I cannot get them to buy me an electric wheel chair, which I still have not got yet. And why my daughter, who has been taking care of us as disabled elders, cannot get assistance from the welfare office. Instead, we were forced out of this welfare office. I have to still buy my own electric wheel chairs second hand. Whenever I have to buy another electric wheel chair it puts us in debt. I also need to buy food with what little the welfare gives us and it hurts us more if I have to buy my own electric wheel chairs. How many other indigenous families of B.C., Canada, are forced to live in poverty because of the abuse of the social workers of this province?

The Wetsuweeten First Nations band welfare worker is no different from the white social workers. My brother who lives on the reserve is suffering extreme poverty because of the abuse of the band social workers. He cannot go hunting because of the band denying him his right to have a gun to go food hunting. Yet the band gives their own families the right to carry a gun to go hunting and the right to sell the moose meat instead of giving the meat to the band members that so badly need it. Now there are no more moose to hunt.

Who in the world will stand up beside us and fight for our rights, our human rights, our indigenous rights, our disabled rights, our woman’s rights, our indigenous childrens rights? What rights do we really have? I know I have some kind of rights because I am still here, trying to tell you all what kind of abuse we as indigenous people of B.C. have to put up with.

Please send this article far and wide, to whomever you know that you think will help us in any way to put a stop to the abuse of the authorities of this only unceded province now called British Columbia, Canada.

Outspoken, indigenous, disabled and a human rights defender of indigenous peoples of B.C., Canada.

Telquaa,Helen Michell,
PO Box 806,
Harrison Hot Springs
B.C. Canada V0M 1K0.
Telephone: 604 796 9191

Email: Helen Michell telquaa@hotmail.com

PRESS RELEASE: FREE TRADE WHISTLE BLOWER SHELLEY ANN CLARK UNDER ATTACK IN OTTAWA

NewRadLogo3

Editor’s Note: For those who have been following or are presently interested in the ongoing controversy surrounding the North American Free Trade Agreement this news breaking story should be of prime interest.

I have know Shelley Ann Clark for close to 15 years now and can vouch for her integrity, indefatigable energy and dedication to our nation.

Shelley Ann Clark desperately needs our help. Please lend your assistance to one of Canada’s foremost whistle blowers by passing this Press Release on to as many associates that you can. Let’s do our utmost to bring this story to the attention of the msm and Canadians in general.

Shelley Ann’s efforts cannot be left to die in vain along with our sovereignty.

Sincerely,

Arthur Topham
Publisher/Editor
The Radical Press
Canada’s Radical News Network
“Digging to the root of the issues since 1998″
http://www.radicalpress.com
radical@radicalpress.com

–––––––––––––––––––––––

PRESS COMMUNIQUE

TO BE RELEASED JANUARY 6, 2011

FREE TRADE WHISTLE BLOWER SHELLEY ANN CLARK UNDER ATTACK IN OTTAWA

The “mainstream” national media won’t touch her and lawyers and politicians will not sue her.

Shelley Ann Clark is the Federal Civil servant with 30 years experience who worked in the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Negotiations Office as an Executive Assistant to the third highest ranking negotiator on Mulroney’s team.
Between 1986 and 1988 Clark was ordered to falsify and eventually shred briefing papers designed to mislead provincial premiers as to what was really being given away in the Free Trade Agreement (FTA).  In March 1988 she was ordered by her boss to secretly remove key documents from the Free Trade Office to the trunk of his car.   While screening the material to be removed, Clark came across a “Step-by-Step Implementation Scheme” that would eventually lead to the merger of Canada and the U.S.A.  We are now in 2010, and even though there was no media fanfare announcing this event, IT HAS OCCURRED.  You are seeing evidence everywhere as more and more American owned businesses are moving into Canada and forcing Canadian businesses to shut down. You can see it in the privileges that American businessmen are receiving when investing in Canada. Favoritism towards American investors is in evidence. Speak to Canadians who are trying to invest and assume they will receive the same privileges as their American counterparts.  Listen to Paul Hellyer’s speech that he gave to his audience when he launched his Canadian Action Party in 1997.

In June, 1993, Clark went public with her explosive story. She ran for political office in the Federal elections.  At the invitation of Canadians she traveled across Canada as a guest speaker in order to inform Canadians that their country had been sold to the Americans.

In April, 1995, the harassment she suffered at the hands of the federal government and its agents finally took its toll and she collapsed for the first time.

After a four year absence, in the fall of 1999 she returned to the Department of Foreign Affairs.  Since then, Clark’s career went into a downward spiral.

In December, 2000, the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade declared her a “surplus” employee. In January, 2001, she was offered a position at the Public Service Commission of Canada (PSC) NOT as an Executive Assistant or Administrator that are her areas of expertise, but as a data entry clerk and part-time receptionist.  Having a family to support she accepted the offer.

From January 2001 to April 2004, the PSC treated Shelley Ann in an inequitable, disrespectful, unjust and differential manner. She was ridiculed by Human Resources Managers when she brought them her Curriculum Vitae.  They laughed and told her “you are asking me to take one huge leap of faith to believe anything that you have put down in your CV”. No one at the PSC would consider her for any job that would have been commensurate with her experience and qualifications.  She was ostracized by everyone.    Staff meetings were held without including her. After each one of these staff meetings she was called in to her immediate supervisor’s office and told that the staff was complaining about her because she could not do the job.  All of these irregular activities by the PSC led to her second collapse in January of 2004.

On January 21, 2005, Shelley Ann was forced into an early retirement when the Public Service Commission would not allow her to return to the workplace on a gradual return to work program. She was even refused to take on the duties of a Receptionist who was a Temp Agency person.

On February 28, 2006, after a lengthy battle with health problems caused by the stress inflicted on her by 11 years of harassment by the Federal Government, Shelley Ann filed a complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC).

On March 6, 2008, the Canadian Human Rights Commission submitted  their Investigation Report.  The decision was made to proceed to a Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (CHRT) Hearing.

On September 14, 2009, a five day hearing began at Canadian the Human Rights Tribunal (CHRT). Shelley Ann, with no legal experience, stood alone and represented herself against a Federal Government Legal Team of five people.  She did not have the funds to pay for a lawyer.  Shelley Ann approached a list of lawyers from Ottawa law firms begging them to represent her on “contingency”.  They all refused.

In the Hearing Room Shelley Ann was obstructed from presenting her case at every turn, while the Department of Justice lawyers were allowed to say and do anything they wanted.

On February 3, 2010, the Chairman of the CHRT rendered his decision in favour of the federal government.
However, the Chairman did arrive at the conclusion that the Public Service Commission’s behavior towards Shelley Ann had been so outrageous that he made note of this in his report.

Here are some of the statements made by the CHRT’s Chairman, Mr. Rejean Belanger in his report “Reasons for Decision”:

•     Point # 166 – “It seems to us that this six-week period the Complainant spent alone in an empty office, that none of the witnesses, including the Chief of Human Resource Operations for the Public Service Commission, were able to explain, represents an aberrant and unimaginable situation”.

•     Point # 167 – “However, it is a neglectful and/or an unpardonable oversight by Human Resources.  Given everything we have learned about the Complainant, we are of the opinion that she certainly did not deserve to be treated in such a way.”

•     Point # 168 – “We can easily imagine the anguish and the depression that the Complainant might have felt or experienced during this extended period.  If an employer wanted to discourage or destroy an employee, there is no better way to do so.”

In February, 2010, Shelley Ann filed an application with the Federal Court to appeal the decision rendered by the CHRT.

On March 22, 2010, Shelley Ann filed her 37 page SWORN AFFIDAVIT with the Federal Court along with over 300 pages of Exhibits that she prepared without any legal assistance.

On December 14, 2010, Shelley Ann received a Court Order by e-mail signed by Chief Justice, Allan Lutfy. The Court Order states: “Point #1: This proceeding shall continue as a specially managed proceeding.”

When Shelley Ann put the question to a clerk at the Federal Court Public Counter what Point # 1 meant she was advised that the usual standard practice for persons bringing a case to the Federal Court is that they never know in advance what Judge will be assigned to their case. It’s like playing Russian Roulette.  Which Judge a person gets is not pre-determined.  It all depends on who is on duty on that particular day.  However, in Shelley Ann Clark’s case a Judge had already been pre-determined and specially assigned to her case ahead of time.

In Shelley Ann’s case, Chief Justice, Allan Lutfy has been specially assigned to be the Judge overseeing the trial.  Prothonotary, Roza Aronovitch has been assigned as the Case Management Judge.  WE ask that everyone who reads this “Proposed” Press Release goes onto their GOOGLE SEARCH ENGINE and enters the name “Alan Lutfy” as well as linking to the following website: http://www.waterwarcrimes.com/contact-us—privately.html.

These two sources will clearly demonstrate to you who Shelley Ann Clark is up against when she goes into the Federal Court Room sometime in the new year.   The information that you will read from the above-mentioned links will make it clear to you why it is imperative that Shelley Ann, at this point, needs legal representation to ensure her well being.  This lawyer must  a) be willing to take her case on contingency; b) come from outside the province of Ontario and especially Ottawa and c) have the stones to go up against Chief Justice Allan Lutfy.

Because her case is being heard in a Federal Court, a lawyer from any province can represent her. WE are appealing to everyone to help her find legal representation.

As of the date of this Press Release, January 6, 2011, the Federal Court has not yet set a date for her case to be heard.  We, who support Shelley Ann, believe that she is being denied her human rights by not having a lawyer to represent her in the court room to settle this issue once and for all. This case does not bode well for Canada whose Constitution claims to respect Human Rights and boasts that we live in a democratic nation.

-30-
 
 
For further information please contact:Margaret R. Bowlby
Public Relations Agent and Researcher for Shelley Ann Clark

e-mail at: fb847@ncf.ca

 

ADL’S TWISTED HATE CRIMES DEFINITIONS: A DICTIONARY By Rev. Ted Pike 24 Nov 10

NewRadLogo3

Dear Reader,

Whether one is a Christian or not the duplicitous Orwellian definitions which Rev. Ted Pike explains in this article are of inestimable valuable to free thinkers and essential to a greater understanding of just how the Rothschild/B’nai Brith International (i.e. Anti-Defamation League, aka ADL) Zionist/Jewish/Israeli mindset operates and functions in their relentless pursuit of greater and greater draconian laws aimed at protecting their own nefarious, racist, supremacist agenda while at the same time surreptitiously destroying the legitimate infrastructure of Western civilization.

Here in Canada their cunning, serpentine actions over decades have resulted in the malicious manipulation of our “Human Rights” laws; laws ostensible meant to benefit the whole of society yet, upon realistic examination in light of all the ensuing legal battles over the past thirty years or more, now proven to be the height of deception and fraud perpetrated against the vast majority of Canadian citizens.

The battle for freedom of speech in Canada is clearly a battle for the right of anyone, be they Christian, Atheist, Pagan, Secular or whatever, to not be brainwashed into the current Zionist-induced mindset and remain free to criticize the actions of the Israeli state and/or the motivations of those Zionist Ashkenazi “Jews” controlling it to bend the mind of humanity toward their one-sided, psychopathic delusion that they, and only they, are the sole inheritors of the right to do whatever they damn well want while the rest of the world rolls over and allows them to destroy all that humankind has fashioned over the past two millennia that’s worthy and dignified in a spiritual, political or cultural sense.

Canada’s greatest challenge today is to enlighten the zombie-like attitudes of all those Canadians who’ve been so mind-controlled through the Zionist media and the education system over the past 60+ years that they truly believe supporting Israel and the Zionist agenda is a good thing for this nation.

Ted Pike’s novel idea of a dictionary is one way in which they can be debriefed of this seditious mental aberration; one that perpetuates the illusion of being good and honest people while in truth hindering their own freedom and the freedom of all Canadians to express their God-given, essential right to open opinion and criticism of any ideology that threatens the well being of our country.

Please pass this reference material on to as many people as you can and don’t forget to …

Shine your Light for Love, Peace & Justice for All,

Arthur Topham
Publisher/Editor
The Radical Press
Canada’s Radical News Network
“Digging to the root of the issues since 1998″

http://www.radicalpress.com

radical@radicalpress.com
—————————–

PikeAlertHdr
ADL’S TWISTED HATE CRIMES DEFINITIONS: A DICTIONARY

By Rev. Ted Pike
24 Nov 10

Yellow plastic arches looming above streets from Taiwan to Tripoli mean McDonald’s USA. In the same way, identical terms in hate laws throughout the Western world are the logo of their architect: the Jewish Anti-Defamation League. ADL recently boasted of having masterminded the whole idea of hate laws, particularly in America.

ADL was privileged to lead a broad coalition of civil rights, religious, educational, professional, law-enforcement, and civic organizations that worked in support of the HCPA [Hate Crimes Prevention Act] for more than a decade. A pioneer in advocating for hate crimes legislation, the League published its first model hate crimes statute almost 30 years ago. Forty-five states and the District of Columbia have enacted laws based on or similar to the ADL model. (“ADL Welcomes First Indictments under Federal Hate Crimes Prevention Act,” adl.org)

Hate laws set up Christians and free thinkers for prosecution, making free speech into hate speech. To understand and combat hate laws, lovers of freedom must be able to recognize the twisted terms that show up in all hate crime educational materials and legislation. Virtually none mean what they suggest or promise. They are cleverly contrived to disempower Western majority populations’ Christian values; to fragment society into separate groups with different legal privileges and punishments; and to silence critical speech about sexual morality and minority religions. In short, there is no legislative tool more powerfully equipped to destroy Christian civilization today.

Here is a concise dictionary of the devious “doublespeak” ADL weaves into hate laws worldwide.

Affirmative Action – Unequal rights and advantages in employment and education given to ethnic minorities and women as a result of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Ostensibly meant to right historical wrongs, affirmative action undermines Christian society by moving it away from laws for individuals to laws for groups. It says people are deserving because of the class they belong to, not what they do. This inherently discriminatory principle continues to drive “civil rights” legislation today, especially in favor of blacks, Latinos, and women.

Anti-Semitism – To ADL, this term is not limited to belief that Jews are evil or deserve to die. It refers to: mere criticism of matters Jewish, including Jewish dominance of big media (See, Jews Confirm Big Media is Jewish), finance, and Congress; criticism of Israel; questioning the accuracy of the six-million figure of Holocaust Jewish dead; agreement with the New Testament claim that Jews masterminded the crucifixion of Christ; quotation of unflattering statements by Jews.

Attack on Israel – Any strong criticism, even if constructive or well-intentioned, of the Jewish state.

Bias (includes Bigotry and Prejudice) – Negative attitudes—primarily rooted in Biblical values—that are critical of homosexuality, Judaism, Islam, abortion, political liberalism, and other anti-Christian establishments that ADL believes it is wrong to oppose.

Bias-Motivated Crime (Hate Crime) – Any violation of US law motivated by a politically incorrect bias such as “homophobia;” such a crime deserves triple penalties compared to the same crime committed for a random or more personal reason. (In many countries mere public criticism of federally protected groups is also a hate crime.)

Blood Charge – The “anti-Semitic” New Testament statement that Jewish leaders masterminded and the Jewish population demanded the crucifixion of Christ. This is defined as the seminal cause of anti-Semitism over the past 2,000 years, leading to the Holocaust. It is defined as a source of continuous “anti-Semitism” and “irrational hatred” of Jews by Christians, making Christian countries inherently unsafe, violence-prone, irrational and racist.

Bullying – Criticism of homosexuality, Judaism, Jews or Israel, Islam, or minorities (other than whites or Christians) on campus, especially when it causes emotional discomfort to students who are part of such groups. Cyber-bullying – The same, only online.

Censorship – Attempts by Christian parents and leadership groups to restrain ADL/liberal promotion of homosexuality, pornography, sex education and secularist “respect for diversity” in public schools. (This term, of course, does not refer to ADL’s right to silence any form of Christian speech or of criticism of Israel on campus or online.)

Civility – ADL-suggested restraint in public criticism of President Obama and Democrats in Congress.

Civil Rights – Special rights and privileges in employment and housing given to blacks, Jews, Muslims, Hispanics, homosexuals/transgenders and women—not afforded to white, straight males or anyone with politically incorrect “biases.”

Civil Rights Act of 1964 – Basis for all US federal hate crimes legislation. Exalts certain favored groups above majority. Opens door for yet more classes to acquire such preference.

Conspirators – Millions of Americans, particularly Tea Party activists, who are intent on defeating Pres. Obama’s agenda and unseating Democrats in government through vehement criticism. (See, ADL Blasts ‘Paranoid’ Right)

Cyber Hate – Criticism of matters Jewish or of Israel online; quoting Bible passages against homosexuality online; distributing photographic evidence of abortion procedures online; etc.

Delegitimization of Israel – “Anti-Semitic” Biblical claim that God abhors occupation of His Holy Land by a nation of disobedient Jews (See, Israel: On the Way to Empire in the Mideast); “terrorist” claim that Israel acquired most of Palestine through violent theft and expropriation of 800,000 Arabs to concentrations camps; demand that dispossessed Palestinians be allowed to return and reoccupy stolen lands; statement that Israel at present is a racist and fundamentally unjust state which should be dismantled and replaced by a state equally participated in by Jews, Muslims, and Christians, all of whom are beneficiaries of its Abrahamic legacy.

Domestic (homegrown) Terrorists – (According to ADL/SPLC’s MIAC directives to police) Not just Muslim saboteurs but U.S. “anti-government” protesters, including supporters of Ron Paul and Chuck Baldwin, members of the Constitution Party, “militia” activists, “white supremacists,” proponents of a Constitutional Convention, “militant” opponents of abortion, and opponents of illegal immigration and the New World Order, NAFTA, federalization of the states, restrictive gun laws, and confiscatory taxation. (Infowars.com, “Secret State Police Report: Ron Paul, Bob Barr, Chuck Baldwin, Libertarians are Terrorists”)

Discrimination – In public schools, criticism of homosexuality, Judaism and Israel, Islam, etc. In business, refusal to hire a known homosexual or firing him or her because of their sexual activity. In housing, refusal to sell or rent to any of the above.

Diversity – Participation in a non-Christian sexual behavior or religion. Membership in a sexual, ethnic or religious group outside the white Christian majority. Respect for diversity — Acceptance of such divergent groups or lifestyles, particularly of homosexuality.

Equality (as promised in hate crimes bills) – Special rights and privileges for Jews, blacks, Latinos, women and homosexuals, with no such rights implied for the majority.

Gender Identity – The sex one perceives oneself to be, regardless of designated sex at birth; this gender identity should be respected by society and determines where a person should go to the bathroom, whom they can marry, and how they should be treated. If a person’s biological gender is different from their gender identity, society is responsible to ignore it.

Genocide – In a Jewish context, genocide can happen through delegitimization of the Jewish state and also through Christian conversion of Jews which kills Jewish souls.

Hate – Bias or criticism against specially protected groups.

Hate Crimes Statistics – Reports by police of alleged hate crimes, the great majority of which have never been adjudicated in court, most consisting of altercations and name-calling yet considered actual hate crimes by police and government and used as proof of an “epidemic of hate” in America and the world.

Hate Speech – Speech critical of protected groups, which should not be protected under the First Amendment; a form of psychological abuse of a persecuted community which government must end, even at the cost of others’ freedom.

Harassment (Intimidation) – Public criticism of protected groups (especially in government and public education); even if not accompanied by any threat of physical violence, such criticism of historically oppressed groups creates feelings of fear and intimidation and therefore must be outlawed and ended.

Hate-free environment – Public spaces, especially college campuses, where criticism of protected groups is not tolerated; in these spaces, it is unacceptable to speak against abortion (thus traumatizing post-abortive women), minority religions (upsetting their adherents), homosexuality (causing “mental anguish” to homosexuals), or other “historically marginalized” groups. The consciences, religious beliefs, and free speech of the white, Christian majority are not as important as the freedom from hurt feelings (and the lurking threat of violence) for minorities. Eventually, all of society should be a “hate-free environment.”

Holocaust – The indisputable fact that six million Jews were killed during World War II. Any questioning of this fact is evil and defames the memory of Jewish dead. Such Holocaust denial is an “anti-Semitic” hate crime worthy of loss of freedom and civil rights, deportation and imprisonment for more than six years.

Homophobia – Criticism of homosexuality.

Perceived Gender or Ethnicity – How others view you, regardless of how you view yourself, in regard to gender or ethnicity. Even if the bias-motivated attacker incorrectly perceives the victim’s gender or ethnicity, he must be punished as a hate criminal with triple penalties. The real crime is having biased thoughts.

Persecution of Jews – Vicious, primarily Christianity-incited verbal, social, and physical attacks on Jews for nearly 2,000 years, the ultimate hate crime.

Proselytization – Christian attempts through evangelism to destroy Jewish souls and cultural/ethnic identity. Successful proselytization leads to belief in the false prophet Jesus.

Racial profiling – Consideration by police (resulting in action) of the fact that members of certain specially protected groups (such as blacks) have a much higher rate of crime per capita than the majority population or may be illegal aliens (Latinos).

Racial Quotas – Government requirements that businesses, education institutions, government agencies, etc., prefer members of favored groups with hiring and admissions advantages, fulfilling prescribed numbers.

Racists – Individuals, particularly in white Christian culture, who advocate the superiority of white Christian civilization and morality. Zionism and the State of Israel, however, reflecting the exalted ethics of Judaism, do not exemplify such bigotry.

Religion (As Protected by Hate Laws) – Judaism and Islam, as minority religions in America, are protected while Christianity, a historically overgrown and persecutive religion, is not.

Sexual Orientation – Homosexuality and sexual deviancies which merit special hate crimes protection. Heterosexuality, preferred by the majority, is granted no protection.

Stereotypes – Broad, negative descriptions of blacks, Jews, Latinos, homosexuals or Judaism and Islam. It is permitted, however, for ADL to make sweeping negative generalizations against critics of Israel, portraying them as “anti-Semitic,” or against Christians, calling them homophobic, intolerant, bigoted, hateful, etc.

Tolerance – Non-criticism of Judaism, homosexuality or Islam.

Targeted Groups – Classes meriting special federal protection from verbal or physical “hate crime” attacks.

Transgender – A person who has had or merely intends biological sex change; anyone involved in gender-crossing or gender-bending requires special consideration by society and must be treated as a member of the gender with which they currently identify, regardless of whether it aligns with their biology or with their past or future gender identity.

Triple Penalties – The standard level of punishment merited by a hate crime under hate crimes law. Implication: A bias-motivated assault is three times as bad as a conventional assault.

Violent Radicalization – Becoming violent under influence of bias, particularly cyber-hate.

Xenophobia – Fear and mistrust, particularly by the white majority, of vastly disproportionate numbers of historically alien people which ADL encourages to settle in host countries, increasing “diversity” and diluting those cultures.

Zero Tolerance for Hate – Acceptance of free speech rights of homosexuals and religious minorities on campus but not for the rights of “homophobic” or Christian critics.

Summary

It is very clear that ADL hate laws—ostensibly meant to end bias—are themselves the epitome of bias. Virtually nothing ADL says, in public statements or the hate crimes legislation it writes, can be taken at face value. A manipulative, anti-Christian, anti-America agenda is always right below the surface. At this moment, the most glaring example of such duplicity is ADL’s bill HR 6216 which seeks to add “religion” to the protected classes in the Civil Rights Act. (See, ‘Don’t Criticize Jews and Muslims’ Bill Enters Congress)

In this bill, ADL has no intention of giving special rights and protection to all religions from bullying on tax-supported American campuses, but only to “harassed minorities:” Judaism and Islam. (We wish to point out that no religion should receive this twisted “protection” from criticism; we would oppose this legislation even if it gave special protection to Christians above the rights of atheists.)

Continue to protest this extremely dangerous legislation, now in the House Judiciary Committee. Come to Truthtellers.org Action Page for the names of the pivotal Republican committee members. Call them all with this message:

“Please oppose HR 6216, which would add “religion” to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It gives Jews and Muslims special protection from criticism on campus but doesn’t give such protection to Christians. This is more biased hate crimes legislation from the Anti-Defamation League to take away free speech and make Christians hate criminals.”

Call 877-851-6437 toll-free or 202-224-3121 toll.

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

Rev. Ted Pike is director of the National Prayer Network, a Christian/conservative watchdog organization.

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

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

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

PM STEPHEN HARPER: CANADIAN TRAITOR AND ISRAEL’S “ANTI-SEMITIC” DRUMMER BOY by Arthur Topham November 11, 2010

PM STEPHEN HARPER: CANADIAN TRAITOR AND ISRAEL’S “ANTI-SEMITIC” DRUMMER BOY

by Arthur Topham
November 11, 2010

As a dedicated patriot and nationalist there is absolutely no doubt left in my mind that Canada’s Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, is an abject traitor as well as a full-blown slave to the racist, supremacist state of Israel.

Harper’s recent public pronouncements, voiced to an unofficial, international group of pro-Zionist parliamentarians in Ottawa that included the self-described “Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Anti-Semitism” (CPCCA), all of whom had gathered together within the hallowed halls of Canada’s parliament buildings to conspire further upon “new” strategies which might further the aims and ideology of the Zionist state of Israel, was the last straw for me in terms of holding out any hope that the Conservative Party of Canada would, and could, stand firm for traditional Canadian values, morals and principles of democratic government.

The concept and God-given right of freedom of speech, which has dominated the digital and print world of Canadian politics for a number of years now, forcing all sincere, freedom-loving Canadians to take a hard, second look at their supposed Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in light of a number of Canadian Human Rights Act’s, Sec. 13(1) cases brought forth by both federal and provincial “Human Rights” commissions, has now been unequivocally caste down, gauntlet-like, before the electorate by the seditious sophistry and deception emanating forth from the mouth of PM Stephen Harper.

The Emperor of Ottawa has finally shed his serpentine sheep’s clothing and now stands naked before the nation as a stark, fervent and rabid representative of the Israeli Zionist criminal cabal.

In light of the recurrent, historic ploy by the Israeli Zionists to re-invent the age-old wheel of “anti-Semitic” deception this latest overt and provocative support for Israel by Canada’s chief political CEO bares a striking resemblance to and repetition of the prophetic words and warnings of the late British journalist and writer Douglas Reed who, in his classic 1956 work on Israel and its ideology of political Zionism, The Controversy of Zion, describes clearly the very same methodologies now being recycled by the Harper government and the  “Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Anti-Semitism” in order to deceive the Canadian public and delete from its mass perception the true motives of Israeli domestic and foreign policies.

As stated in an original article on this unsavory decoy subject of “anti-Semitism,” B’nai Brith: Beating the anti-Semitic Drum, first published September 5, 2005 then updated in 2008 after I and my website RadicalPress.com were charged with a Sec. 13(1) “hate crime” of “anti-Semitism” by Harry Abrams and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada, as far back as WWII the Zionist forces were already secretly infiltrating foreign governments, especially those of the USA and Canada, with the expressed intent of subverting them to Israeli interests.

In Chapter 43 of Reed’s book, ominously and aptly titled “The Invasion of America”, he describes to a tee the very same techniques presently being re-applied by Harper and the “Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Anti-Semitism” to discredit and criminalize any person, group, organization or publishing business that exposes the fundamental truth about the real structure, intent and purpose of this nefarious ideology and its present embodiment within the Israeli state.

As Reed then described the modus operandi of the Zionists:

“While military invasions and counter-invasions multiplied during the six years of the Second War, absorbing all thought and energy of the masses locked in combat, a silent invasion went on which produced more momentous effects than the armed ones. This was the political invasion of the American Republic [and Canada. A.T.] and its success was shown by the shape of American state policy at the war’s end….This was a three-pronged movement which aimed at the capture of the three vital points of a state’s defences: state policy at the top level, the civil services at the middle level and “public opinion” or the mass-mind at the base.”

This is a precise and apt description of what is presently being, once again, surreptitiously foisted upon the Canadian public by the likes of PM Harper and his band of disloyal insurgents who have managed, with the assistance of foreign Israeli lobbyists like the secret Jewish masonic order of B’nai Brith, the Canadian Jewish Congress, the Simon Wiesenthal Center and other blatant Israeli-first traitors such as former federal Liberal Attorney General Irwin Cotler (brain-child of the “new anti-Semitism” catch phrase). All of them are hell-bent on using this former thread-bare Zionist trump card, “anti-Semitism”, to censor authentic debate and criticism and stifle freedom of speech when it comes to the shameful and despicably cold-blooded and cruel actions of the racist, supremacist Israeli government.

We need only look at the obvious actions and make up of our federal and provincial politicians and political parties; of our federal judiciary or Supreme Court of Canada (composed for the most part of pro-Zionist Jews); of our various civil organizations and “Human Rights” commissions and tribunals; and of our so-called mainstream media which is overwhelmingly controlled by pro-Israel, Zionist corporate interests, to see that this relentless “invasion” of our nation’s political and cultural infrastructure and mindset has now reached the apex in its rise to infamy and police state mentality and behaviour.

Further to this in-your-face dictatorial stance of Harper and his Israeli con-men advisers, Reed had more prescient observations to make which apply to the present circus act and siren song of the Zionist forces now occupying our federal and provincial levels of government and our msm. Thanks to the Zionist media’s overwhelming control and presence in our everyday lives it was able, as Reed stated, to impose, “the law of heresy on the public debate in America. No criticism of Zionism or the world-government plan is allowed to pass without virulent attack; . . .”

Back as far as 1956 he was right on the mark in stating that “America has today a few surviving writers who fight on for independent debate and comment. They will discuss any public matter, in the light of traditional American policy and interest, save Zionism, which hardly any of them will touch. I have discussed this with four of the leading ones, who all gave the same answer: it could not be done. The employed ones would lose their posts, if they made the attempt. The independent ones would find no publisher for their books because no reviewer would mention these, save with the epithets enumerated above.”

Regarding America’s B’nai Brith strong-arm for Israeli propaganda and the promotion of “hate crimes” legislation, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), Reed stated:

“The A.D.L., of such small beginnings in 1913, in 1948 had a budget of three million dollars (it is only one of several Jewish organizations pursuing Zionist aims in America at a similar rate of expenditure). The Menorah Journal, discussing “Anti-Defamation Hysteria”, said, “Fighting anti-semitism has been built up into a big business, with annual budgets running into millions of dollars”. It said the object was “to continue beating the anti-semitic drum” and “to scare the pants off prospective contributors” in order to raise funds. It mentioned some of the methods used (”outright business blackmail; if you can’t afford to give $10,000 to this cause, you can take your business elsewhere”), and said American Jews were being “stampeded into a state of mass-hysteria by their self-styled defenders.””

I suggest that this very same ploy, originally designed to gain the support of American Jews who were disinterested in Zionism, is now being used against the Canadian public, with the help of the Zionist media, in order to muster up a similar state of “mass-hysteria” with regard to the “new anti-Semitism” presently being rammed down the collective throat and mind of Canadians across every spectrum by Harper and the “Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Anti-Semitism”.

A couple of final and important observations which Reed made regarding this endless aberration and ruse known as “anti-Semitism”.

Speaking of the inordinate power and influence of Zionist organizations like B’nai Brith International and its enforcement arm the ADL he quotes a Mr. Vincent Sheehan who, in 1949, wrote, “There is scarcely a voice in the United States that dares raise itself for the rights, any rights, of the Arabs; any slight criticism of the Zionist high command is immediately labeled as anti-semitic”. . .”

And, to state the obvious, underlying rationale for the behaviour of traitors like Stephen Harper, Irwin Cotler and all the rest of Canada’s pro-Israel political leaders:

“How is the oracle worked? By what means has America (and the entire West) been brought to the state that no public man aspires to office, or editor feels secure at his desk, until he has brought out his prayer-mat and prostrated himself to Zion? How have presidents and prime ministers been led to compete for the approval of this faction like bridesmaids for the bride’s bouquet? Why do leading men suffer themselves to be paraded at hundred-dollar-a-plate banquets for Zion, or to be herded on to Zionist platforms to receive “plaques” for services rendered?

“The power of money and the prospect of votes have demonstrably been potent lures, but in my judgment by far the strongest weapon is this power to control published information; to lay stress on what a faction wants and to exclude from it all that the faction dislikes, and so to be able to give any selected person a “good” or a “bad” press.”

The truth, regarding what is now happening here in Canada and elsewhere around the world, has never been more poignantly expressed than in these final two paragraphs of the late Douglas Reed. The collusion of Canada’s mainstream media with the Israeli government and the seditious motives of our political leaders have culminated in the insertion of the Trojan Horse of Zionism into Canada’s federal government and until this alien entity is expunged from Canada’s political, cultural and media milieu the fight to retain our rights to freedom of speech and expression will continue to widen and grow in intensity.

The death knell of this satanic, racist, supremacist and Nihilistic initiative on the part of Israel and its Zionist zealots and collaborators within our government to undermine Canada’s democratic principles and heritage must be rung loud and clear by each and every Canadian who values truth and freedom.

This cabal of Zionist cretins is anathema to our political and spiritual survival and, as such, PM Stephen Harper and his Conservative government must be removed from power as soon as possible and whatever government replaces them must not only defeat the Conservatives on the political battle field but, once victorious, formally arrest and try him and his accomplices for treason against Canada. Nothing short of such a radical move will prove efficacious in terms of ridding our nation of the clear and present danger that the state of Israel and the Zionist ideology pose to our God-given rights and freedoms.

Israel’s Terrorist Attack upon Aid Flotilla: Full Text of Turkish President Recep Tayyip ErdoÄŸan’s Speech!

RadLogo&Pic

Dear Radical Reader,

The speech below by Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip ErdoÄŸan stands in bold relief to that of Canada’s Prime Minister Stephen Harper as a speech emanating from the heart and filled with courage and conviction. Rather than prostrating himself before Zion like Canada’s groveling, pathetic, shabez goi Harper the Turkish leader has cut to the chase and pointed a fierce finger of rightful condemnation directly at the miscreant responsible for this latest international crime against humanity. Here is a world leader worth his salt.

In these days of waning political integrity it’s heartening to see at least one person in such a position lash out at this viperous state and demand that it suffer the consequences of its pathological behaviour. Were it not for the fact that the Jew Media shields the West from reading such speeches I’m certain the outcry here in Canada and the USA and elsewhere would be much more vocal than it already is.

Do pass this along to your friends and associates. The truth is finally growing legs and wings and soon it will rise above the diabolical deeds of pseudo-nations such as Israel and bring that much-awaited dream to humanity – peace. You can be a part of it by spreading the word.

Shine your Light for Love, Peace & Justice for All,

Arthur Topham
Publisher/Editor
The Radical Press
Canada’s Radical News Network
“Digging to the root of the issues since 1998″

http://www.radicalpress.com

radical@radicalpress.com
——————————-

Pres.Erdogan

Full Text of Turkish President Recep Tayyip ErdoÄŸan’s Speech!
June 2nd, 2010

Translated and transcribed from Turkish

by Güzin Bilgi for www.palestinethinktank.com

and Gulagnik Translators (www.gulaknik.wordpress.com)

English editing by Mary Rizzo.

Italian translation by Diego Traversa.

(Additional grammatical editing by Arthur Topham/RadicalPress)

Today I do not only want to speak to my dear people but to all of humanity.

I want to call to the conscience and hearts and minds of the whole of humanity, I would like to share courageously my feelings.

Yesterday, in the darkest moment of the night, two bloody attacks occurred.

The first of them was the terrorist attack against our military troops at the Iskenderun Naval Base. In this malicious, vicious attack six of our soldiers died, and have become martyrs. Seven of our soldiers have been injured.

The second, at dawn in the waters of the Mediterranean Sea, the heart of humanity has taken one of her heaviest wounds in history. The aid ships, from the humanitarian heart, these flowing aid ships have been hindered by guns, by violence, and by despotism.

They, who with mercy, compassion and humaneness, loaded aid onto these ships, could not reach their place of destination; they were wreaked in carnage.

Yesterday, beginning in the morning hours, armed elements of the Israeli Army stopped humanitarian aid being brought to the Gazan people. From more than 32 countries, with 600 people inside the Free Gaza Flotilla traveling in international waters, in an absolutely illegal way did they attack, spilling the blood of innocent humans.

During this violent attack, resulting in death, casualties and persons being wounded, the humanitarian aid ships were seized and sequestered. This inhuman attack against those women, young people and religious functionaries that the ship was carrying, I do one more time strongly, severely condemn.

I have declared this in Chile. Here I do stress it one more time. This bloody massacre by Israel, brought against the ships bringing humanitarian aid to Gaza is a massacre deserving of every kind of curse and condemnation. This is openly an attack upon international law, against the heart of humanity, against world peace. I say against the heart of humanity, for, on those ships were people from all nations, all religions. People alone and defenseless who were bringing humanitarian aid to those under blockade, embargo; the people in Gaza.

[Read more...]

New Canadian Law Protects Internet Privacy Rights – Warman vs Fourniers and John Does

FDGOAward2009

Connie & Mark Fournier of FreeDominion.com accepting the Prestigious “George Orwell Award” at the 25th Annual George Orwell Dinner in Victoria, B.C. sponsored by lawyer Douglas Christie and the Canadian Free Speech League, August 2009.
___________________________________________________________________________

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

New Law Protects Internet Privacy Rights – Warman vs Fourniers and John Does

On April 8, 2010, a precedent-setting case regarding internet law was heard in the Ontario Divisional Court.

The case was an Appeal of a lower court motion decision in the case of Warman vs Fourniers and John Does. The ruling being appealed stated that the defendants were to turn over personal information such as IP addresses and email addresses for anonymous posters who were alleged to have defamed the plaintiff. The defendants’ position was that online anonymity should be protected until it is clear that there is a strong case that a “John Doe” has broken the law.

The Divisional Court decision that was released this afternoon changed the rules of disclosure in civil litigation so that plaintiffs must now prove a prima facie case against John Does before site administrators are required to turn over personal information about them. The ruling states, in part:

In addition, because this proceeding engages a freedom of expression interest, as well as a privacy interest, a more robust standard is required to address the chilling effect on freedom of expression that will result from disclosure….

…In the circumstances of a website promoting political discussion, the possibility of a defence of fair comment reinforces the need to establish the elements of defamation on a prima facie basis in order to have due consideration to the interest in freedom of expression.

The text of the decision can be read here: http://www.freedominion.com.pa/images/appeal_ruling.pdf

This case is a huge step forward toward changing the law to accommodate new technology.

————-

FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT:

Connie Fournier
(613) 888-1169
connie@freedominion.ca
http://www.freedominion.com.pa

-30-

From Marc Lemire:

Freedom of Speech for Anonymous Posters upheld. Richard Warman loses appeal and ordered to pay $10k in costs

[44] Returning to the decision of the motions judge, it would appear that he did not have the benefit of the extensive submissions on these issues provided to the Court by the two interveners in this proceeding. Notwithstanding, it is clear that he was alert to the need to take into consideration that privacy interests of the unknown alleged wrongdoers. It does not appear, however, that the need to consider the interest in freedom of expression was raised by the parties or was otherwise considered by the motions judge.

[45] In addition, the motions judge did not take into consideration whether the Respondent had established a prima facie case of defamation before ordering disclosure of the documents sought by the Respondent. In our view, the omission to do so constituted an error of law.

[46] Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the matter is remitted to a different motions judge for re-consideration based on the principles set out above.

Costs

[47] The interveners do not seek costs in respect of this appeal. The appellants [Mark and Connie Fournier] are entitles to costs on a partial indemnity basis payable by the Respondent [Richard Warman] in the amount of $10,000 on an all inclusive basis in respect of the motion, leave to appeal and the hearing of the appeal.

CCLA welcomes Divisional Court decision to protect internet anonymity

http://ccla.org/?p=5338

The Divisional Court released its decision in the case Warman v. Fournier, Fournier and John Does 1-8, which dealt with anonymous internet commentators. The question before the Court was whether a party to a lawsuit should be automatically forced to disclose identifying information about an anonymous commentator simply because a statement of claim had been filed. The Court recognized CCLA’s concerns regarding privacy and freedom of expression, stating that “[if] disclosure were automatic, a plaintiff with no legitimate claim could misuse the Rules of Civil Procedure by commencing an unmeritrous action for the sole purpose of revealing the identity of anonymous internet commentators, with a view to stifling such commentators and deterring others from speaking out on controversial issues.”

CCLA had argued that, while the internet should not be used as a shield to allow individuals to break the law, neither should a simple request to the courts result in the disclosure of identifying information. Highly personal communication occurs online. Indeed, many use online anonymity as a way to explore difficult issues (political, legal, sexual, medical, etc.) that they might not feel free to explore publicly. The internet is a highly accessible democratic forum, with virtually limitless opportunities for discussion and debate. Court orders that force individuals to reveal the identity of those who choose to participate anonymously could chill this rigorous discussion, particularly on sensitive personal topics. Anonymity on the internet should not be compromised simply because a private individual has filed a statement of claim.

In a unanimous ruling, the Court set out four considerations which must be taken into account to determine whether disclosure should be ordered:

1. whether the unknown alleged wrongdoer could have a reasonable expectation of anonymity in the particular circumstances;

2. whether the Respondent has established a prima facie case against the unknown alleged wrongdoer and is acting in good faith;

3. whether the Respondent has taken reasonable steps to identify the anonymous party and has been unable to do so; and

4. whether the public interests favouring disclosure outweigh the legitimate interests of freedom of expression and right to privacy of the persons sought to be identified if the disclosure is ordered.

To read CCLA’s factum click here.

To read the Court’s decision click here.

Court Decision Protects Online Anonymity

http://www.cippic.ca/index.php?mact=News,cntnt01,detail,0&cntnt01articleid=452&cntnt01origid=216&cntnt01dateformat=%25B%20%25e%2C%20%25Y&cntnt01returnid=54

The Ontario Divisional Court released a unanimous decision today that will protect the anonymity of online speakers.  The court held that before the identity of anonymous online users accused of defamation can be revealed, the plaintiff must convince the court there is an adequate basis for ordering such disclosure.  This overturns a lower court’s decision that identities must be disclosed automatically.

Warman v. Fournier
CIPPIC’s Factum

Doug Christie Takes Powerful Free Speech Message to the University of Ottawa

Doug Christie Takes Powerful Free Speech Message to the University of Ottawa

[Paul Fromm of the Canadian Association for Free Expression (CAFE) writes: Just 10 days after a rowdy mob of protesters, egged on by a university administration that admonished the controversial U.S. Ann Coulter against "inappropriate" or hateful speech, won the University of Ottawa, unaffectionately known as the U of Zero, a reputation for censorship, when Ottawa Police advised that the appearance be canceled rather than they preserve law and order and free speech, Canada's foremost free speech lawyer, Doug Christie made a successful appearance before a packed standing room only meeting of 150. The meeting was organized by a number of free speech supporters and partially funded by the Canadian Association for Free Expression. Afterward, the audience listened with rapt attention and engaged the Battling Barrister in a lively discussion.]


       DOUGLAS CHRISTIE – CANADA’S FREEDOM OF SPEECH LAWYER

___________________________________________________________________________

Notes for Doug Christie’s Speech
University of Ottawa, April 8, 2010

I’m here to talk about free speech. I’m not here to practice it.

Unlike Ann Coulter, I don’t need a warning from the provost. I am a Canadian, trained by law in the way of silence, sullen silence, and code language. I have been trained by the Supreme Court not to engage in hate speech, even though no one can define it in advance, so I can avoid it.

There are general taboo topics which I must avoid or tread lightly around, like race, religion, ethnic origin, sex, sexual orientation, mental or physical disability or mental status. Then there are peripheral taboo topics like multiculturalism, immigration, affirmative action programs and a host of other ill-defined topics.

I have been trained to remain very sensitive to the broad political implications of these topics lest I face a very expensive lesson from the Human Rights Tribunal.

What the Supreme Court taught me when I appeared in Taylor and Zundel and Keegstra was that free speech has its limits in “hate” which means “extreme dislike.” So presumably I must like all races, religions, ethnic origins, etc. equally or at least dislike them only moderately. Or at least pretend to, which is more Canadian. I cannot denounce any one as evil.

The Law Society, through its decision of Harvey Strosberg taught me that if I speak in public, “law students” may tape some but not all of my words, and the Chairman of the Discipline Committee can issue a statement to the media condemning me as “identifying with a lunatic fringe,” even in the very act where he decides not to give me the benefit of a hearing where I could answer the allegation with evidence where both sides could be heard.

I learned in McAleer and Malcolm Ross, both of which went to the Supreme Court of Canada, that expressing your religious beliefs on your own time, is no defence and placing the messages in the United States where it is legal, is no defence if you mention where you can get the message to someone in Canada.

I learned that our parliamentarians of all parties love free speech so much that they banned someone from the precincts of Parliament who wanted to rent the parliamentary press gallery, a place anyone can rent for a press conference.

What was the press conference about? That the Human Rights Tribunal had ruled in Zundel’s case that “Truth was no defence,” and the truth of the statement could not be proven by any evidence. I know because that someone was me, the only lawyer in Canadian history to be banned by all party agreement from the precincts of parliament. Because in Canada truth is no defence. Orwell was right about double speak. Randy White a so-called Reform MP said he did not want me in his work place. Orwell was right about a lot of things.

I have learned and been carefully taught to avoid the taboo topics, to measure every word lest a tape recorder in the audience be taken to the Human Rights Commission, the police, the Law Society, or someone likes to complain to the Human Rights Commission.

I have learned to talk about free speech but never practice it. Never say anything like Ann Coulter would say, coming from a free society. And being in a university setting is all the more reason to be very careful about how you choose your words. The left-wing political giants who run most universities are able to let loose the mob with a wink and the students know their success with many professors depends on how successfully they can entrap a political foe.

Universities are the most dangerous place to practice free speech. Even topics like abortion which you would not normally think involve a taboo topic can quickly be spun into forbidden territory and sexism can result in expulsion or criminal charges. The civility of universities is accorded to those who can mobilize the largest screaming mob. No one listens.

I have to even be careful how I speak about Freedom of Speech.

[Read more...]

RadicalPress Publisher Arthur Topham guest on RoadKill Radio Tuesday, April 6, 7:30 pm PST

RadLogo&Pic

RadicalPress Publisher Arthur Topham will be appearing as a guest on RoadKill Radio with host Kari Simpson tonight, April 6, 2010 at 7:30 PST.

RoadKillRadio
Tonight, Tuesday April 6, 2010 on RoadKill Radio!!Kari Simpson & Ron Gray open up the debate onFree Speech vs. Free EEK!
&
Enlightened Sovereignty vs. Endangered Sovereignty
&
Post H1N1

7:30 –8:15 pm:  ARTHUR TOPHAM, publisher of the Radical Press joins us to talk about his ongoing battle to exercise his (and mine and yours) right to Free Speech!  A battle that is costing Canadian tax-payers (us) millions of dollars!

8: 20 – 8:55 pm:  Then, one of our favourite healthcare advocates, DEE NICHOLSON will be here to talk about “post H1N1” and the flood of adverse reports that are still coming in daily on the Canadians for Health Freedom website.  Also, Is our Sovereignty “Enlightened” or “Endangered”?

8:55 – 9:30 pm:        Current happenings that will affect you and your family, including the “Day of Silence”, an event coming soon to a school near you!

Be Wise, Be Aware & Be Informed!!

It all happens tonight at 7:30 p.m.-9:30 p.m. Pacific. Listen live at www.roadkillradio.com or check out the archived show later.

CALL IN: On-air telephone: (604) 525-4167 or (604) 525-3974
WHERE: Listen live - http://www.roadkillradio.com
EMAIL THE SHOW LIVE: Roadkillradio@live.ca

Friends of Freedom: Write your Senator and demand an inquiry on the Erosion of Freedom in Canada.

Friends of Freedom
Write your Senator and demand an inquiry on the Erosion of Freedom in Canada.

Dear Friends of Freedom:

On March 30 2010, Senator Doug Finley rose in the Senate of Canada and publicly asked for an inquiry on the erosion of freedom of speech in Canada.

Freespeechers and Bloggers need to unite and make our views known to all Senators.  Freedom of speech is a fundamental right and we need to express our support for Senator Finley’s request for an inquiry.

Please put aside some time and write a letter to all senators demanding they proceed with calling the inquiry.

Senator Finey stated:

“Honourable senators, I call for this inquiry to accomplish five things: first, to reaffirm that freedom of speech is a great Canadian principle that goes back hundreds of years; second, to put Canada’s censors on notice that their days of infringing upon our freedoms with impunity are over; third, to show moral support for those who are battling censors; fourth, to inquire into the details of what went so desperately wrong at the University of Ottawa to ensure that those awful events never happen again; and, fifth, to inspire a debate that hopefully will lead to a redefinition of section 13.1 of the Human Rights Act.

Honourable senators, there are times for partisan debate when parties must naturally be at odds with one another. This is not one of those times. Freedom of speech and respect for differing views is a foundational principle of our entire parliamentary system — indeed, of our entire legal system, as well.”

The words by Senator Finley are a call to Canadians to get involved.   He went on to say that “If we can rededicate our Parliament to protecting this most important right, we will have done our country a great service, but if we fail to stop and indeed reverse this erosion of freedom, we will have failed our most basic duty, the duty to uphold our constitution and the rights in it, the rights it guarantees for all Canadians.”

Please find attached to this email, a complete list of Canadian Senators who have an email address. A complete list of senators can be found at:  http://parl.gc.ca

————————————————————

Sample letter written by Marc Lemire to all Canadian Senators:

April 3, 2010

To: Senator Doug Finley
The Senate of Canada,
Ottawa, Ontario
Canada
K1A 0A4
Freedom of Speech in Canada

Dear Senator;

I am writing today to express my support for your March 30, 2010 statement in the Senate of Canada on the Erosion of Freedom of Speech in Canada.  I would welcome a Senate inquiry on freedom of speech.

By way of background, I have been battling the fanatical Canadian Human Rights Commission for the past seven years.  Back in 2003 a complaint was filed against my website, the Freedomsite [ http://www.freedomsite.org ] which alleged that my website promoted hatred and/or contempt in violation of Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.  In September 2009, after a 32 day hearing, I was completely exonerated for alleged hate speech, and Section 13 was found to be unconstitutional.  Although the case took 6 years, and in the end I “won”, I was not able to claim a cent of compensation for dragging me though the system.

As a result of my 6 year persecution, I have amassed the largest collection of critical material on the CHRC and their systemic corruption.  These documents show the abuse, totalitarianism and corruption of the CHRC.  If an inquiry is called, I would like to present some of this shocking information to the Senate.

The information which I have uncovered includes:

• CHRC theft of internet communications
• CHRC staff signing onto questionable websites and entrapping people
• CHRC staff’s contempt for freedom of speech, including their testimony that “Freedom of speech is an American concept”
• 99% conviction rate before the Tribunal
• The corrupt investigations of the CHRC, which includes dismissing a complaint because it was a “double-sided” fax
• CHRC exchanging information with Police and others, thus usurping safeguards in criminal law
• CHRC contravening the Canada Post Act, by setting up mail drops in Ottawa, to send out hate posters to receive mail under false names
• CHRC editing court transcripts to remove explosive testimony about the CHRC #1 complainer,  then distributing copies of the doctored transcripts to members of the media
• Decision from the Office of the Privacy Commission, chastising the CHRC for refusing to release information

HRCommissionCartoon

The CHRC: an Affront to all Canadians

Canadians are sick and tired of the totalitarianism of the Canadian Human Rights Commission and their obsession to restrict freedom of speech on the Internet. Editorials from every major newspaper across Canada have demanded that Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act needs to be scrapped.  The Canadian “Human Rights” Commission (CHRC) has become the single largest threat to freedom of expression, religion and personal beliefs in Canada’s History.

Sections 13 and 54 of the Canadian Human Rights Act are a direct attack on the freedom of expression guaranteed to us under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The provisions of these sections allow the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal to prosecute anyone alleged to have said or written something “likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt” whether there is a living, breathing victim or not.

Vague concepts such as speech or writing “liable to cause hatred or contempt” are the basis of expensive state-funded prosecution of individuals. The statute provides no objective legal test for “hate” or any objective means of determining what constitutes “contempt”. As a result, the CHRC is used by various groups and individuals, as a risk-free taxpayer funded method to silence their critics and those they disagree with. CHRC investigators have testified that that “freedom of speech is an American concept” and therefore not valid in Canada. Such statements are contrary to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but are standard operating procedure at the CHRC.

Commissioners of the Canadians Human Rights Tribunal, who are not judges and are often not even lawyers, have held that “truth” is not a defence against prosecution under Section 13.  Intent or fair comment are also not defenses.  In fact, there is not a single listed defence under Section 13! Because of the lack of any defenses, the Tribunal has a 99% conviction rate since 1978. The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal routinely ignores the principles of fundamental justice, such as the rules of evidence, and these kangaroo courts, even allow hearsay evidence.  The CHRA provides for each Tribunal to make up the rules as they go.

Every journalist, writer, Internet webmaster, publisher and private citizen in Canada can be the subject of a Human Rights complaint for expressing an opinion or telling the truth. Given the ambiguity of Section 13, it is virtually impossible for any individual to determine if they might be in violation of Section 13. Arbitrary censorship and punishment are wrong, and cannot be justified in a free society.

Photobucket
“Human Rights Commissions, as they are evolving, are an attack on our fundamental freedoms and the basic existence of a democratic society…It is in fact totalitarianism. I find this is very scary stuff.”

(Stephen Harper BC Report Newsmagazine, January 11, 1999)

HRCartoon

Hallmarks of Suppression

1: The Canadian Human Rights Commission and Tribunal are not fair, and make arbitrary decisions based on who an accused is rather than on a fair and impartial application of the statute they enforce. High profile accused, such as Macleans, Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant are given a free pass, while others, less prominent and lacking the resources to hire legal council are relentlessly prosecuted. This creates a chill on the freedom of expression since there is no discernible “line” between speech that is prohibited and speech that is “acceptable” to the CHRC.

2: The CHRC pays no heed to constitutionally protected rights such as Freedom of Expression. In place they use imaginary “rights” such as the “right to be free from contempt”. There is no such right in our Charter. Both the CHRC and the Attorney General’s office considered freedom of speech to be an American concept that does not apply to Canadians. The CHRC only believes in “group” rights, and not the rights of individuals to “speak truth to power”, hence the 99% conviction rate.

3: The CHRC is out of control and is currently under three investigations. CHRC investigators are under criminal investigation by the RCMP for the criminal theft of telecommunications services; the Privacy Commissioner is investigating complaints of CHRC breaches of personal privacy; and CHRC investigation techniques are under review by the Parliamentary Justice Committee. In the meantime, the CHRC continues to apply the law in an arbitrary and capricious manner.

4: The CHRC engages in clandestine spying on Canadians including using aliases to engage others in conversation and writing questionable material while asking for support for views of the alias for use in a subsequent prosecution.

5: The entire process is paid for by taxpayers on behalf of the complainants. The defendants must pay their costs personally. There is no legal aid and there is no way to claim costs, even if the defendants are found innocent.

Over the past few years, the CHRC has tried to bump itself up into a quasi National Security type agency.  Shamelessly, this politically motivated outfit operates in almost complete secrecy, with no rules, no public oversight and continually deflects Access to Information requests over their activities with absurd claims of “security”.

The CHRC has employed some very shady and possibly illegal tactics including;

• Hijacking a private citizens Wireless Internet connection to connect to neo-Nazi websites and print of material and post messages
• infiltration and spying operations on Canadians
• the use of private police databases such as CPIC, (which holds records of millions of Canadians, including data such as dental records, known aliases, addresses, last contact with police, etc)
• infiltration of internet message boards

• telephone record searches

• motor vehicle record searches

• search warrants

• and even tenancy agreements for rental properties.

Because the CHRC is exempt from parliamentary oversight and doesn’t report to a minister, in enjoys carte blanche to do exactly as it pleases.  Inside the CHRC, there are no guidelines on how they need to investigate complaints.  Nor are there any rules on what CHRC employees can do in the course of investigations.  This includes even the totally unacceptable practice of trying to entrap respondents dragged before the CHRC.

Furthermore, to Canada’s great shame, in any Human Rights Commission case, truth is no defence!  It’s a slap in the face of 200 centuries of jurisprudence as intent, malice, effect, fair comment – none of these factors are taken into account by CHRC Tribunals. In fact, if you argue the truth of your statements, it is then used as proof of your guilt, and a rational to increase the amount of fines! Under the legislation there are no defences available. Is it any wonder that from 1977 to 2009 not a single person in over 32 years has ever won?

Tribunals and political inquisitions have no place in Canada. Recently, David Warren writing in the Ottawa Citizen called the Tribunal a “Kangaroo court” and “Star Chamber”. Others have compared them to the Communists, the Nazis, and the medieval Inquisition.  We need to stop the censorship enforcers and let freedom of speech reign. It’s time to abolish the Canadian Human Rights Commission and pack off this shameful censorship outfit to the “embarrassing lapses” dustbin of history.

I hope to hear from you on this pressing issue.

__________________________
Marc Lemire

Email:  marc@lemire.com

Members of Parliament who have openly stated their support for a repeal of Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act:

Liberal MP Keith Martin
Liberal MP Dan McTeague
Conservative MP Brad Trost
Conservative MP Rob Anders
Conservative MP Brent Rathgeber
Conservative MP John Baird
Conservative MP James Rajotte
Conservative MP Bruce Stanton
Conservative MP Lee Richardson
Conservative MP Russ Hiebert
Conservative MP Kevin Sorenson
Conservative MP Helena Guergis
Conservative MP Nina Grewal
Conservative MP Pierre Poilievre
Conservative MP Rick Dykstra
Conservative MP John Williams
Conservative MP Rick Casson
Justice Minister Rob Nicholson

Canadian Senators support Freedom of Speech and slam “Human Rights” Censorship

Canadian Senators support Freedom of Speech and slam “Human Rights” Censorship

SenatorFinley

Canadian Senator Doug Finley slams “Human Rights” Commissars
_______________________________________________________________

Canadian Senators support Freedom of Speech and slam “Human Rights” Censorship

“…our own Canadian Human Rights Commission has egregiously violated freedom of speech without any shame. In a censorship trial in 2007, a CHRC investigator named Dean Stacey testified that, “Freedom of speech is an American concept, so I don’t give it any value.” He actually said that. The Canadian Human Rights Commission actually admits they do not give free speech any value. That is totally unacceptable.”

Senator Finley – Senate of Canada – March 30, 2010

———————————————————–

SenateDebatejpg

Debates of the Senate (Hansard)

3rd Session, 40th Parliament,
Volume 147, Issue 13

Tuesday, March 30, 2010

http://parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/chambus/senate/deb-E/013db_2010-03-30-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3#52

Erosion of Freedom of Speech

Inquiry—Debate Adjourned

Hon. Doug Finley rose pursuant to notice of March 25, 2010:

That he will call the attention of the Senate to the issue of the erosion of Freedom of Speech in our country.

He said: Honourable senators, I rise to call the attention of the Senate to the erosion of freedom of speech in Canada.

There can scarcely be a more important issue than this one. Freedom of speech is, and always has been, the bedrock of our Canadian democracy. The great Alan Borovoy, who was the head of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association for more than 40 years, calls freedom of speech a “strategic freedom” because it is a freedom upon which all other freedoms are built. For example, how could we exercise our democratic right to hold elections without free speech? How could we have a fair trial without free speech? What is the point of freedom of assembly if we cannot talk freely at such a public meeting?

Freedom of speech is a most important freedom. Indeed, if we had all our other rights taken away we could still win them back with freedom of speech.

Benjamin Franklin once said: “Without Freedom of thought, there can be no such Thing as Wisdom; and no such thing as public Liberty, without Freedom of speech.”

Freedom of speech is embedded in Parliament’s DNA. The word “Parliament” itself comes from the French word “parler,” to speak. As parliamentarians we guard our freedom jealously. No member of the House of Commons or the Senate may be sued for anything that is said in Parliament. Our freedom of speech is absolute.

Yet, only last week, a few miles from here, censorship reared its ugly head. Ann Coulter, an American political commentator, had been invited to speak at the University of Ottawa. Before she even said a word, she was served with a letter from François Houle, the university’s vice-president, containing a thinly veiled threat that she could face criminal charges if she proceeded with her speech.

On the night of her speech, an unruly mob of nearly 1,000 people, some of whom had publicly mused about assaulting her, succeeded in shutting down her lecture after overwhelmed police said they could not guarantee her safety.

Honourable senators, it was the most un-Canadian display that I personally have seen in years. It was so shocking that hundreds of foreign news media covered the fiasco, from the BBC to The New York Times to CNN. It was an embarrassing moment for Canada because it besmirched our reputation as a bastion of human rights — a reputation hard won in places like Vimy Ridge, Juno Beach and Kandahar.

More important than international embarrassment is the truth those ugly news stories revealed. Too many Canadians, especially those in positions of authority, have replaced the real human right of freedom of speech with a counterfeit human right not to be offended.

An angry mob is bad enough. That may be written off as misguided youth, overcome by enthusiasm. However, such excuses are not available to a university vice-president who obviously wrote his warning letter to Ms. Coulter after careful thought.

Ann Coulter is controversial, she is not to everyone’s taste, but that is irrelevant because freedom of speech means nothing if it applies only to people with whom we agree. To quote George Orwell: “Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”

In a pluralistic society like Canada, we must protect our right to peacefully disagree with each other. We must allow a diversity of opinion, even if we find some opinions offensive. Unless someone counsels violence or other crimes, we must never use the law to silence them.

Freedom of speech is as Canadian as maple syrup, hockey and the northern lights. It is part of our national identity, our history and our culture. It is section 2 of our 1982 Charter of Rights and Freedoms, listed as one of our “fundamental freedoms;” and it is in the first section of Canada’s 1960 Bill of Rights.

Honourable senators, our Canadian tradition of liberty goes much further back than that. In 1835, a 30-year-old newspaper publisher in Nova Scotia was charged with seditious libel for exposing corruption amongst Halifax politicians. The judge instructed the jury to convict him. At that time, truth was not a defence. The publisher passionately called on the jury to “leave an unshackled press as a legacy to your children.” After only 10 minutes of deliberations, the jury acquitted him. That young man, of course, was Joseph Howe, who would go on to become the premier of Nova Scotia.

Our Canadian tradition of free speech is even older than that. It is part of our inheritance from Great Britain and France.

[Translation]

Quebecers are heir to article 11 of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, 1789. This article states:

The free communication of thought and opinion is one of the most invaluable rights of the man; any citizen can thus speak, write, [and] print freely. . .

France has produced some of the most well-known defenders of free speech in the world.

(1650)

François-Marie Arouet, better known by his pen name, Voltaire, was a polemicist who used satire and criticism to press for political and religious reforms. He paid a personal price, facing censorship and legal threats.

[English]

Voltaire put it best when he famously wrote, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” His passionate advocacy helped shape liberty on both sides of the Atlantic.

English Canada has an impressive legacy of free speech, too. Like Voltaire, John Milton, the great poet who wrote Paradise Lost, was constantly hounded for his political views. His 1644 pamphlet on free speech, Areopagitica, perhaps the greatest defence of free speech ever written, is as relevant today as it was 350 years ago. In it, Milton wrote, “Let Truth and Falsehood grapple; who ever knew Truth put to the worst, in a free and open encounter?” and, “He who kills a man kills a reasonable creature, but he who destroys a good book kills reason itself . . .”

Yet, despite our 400-year tradition of free speech, the tyrannical instinct to censor still exists. We saw it on a university campus last week, and we see it every week in Canada’s misleadingly named human rights commissions.

This week in Vancouver, a stand up comedian named Guy Earl has been on trial before the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal for the crime of telling jokes that someone did not find funny. An audience member who heckled him is suing him for $20,000 because she found his retorts offensive. They may have been offensive, but what is more offensive is that a government agency would be the arbiter of good taste or humour. Nobel Prize winner Alexander Solzhenitsyn was sentenced to eight years of hard labour for telling a joke about Stalin’s moustache. It is a disgrace that Canada is now putting comedians on trial.

There is not a lot that the Senate can do about the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal, but our own Canadian Human Rights Commission has egregiously violated freedom of speech without any shame. In a censorship trial in 2007, a CHRC investigator named Dean Stacey testified that, “Freedom of speech is an American concept, so I don’t give it any value.” He actually said that. The Canadian Human Rights Commission actually admits they do not give free speech any value. That is totally unacceptable.

Freedom of speech is the great non-partisan principle that every Member of Parliament can agree on — that every Canadian can agree on. I will never tire of quoting the great Liberal Prime Minister Wilfred Laurier when he said that Canada is free and its freedom is its nationality. I will readily give credit to Keith Martin, the Liberal MP from British Columbia, who two years ago introduced a private member’s motion to repeal the censorship provisions of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

Honourable senators, I call for this inquiry to accomplish five things: first, to reaffirm that freedom of speech is a great Canadian principle that goes back hundreds of years; second, to put Canada’s censors on notice that their days of infringing upon our freedoms with impunity are over; third, to show moral support for those who are battling censors; fourth, to inquire into the details of what went so desperately wrong at the University of Ottawa to ensure that those awful events never happen again; and, fifth, to inspire a debate that hopefully will lead to a redefinition of section 13.1 of the [Canadian] Human Rights Act.

Honourable senators, there are times for partisan debate when parties must naturally be at odds with one another. This is not one of those times. Freedom of speech and respect for differing views is a foundational principle of our entire parliamentary system — indeed, of our entire legal system, as well.

I look forward to the constructive comments of my friends and colleagues on both sides of the aisle to build on the bipartisan history that Canadian free speech enjoys. If we can rededicate our Parliament to protecting this most important right, we will have done our country a great service, but if we fail to stop and indeed reverse this erosion of freedom, we will have failed our most basic duty, the duty to uphold our constitution and the rights in it, the rights it guarantees for all Canadians.

I know that, like so many generations of Canadians before us, we will meet the challenges of our time and live up to our responsibility to pass on to our children the same freedoms that we inherited from our parents. God keep our land glorious and free.

———–

1001 Quotes By and About Jews – Part One (1 to 100)


http://www.stormfront.org/posterity/13texan/1001ndx.htm

1001 Quotes By and About Jews

Compiled By: Willie Martin

001

VOLTAIRE (Francois Marie Arouet) 18th century French philosopher, writer:

“Why are the Jews hated? It is the inevitable result of their laws; they either have to conquer everybody or be hated by the whole human race…”

“The Jewish nation dares to display an irreconcilable hatred toward all nations, and revolts against all masters; always superstitious, always greedy for the well-being enjoyed by others, always barbarous – cringing in misfortune and insolent in prosperity.” (Essai sur le Moeurs)

“You seem to me to be the maddest of the lot. The Kaffirs, the Hottentots, and the Negroes of Guinea are much more reasonable and more honest people than your ancestors, the Jews. You have surpassed all nations in impertinent fables in bad conduct and in barbarism. You deserve to be punished, for this is your destiny.” (From a letter to a Jew who had written to him, complaining of his ‘anti-Semitism.’ Examen des Quelques Objections…dans L’Essai sur le Moeurs.)

002

“You will only find in the Jews an ignorant and barbarous people, who for a long time have joined the most sordid avarice to the most detestable superstition and to the most invincible hatred of all peoples which tolerate and enrich them.” (“Juif,” Dictionnaire Philosophique)

003

“I know that there are some Jews in the English colonies. These marranos go wherever there is money to be made…But whether these circumcised who sell old clothes claim that they are of the tribe of Naphtali or Issachar is not of the slightest importance. They are, simply, the biggest scoundrels who have ever dirtied the face of the earth.” (Letter to Jean-Baptiste Nicolas de Lisle de Sales, December 15, 1773. Correspondance. 86:166)

004

“They are, all of them, born with raging fanaticism in their hearts, just as the Bretons and the Germans are born with blond hair. I would not be in the least bit surprised if these people would not some day become deadly to the human race.” (Lettres de Memmius a Ciceron, 1771)

005

CANNOT, E. 19th century French reformer. In La Renovation,journal of the socialist school of CHARLES FOURIER: “Jews! To the heights of your Sinai…I humbly lift myself. I stand erect and cry out to you, in behalf of all my humble equals, of all those whom your spoliation has brought to grief, who died in misery through you and whose trembling shades accuse you:  Jews! for Cain and Iscariot, leave us, leave us! Ah, cross the Red Sea again, and go down there to the desert, to the promised land which is waiting for you, the only country fit for you; o you wicked, rude and dishonest people, go there!!! (“Israel”)

006

“I participated with Herzl in the first Zionist Congress which was held in Basle in 1897. Herzl was the most prominent figure at that first Jewish World Congress. He worked to achieve an object which had been fixed beforehand. Just as Isaiah foresaw, decades before the event occurred, the victorious power of Cyrus before anyone else, so did Herzl foresee twenty years, before we experienced them, the revolutions brought about by the Great War, and he prepared us for that which was going to happen. He foresaw the splitting up of Turkey, and he foresaw that England would obtain control over Palestine. ‘We may expect important developments in the world.’ These were the words spoken by Herzl twenty years before the Great War. He added that the events would offer the Jewish people fresh opportunities.” (The Judisk Tidskrift, No. 6, Aug.-Sept., 1929, written by Dr. Ehrenpreis, Chief Rabbi of Sweden).

007

“Hitler will have no war, but he will be forced into it, not this year but later…” (The Jewish Emil Ludwig, Les Annales, June, 1934)

008

“Whenever an American or a Filipino fell at Bataan or Corregidor or at any other of the now historic spots where MacArthur’s men put up their remarkable fight, their survivors could have said with truth: ‘The real reason that boy went to his death, was because Hitler’s anti-Semitic movement succeeded in Germany.’” (The American Hebrew, July 24, 1942).

009

“Kill the Germans, wherever you find them! Every German is our moral enemy. Have no mercy on women, children, or the aged! Kill every German — wipe them out!” (Llya Ehrenburg, Glaser, p. 111).

010

“The millions of Jews who live in America, England and France, North and South Africa, and, not to forget those in Palestine, are determined to bring the war of annihilation against Germany to its final end.” (The Jewish newspaper, Central Blad Voor Israeliten in Nederland, September 13, 1939)

011

“Germany is the enemy of Judaism and must be pursued with deadly hatred. The goal of Judaism of today is: a merciless campaign against all German peoples and the complete destruction of the nation. We demand a complete blockade of trade, the importation of raw materials stopped, and retaliation towards every German, woman and child.” (Jewish professor A. Kulischer, October, 1937)

012

“Step by step, I have arrived at the conviction that the aims of Communism in Europe are sinister and fatal. At the Nuremberg Trials, I, together with my Russian colleague, condemned Nazi Aggression and Terror. I believe now that Hitler and the German People did not want war. But we, {England}, declared war on Germany, intent on destroying it, in accordance with our principle of Balance of Power, and we were encouraged by the ‘Americans’{Jews} around Roosevelt. We ignored Hitler’s pleading, not to enter into war. Now we are forced to realize that Hitler was right. He offered us the co-operation of Germany: instead, since 1945, we have been facing the immense power of the Soviet Empire. I feel ashamed and humiliated to see that the aims we accused Hitler of, are being relentless pursued now, only under a different label.” (Ashamed and Humiliated The British Attorney General, Sir Hartle Shawcross, said in a speech at Stourbridge, March 16/84 (AP)).

013

“Our fight against Germany must be carried to the limit of what is possible. Israel has been attacked. Let us, therefore, defend Israel! Against the awakened Germany, we put an awakened Israel. And the world will defend us.” (Jewish author Pierre Creange in his book Epitres aux Juifs, 1938)

014

“Judea declares War on Germany.” (Daily Express, March 24, 1934)

015

“Germany must be turned into a waste land, as happened there during the 30-year War.” (Das Morgenthau-Tagebuch, The Morgenthau Dairy, p. 11).

016

“The fight against Germany has now been waged for months by every Jewish community, on every conference, in all labor unions and by every single Jew in the world. There are reasons for the assumption that our share in this fight is of general importance. We shall start a spiritual and material war of the whole world against Germany. Germany is striving to become once again a great nation, and to recover her lost territories as well as her colonies. But our Jewish interests call for the complete destruction of Germany…” (Valadimir Jabotinsky, in Mascha Rjetsch, January, 1934)

[Read more...]

AND THERE THE JEWS! from A PROPHET AT HOME, Chapter 5 by Douglas Reed. 1941


Famous English war painting ‘Merry-go-round’ by Mark Gertler painted after the Somme, 1916

___________________________________________________________________________


AND THERE THE JEWS!
from A PROPHET AT HOME, Chapter 5
by Douglas Reed. 1941

Editor’s Preface: It was my intention to have this chapter from Douglas Reed’s 1941 book, A Prophet At Home typed up and published online for November 11th to coincide with Remembrance Day. It didn’t happen but readers will still benefit from what the author has to say about conditions in Britain in 1939-40 as they relate to those of today in Canada and the USA as well as elsewhere in Europe, etc.

Reed returned to England in 1939 from the Continent after spending a number of years in Berlin, Vienna and Prague working as Chief correspondent for the London Times. In that capacity he was privy to a panoramic view of the political landscape in Germany, Austria and Czechoslovakia leading up to the resumption of the World War in 1939.

This particular chapter from his final book of a three-part series that began in 1938 with Insanity Fair followed in ’39 by Disgrace Abounding is extremely relevant to our own times and bears close reading. Seventy years have passed yet the information contained in this chapter appears to be in a time-warp as if the conditions which precipitated it somehow were frozen in time. As such it now stands as a striking historical record, clearly illustrating the degree of power and influence which the Zionist Jews of his day wielded over the British parliament and the British press.

Concomitant with this fact and more important in terms of today is the evidence which Reed provides that shows how the Jews of the 1930s were already consummate masters of the immigration game.

It has been a contention of mine for a number of years that the Zionist Jews who control Canada’s PM, House of Parliament and Judiciary are using their illegitimate influence over government to manipulate and control immigration policies; ones which have been having a detrimental effect upon Canadian society for decades and which also dovetail fully with the Zionist agenda of destroying all nation states in the world in order to facilitate the implementation of their Zionist one world government.

Immigration, like the control of the media, banking, pharmaceutical conglomerates, major corporations including oil and gas and water and cultural and educational institutions, is a vital part of the program to destroy the democratic framework upon which sovereign nations are built and the Zionist Jews have been working this tool here in Canada and elsewhere with deftness and surgical precision for many, many decades. This thesis that immigration policies are being exploited for partisan Zionist purposes should become obvious to any reader who takes the time to study what Reed has to say about the invasion of England by the Jews of Eastern Europe, or as the Jewish media of the day was wont to call them, ‘friendly aliens’; an endearing term to describe the hundreds of thousands of Jewish refugees who flooded into Great Britain during the years leading up to the second act of the World War to take advantage of the precarious political conditions then existing in the British Isles.

There is much more though in this chapter that helps to explain some of the current behaviour on the part of today’s extremist Zionist Jews who are going to great lengths to deflect the growing criticism of their doctrine of supremacist discrimination and racism that is now becoming almost rampant on the one venue for free information still not entirely controlled by their excessive and pervasive power – the Internet.

Reed explains how the Jews of his day used their “anti-Semitism” card to full effect whenever anyone challenged the government’s and the media’s blatant discrimination aimed at the English and the Arabs while all the while consistently favouring the ‘friendly alien’.

Given the fact that today, seven decades later, Canadians in the majority still haven’t grasped the fact that their “mainstream” media and their government are absolutely controlled and manipulated to suit this extremist Zionist Jew agenda, Reed’s prophetic warning of 1941 stands forth in even greater relief as a hallmark to be heeded by anyone concerned with knowing the truth about who is really pulling the strings of our Members of Parliament in Ottawa.

The parallels between Reed’s description of the behaviour of the Members of the British Parliament respecting the ‘friendly aliens’ during a period of critical danger to the nation as a whole and that of our own parliament today is as uncanny as it is frightening to contemplate. It begs the question as to whether the term “change” is in fact a reality or merely a ruse to soothe the ignorant citizenry who still are brainwashed by the Zionist Jew tube.

Read Reed and you will discover why censorship and draconian legislation like sec. 13 today are of such paramount importance to the Zionist Jews and why the extremist Zionist Jew must continually re-create this false illusion now being coined as the “new anti-Semitism” by such Zionist Jew zealots as our former federal Liberal Attorney-General Mr. Irwin Cotler and being flogged upon an unsuspecting public by the likes of B’nai Brith Canada and the Canadian Jewish Congress and even committees formed from our Members of Parliament.

Anyone wishing to access what remains of Reed’s works is encouraged to go to http://www.abebooks.com where you will still find a few of his works available. His most highly recommended work of course is the 1956 edition of The Controversy of Zion which readers will find online at RadicalPress.com.
—————-


AND THERE THE JEWS!
from A PROPHET AT HOME, Chapter 5
by Douglas Reed. 1941


DOUGLAS REED

A provoking thought: if Rupert Brooke, whose poetry, as Lord Halifax said in his ‘This is a conflict of youth against youth’ speech, so inspired the generation of 1914, if this Rupert Brooke had not died, with about a million other Britishers, in the 1914-1918 section of the war which has now been resumed, he would have needed to revise the poem he wrote in the Cafe des Westens, in the Kurfurstendamm in Berlin, in 1912. He wrote that poem sitting at the same table with a friend of mine, Rothay Reynolds, who in the years between the two sections of the World War struggled hard to fulfill the difficult task of being Berlin Correspondent of Lord Rothermere’s Daily Mail, and when Rupert Brooke had finished he turned to Rothay Reynolds and said, ‘I have made this cafe famous’, which was true.

I well remember how that song of England wrung an Englishman’s heart, that is, the heart of a very young and fervent Englishman, who took on trust nearly everything he was told about his native country, of which he had seen but little, in the 1914-1918 war. But if Rupert Brooke had lived in 1939, or thereabouts, he would have found himself out of touch with the taste of the times. For his poem, ‘Grantchester,’ begins:

Du lieber Gott!
Here am I, sweating, sick and hot,
And there the shadowed waters fresh
Lean up to embrace the naked flesh.
Temperamentvoll German jews
Drink beer around – and there the dews…

Well, well, well. How times have changed. Rupert Brooke is dead; the war-to-end-war has gone and the war-to-continue-war is simmering nicely; but the relative position of Jews and dews seems to have been reversed, or have we now both? Rupert Brooke, the singer of the generation of 1914, seemed to find the Jews in Berlin a thought unsympathetic and none took it amiss of him that he said so; indeed, the thought of those temperamental beer-drinking Jews in Berlin helped to fortify the faith of the young Englishman of 1914 in ‘the things he was fighting for’. Now we, he thought, have dews, and we are going to keep them.

But if Rupert Brooke had written twenty-five years later he would have known that those two lines must come out, or else he would have had to find a fresh rhyme for dews, for by the time the World War in which he died was resumed no Englishman of his class and kind would have thought of writing anything which would set the critics yelping the dread name ‘anti-Semite’.


             RUPERT BROOKE – BRITISH POET

By the time the World War was resumed, indeed, the general understanding had come to be that the Jews of Berlin were the most valuable citizens of that town and that we were very lucky indeed to have them, because they were so much cleverer than ourselves. By some further process of reasoning which was a little outside my comprehension, the general understanding seemed also to be that we should fight Germany to enable these people, whom we had been fortunate enough to obtain, to return there as soon as possible; this, as far as I could gather, was among ‘the things’ we were about to fight for.

When I returned to England, on the eve of the new war which had become almost inevitable, I brought back with me a particular interest in this question, because for many years, since 1933, I had noticed, with growing misgiving, that, chiefly through the very great influence which the Jews in all countries exercised in the interest of their co-religionists, this relatively small aspect of an enormous problem was being set out of all proportion to the whole, that the entire wood was disappearing behind one tree.

[Read more...]

Lisbon And The Zionist Nightmare

Lisbon And The Zionist Nightmare

By Mike James in Germany – 8 November 2009

You make me laugh. You make me cry. You are fighters. You are natural-born rebels. You are my people.

You are, by virtue of your Anglo-Saxon, Celtic, Frankish, Teutonic, Alpine, Old Mediterranean and Scandinavian ancestry, one whole bunch of contentious, argumentative, reactionary, swing-a-fist after one too many beers, sons of proverbial bitches.

You are the scum of the earth. You are an utter disgrace.

You are largely ignorant, dumbed-down, manipulated, deceived, naive, easily duped by The International Tribe and their grotesque quasi-religious fables and their International Money System.

But you are heroes. And I love you.

Upon the burden sufficient to the strength of your shoulders, all things depend.

[Read more...]

ADL CAMPAIGNS TO TRAIN HATE PROSECUTORS By Rev. Ted Pike


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

By Rev. Ted Pike

October 11, 2009

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Email these two messages to the President immediately:

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

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

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

Your emails should be there first thing Monday morning.

Endnote:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Read more...]

CHRC Files a Judicial Review Application in the Warman v. Lemire case

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

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

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

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

God grant them courage to continue on!]

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

What’s New

01/10/2009

Judicial Review Application in the Warman v. Lemire case

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

————

The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today by Elizabeth Dilling Ch. XIII: MODERN JEWISH “ANTI-COMMUNISM”

The famous Bird-head Haggadah, produced in the Upper Rhine about 1300 A.D.
__________________________________________________________________________

[Editor’s Note: Elizabeth Dilling, all things considered, was a prophetess in her own time. Her various works, which include her exposure of the Zionist Jewish infiltration of the United States of America and her analysis of Bolshevism, Communism and Zionism as one Beast with numerous names, are a testament to her courage and her foresight in revealing the truth during a period of American history when to speak out was to risk the inevitable attacks by the Jewish establishment. Groups like the American Jewish Congress and B’nai Brith International and their attack-dog the Anti-Defamation League, were always ready and willing to vilify anyone who dared to speak out about their plans to implement their one world government and Elizabeth Dilling was forced to deal with their Talmudic tactics from the moment she picked up the sword of truth.

Each chapter of her book is preceded by the Forward and an Introduction. Readers who go beyond Chapter One will find it convenient to just scroll down the page until the start of the new chapter.]

—————

Foreword

Elizabeth Dilling Stokes was born, raised, and educated in Chicago. After attending the University of Chicago she married, and for many years devoted her life to her children, social activities on the North Shore of Chicago, and being a concert harpist. After hearing of the great “humanitarian experiment” in Soviet Russia, she traveled there in 1931, and was able to go behind the scenes. She was shocked at the forced labor, the squalid living quarters, and deplorable living conditions, and the atmosphere of fear created by the Soviet dictatorship.

She was most shocked by the virulent anti-Christianity of the atheist Communist regime.

Following her return to the United States she lectured and wrote about what she had seen, realizing from the opposition which immediately arose that a substantial Marxist movement was active in the United States.  In 1934 her first book The Red Network was published, an expose of the persons and organizations furthering Red causes in the United States. In 1936, her second book, The Roosevelt Red Record and Its Background, was published. Almost immediately after these books were published, she was attacked as “anti-semitic,” although she had actually offered her anti-Communist services to Jewish organizations, and knew nothing of organized Jewish involvement in the Marxist movement.  After researching and studying, however, in 1940 she published her third book The Octopus, which dealt with these subjects.

After World War II commenced, Mrs. Dilling became convinced that, despite President Roosevelt’s protestations that not one American boy would ever again fight on foreign soil, there was a movement afoot to involve the United States, with the result that a substantial part of the world would be communized later.

In 1941, she led a Mother’s March on Washington to oppose the “Lend Lease” bill, proclaimed to help keep us out of war by its sponsors, but proving the last step for our involvement.  The bill passed by only one vote.  A few months later, the United States went to war.

In 1944, Mrs. Dilling’s views involved her in the now infamous mass “sedition” trial.  The case was ultimately dismissed  by a Federal Court as “a travesty on justice.”

She was later remarried to Jeremiah Stokes, a Christian anti-Communist writer, and she continued to write and lecture in behalf of Christianity and Constitutional Americanism, first publishing this book in 1964.
[Read more...]

The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today by Elizabeth Dilling X: JEWS GOD’S “CHOSEN”?


[Editor’s Note: Elizabeth Dilling, all things considered, was a prophetess in her own time. Her various works, which include her exposure of the Zionist Jewish infiltration of the United States of America and her analysis of Bolshevism, Communism and Zionism as one Beast with numerous names, are a testament to her courage and her foresight in revealing the truth during a period of American history when to speak out was to risk the inevitable attacks by the Jewish establishment. Groups like the American Jewish Congress and B’nai Brith International and their attack-dog the Anti-Defamation League, were always ready and willing to vilify anyone who dared to speak out about their plans to implement their one world government and Elizabeth Dilling was forced to deal with their Talmudic tactics from the moment she picked up the sword of truth.

Each chapter of her book is preceded by the Forward and an Introduction. Readers who go beyond Chapter One will find it convenient to just scroll down the page until the start of the new chapter.]

—————

Foreword

Elizabeth Dilling Stokes was born, raised, and educated in Chicago. After attending the University of Chicago she married, and for many years devoted her life to her children, social activities on the North Shore of Chicago, and being a concert harpist. After hearing of the great “humanitarian experiment” in Soviet Russia, she traveled there in 1931, and was able to go behind the scenes. She was shocked at the forced labor, the squalid living quarters, and deplorable living conditions, and the atmosphere of fear created by the Soviet dictatorship.

She was most shocked by the virulent anti-Christianity of the atheist Communist regime.

Following her return to the United States she lectured and wrote about what she had seen, realizing from the opposition which immediately arose that a substantial Marxist movement was active in the United States.  In 1934 her first book The Red Network was published, an expose of the persons and organizations furthering Red causes in the United States.   In 1936, her second book, The Roosevelt Red Record and Its Background, was published.

Almost immediately after these books were published, she was attacked as “anti-semitic,” although she had actually offered her anti-Communist services to Jewish organizations, and knew nothing of organized Jewish involvement in the Marxist movement.  After researching and studying, however, in 1940 she published her third book The Octopus, which dealt with these subjects.

After World War II commenced, Mrs. Dilling became convinced that, despite President Roosevelt’s protestations that not one American boy would ever again fight on foreign soil, there was a movement afoot to involve the United States, with the result that a substantial part of the world would be communized later.

In 1941, she led a Mother’s March on Washington to oppose the “Lend Lease” bill, proclaimed to help keep us out of war by its sponsors, but proving the last step for our involvement.  The bill passed by only one vote.  A few months later, the United States went to war.

In 1944, Mrs. Dilling’s views involved her in the now infamous mass “sedition” trial.  The case was ultimately dismissed  by a Federal Court as “a travesty on justice.”

She was later remarried to Jeremiah Stokes, a Christian anti-Communist writer, and she continued to write and lecture in behalf of Christianity and Constitutional Americanism, first publishing this book in 1964.
[Read more...]

The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today by Elizabeth Dilling Ch. VIII: DEMONOLOGY OF THE PHARISEES


[Editor’s Note: Elizabeth Dilling, all things considered, was a prophetess in her own time. Her various works, which include her exposure of the Zionist Jewish infiltration of the United States of America and her analysis of Bolshevism, Communism and Zionism as one Beast with numerous names, are a testament to her courage and her foresight in revealing the truth during a period of American history when to speak out was to risk the inevitable attacks by the Jewish establishment. Groups like the American Jewish Congress and B’nai Brith International and their attack-dog the Anti-Defamation League, were always ready and willing to vilify anyone who dared to speak out about their plans to implement their one world government and Elizabeth Dilling was forced to deal with their Talmudic tactics from the moment she picked up the sword of truth.

Each chapter of her book is preceded by the Forward and an Introduction. Readers who go beyond Chapter One will find it convenient to just scroll down the page until the start of the new chapter.]

—————

Foreword

Elizabeth Dilling Stokes was born, raised, and educated in Chicago. After attending the University of Chicago she married, and for many years devoted her life to her children, social activities on the North Shore of Chicago, and being a concert harpist. After hearing of the great “humanitarian experiment” in Soviet Russia, she traveled there in 1931, and was able to go behind the scenes. She was shocked at the forced labor, the squalid living quarters, and deplorable living conditions, and the atmosphere of fear created by the Soviet dictatorship.

She was most shocked by the virulent anti-Christianity of the atheist Communist regime.

Following her return to the United States she lectured and wrote about what she had seen, realizing from the opposition which immediately arose that a substantial Marxist movement was active in the United States.  In 1934 her first book The Red Network was published, an expose of the persons and organizations furthering Red causes in the United States.   In 1936, her second book, The Roosevelt Red Record and Its Background, was published.

Almost immediately after these books were published, she was attacked as “anti-semitic,” although she had actually offered her anti-Communist services to Jewish organizations, and knew nothing of organized Jewish involvement in the Marxist movement.  After researching and studying, however, in 1940 she published her third book The Octopus, which dealt with these subjects.

After World War II commenced, Mrs. Dilling became convinced that, despite President Roosevelt’s protestations that not one American boy would ever again fight on foreign soil, there was a movement afoot to involve the United States, with the result that a substantial part of the world would be communized later.

In 1941, she led a Mother’s March on Washington to oppose the “Lend Lease” bill, proclaimed to help keep us out of war by its sponsors, but proving the last step for our involvement.  The bill passed by only one vote.  A few months later, the United States went to war.

In 1944, Mrs. Dilling’s views involved her in the now infamous mass “sedition” trial.  The case was ultimately dismissed  by a Federal Court as “a travesty on justice.”

She was later remarried to Jeremiah Stokes, a Christian anti-Communist writer, and she continued to write and lecture in behalf of Christianity and Constitutional Americanism, first publishing this book in 1964.
[Read more...]

Thought Makes You Free In the EU [and Canada] by Bernhard Schaub

Thought Makes You Free In the EU [and Canada]
by Bernhard Schaub

The world is in flux. The financial crisis has shattered our too-blind faith in the regnant economic and political system. The good in this crisis: it makes you think. Many realize that the remedies proposed by government are no remedies at all, but merely measures intended to keep the existing system alive. The idea is spreading that the whole thing in reality is a giant redistribution intended to concentrate money and power into even fewer hands than before. It is high time to end our unquestioning ways with some serious thought.

The present economic system-like all systems-rests on certain axioms, certain underpinnings, that cannot be disturbed without putting the entire edifice into danger of collapse. Such underpinnings are for that reason always sacrosanct.

He who wishes to be accepted, or even merely tolerated in our society does well to acknowledge, or at least not to openly dispute, certain core beliefs: To these belong devotion to the free market, including debt financing and the independence of the banking system, to so-called parliamentary democracy, including the attendant two-party system, devotion to philo-semitism, multiculturalism, homosexuality, and abortion together with the highest praises for the civil rights to which one considers oneself entitled.

It is even permitted to belong to whatever religion or philosophy one might wish to-but subject to the unstated condition that one doesn’t really take it seriously. Otherwise, one acquires very quickly the odor of fundamentalism.

In today’s political and cultural landscape, a fundamentalist is anyone who holds his Catholic, or Evangelical, or Islamic, or national-or whatever feelings of any kind-above those highest of values enumerated above. Therefore, fundamentalists cannot be tolerated under the global New World Order that is the central theme of American politics. It is only a very slight distance that separates the fundamentalist from the charge of  being a terrorist. And it is not necessary here to spell out what sort of treatment awaits terrorists. That has been ordained by 9/11.

The thoughtful European notes with puzzlement that the proscriptions set forth by Political Correctness and monitored by the culture and the law grow more numerous every day. The citizen is condemned to silence by all manner of gag laws and cowed by the looming threat of the EU criminal code because he no longer knows what is punishable, nor why, nor where. Lately, we’re told, nearly 14,000 “rights violations”-whatever those might be-were committed in Germany in 2008, of which fully 700 were violent. Therefore, there remain from these numbers about 13,000 nonviolent “rights violations.” This is notable, especially in light of the incessant reminders by self-righteous German politicians to China and other countries to “uphold civil rights.” Obviously, the sacred rights of freedom of expression, academic freedom, religious or philosophical belief, etc., are valid only so long as they don’t oppose any of the listed Canons of Western Values.

Catch-22

Here is a Catch-22. It is profoundly disingenuous, not to say outright mendacious: an easily seen-through maneuver for the benefit of the ruling elites of the West.

The greatest taboo of Western propriety, however, is of a historical nature. That is, where the matter has to do with Nazism or the so-called Third Reich, contemporary thought abdicates completely. The brain is relieved of its function, and quasi-religious reflexes take over. All powers of discernment cease, any inquiry into the Holy Writ is thought inappropriate, even malign. Here there is only one viewpoint allowed: the Nazis-read, the Germans-are perpetrators, and exclusively that, and the Jews are victims, and innately and eternally, no less. The uproar about Erika Steinbach, Eva Herrmann, Martin Hohmann, and General Günzel serves to illustrate. Whoever doubts these supreme tenets of belief is no longer a discussion partner, but instead a leper and a heretic rolled into one, subjected instantly to inquisitorial judgment, ostracism, and economic destruction. And everyone who has anything to do with such a person must immediately distance himself.

This goes double for questions concerning the Holocaust, the inner circle of this minefield. The never-ending rumble of the media concerning Bishop Richard Williamson has brought this taboo to the fore once again. Mrs. Merkel feels called upon to instruct the Pope; the Pope feels called upon to call Bishop Williamson to account; the attorney general of Regensburg proposes, and the Justice Department considers issuing, an international arrest warrant for the churchman-and why? Because he judges a historical matter differently from the way it is usually and permitted to do. This constitutes heresy. This means nothing else than that a historical event has been removed from the domain of scholarship and with that, of reasoned discussion, and elevated into the domain of religion, and indeed a kind of world religion that in Germany has unbeknownst acquired the standing of a half-official state religion.


Bishop Richard Williamson

As the media campaign against Bishop Williamson rose to a fever pitch, the revisionist and lawyer Horst Mahler was sentenced in Munich to six years imprisonment and at the same time in Potsdam to four more years, because he questioned details of the Holocaust. In 2007, Mahler’s partner, lawyer Sylvia Stolz, was sentenced to 3 1/2 years’ imprisonment and escorted directly to jail from the courtroom. The reason: she defended the German-Canadian publicist Ernst Zündel in court in Mannheim and took the position that the accused was right, or at least that he was exercising his right to a dissenting opinion. Zündel himself got five years. Two years’ investigatory detention under the most dubious circumstances in Canada didn’t count. So Zündel does seven years because he published arguments over his Internet site concerning the historical thesis of the “mass gassing” of Jews.


Lawyer Sylvia Stolz and Revisionist and lawyer Horst Mahler

Shortly after Zündel, the chemist and multi-book author Germar Rudolf, originally a scientist at the Max Planck Institute in Stuttgart, received a sentence of 2 1/2 years because it was possible to arrive at the same conclusions from his neutral, scientific investigations in forensic chemistry as had been arrived at by other routes by earlier researchers.


  Scientist Germar Rudolf

The Frenchman Robert Faurisson, university professor for documentary research and textual analysis at the Sorbonne in Paris has been subjected to multiple fines of astronomic amounts, and has sustained bodily injuries from a beating administered by unidentified assailants.


Robert Faurisson-French Revisionist

One of the best-known revisionist researchers and writers is the Swiss Romanist and Scandinavist Jürgen Graf, sentenced to 15 months’ imprisonment by a Swiss court for questioning the holocaust hypothesis. He was able to avoid this imprisonment only by flight into exile.

Also in exile is the Belgian father of seven Vincent Reynouard. In Austria, court-expert-witness-engineer Wolfgang Fröhlich is in jail for the second time because he does not accept the official version of the holocaust.

Where is Amnesty International?

Where is Amnesty International? Where the European Court of Human Rights? Where the hue and cry of the media? Where the student protests? Where the Church?

All these men and women and many others, such as Ursula Haverbeck, Dr. Udo Walendy, Gerd Honsik, Dr. Max Wahl, Siegfried Verbeke, Gaston Amaudruz, have committed no offense other than to have arrived at conclusions from their research and analysis that diverge from the official account-and that they then addressed pointed questions to those who have promulgated the putative falsehoods around the world.

It is the pride of western science, since the Renaissance, and in particular since the Enlightenment, to allow nothing to be sacrosanct, and to accept nothing short of absolute objectivity. Revisionism-that is, discernment, confirmation, questioning-is a basic principle of science. All else is dogmatism. Science cannot admit of religious, political, or other social exceptions. In the sense of the natural sciences, there is no Christian reality nor Unchristian reality, no moral nor immoral fact. The scientist has the right to err, since no one is in possession of the absolute truth. Natural science has banished the medieval age of superstition with the age of reason.

As applied to research into the Holocaust, this means: it may not be clouded by philo-Semitic nor by anti-Semitic inclinations, any more than it may be by Germanophilic or Germanophobic. Whether one likes the Jews or the Germans, or dislikes them is no factor in research, and may not affect it in any way.

Ms Merkel said in her message to Pope Benedict XVI, “There may be no denial of the Holocaust.” What does this mean, there may not be? Does it mean that “denial” presupposes that someone advances lies while knowing better? This certainly doesn’t apply to the revisionists, who are convinced of their interpretations. Or does it mean that here, after all-trumping all factual inquiry-global political forces are  in play to which both the German head of state as well as the leader of Christianity must bow?

There is commentary that implies something pretty close to these conjectures. As early as May 1979, Professor William Rubinstein of the University of Melbourne, Australia, wrote in the Nation Review, “Were the Holocaust shown to be a hoax, the Number One weapon in Israel’s propaganda armory disappears.”

And after the lecturer and revisonist Günther Deckert was sentenced to years in jail, the  Frankfurter Allgemeine wrote on August 15, 1994, “If Deckert’s account of the Holocaust were correct, the Federal Republic of Germany would be founded upon a lie.” Every presidential address, every “moment of silence,” every history book would have lied. In that he denies the murder of the Jews, he contests the very legitimacy of the German Federal Republic.

The Canadian B’nai B’rith

But it seems that there are even higher matters at stake: the memory of the Holocaust is central to the erection of the new world order. So wrote Ian J. Kagedan, the Director of the Canadian B’nai B’rith in the Toronto Star for November 26, 1991.

These unseemly newspaper announcements enable us to understand why finally the effort to exhume the claimed victims and properly to account for them has not been undertaken; why Ms Merkel has not called an international Holocaust conference in Berlin and subjected the assertions of the revisionists to a public discussion and critique. With that, the sorry matter would once and for all be placed on the table and the “pseudoscientific bumbling” of the Holocaust deniers would be laid bare for all to see-and indeed by scientists, not just journalists. But therein, of course, argument and counter-argument would have to be heard.

Why can’t this be? Is it feared that such a discussion might produce results other than those that are politically desired? Is this why the revisionists languish in jail? Is this why their books are banned? Is the public to be denied the means of evaluating the state of the revisionist arguments?

The reason for this remarkable scientific regression appears to be the same as the reason for the judicial regression in the courtroom. Here also the established practice-which ashamedly is never admitted in public-that there is never inquiry into whether the accused might be right. Evidence is not taken, and if the accused should try to explain his position, he subjects himself to still further charges, and his attorney as well! A judicial monstrosity. The factuality of genocide of millions in gas chambers is simply declared “given,” and the court has merely to decide whether the defendant has contradicted this given – and then to arrive at a sentence. A historical assumption is thereby peremptorily raised to the status of a universally known and proven law of nature – and at the same time, factual confirmation of it is forbidden!

Who’s Afraid of the Big Bad Truth?

Is somebody afraid of the truth here?

The voices are becoming more numerous that advocate breaking the silence over this: in 2007, Professor Karl Albert Schachtschneider, professor of public inquiry at the University of Erlangen, spoke on the Constitution of the European Union. He took a question from the audience, “Do we have freedom of speech here?” He answered: “A country in which free speech is constrained by severe punishments  is not a free country. The immortal Kant said about freedom of speech that one must be free to say anything, whether it is true or untrue. With the Holocaust, anything might be true or not true; I wasn’t there. But another reason I don’t discuss it,  is that it is forbidden. One is not allowed to dispute it, not even scientifically. The prohibition on “agitation” prevents it. This is not a free country.”

If the “new world order” that the Canadian gentleman from B’nai B’rith mentioned might be in some way identical with that financial system that currently has thrown the world into the grips of an unprecedented crisis, it might in any case be appropriate to examine the central historical and philosophical foundations of that new order somewhat more closely.

“Where everyone condemns, one must prove. Where everyone praises, as well.”  Thought makes you free!

=====
The publicist and lecturer Bernhard Schaub (Dornach bei Basel), publisher of this newsletter, is Swiss. He was a teacher of German and history at Waldorf Schools  until he was dismissed in 1993 for publishing a book in which he cited objective research into the Holocaust. He also lost a later position as academic dean of an adult-education school for similar reasons. In 2006 he participated in the Holocaust Conference called in Tehran by President Ahmedinejad.

Canadian Human Rights Tribunal rules that Sec. 13 “Hate Law” is Unconstitutional


Canadian Human Rights Tribunal rules that Sec. 13 “Hate Law” is Unconstitutional

September 2, 2009
RadicalNewsNetwork

Dear Radical Reader,

Prior to my comments I first want to take the time to say thank you to Mr. Marc Lemire, the man who has been at the forefront of the battle for Internet Freedom in Canada over the past six years. Persevering and remaining steadfast in his convictions through thick and thin and suffering endless slings and arrows of accusative epithets and accusations of every conceivable nature. Along with him was his steadfast and cool lawyer Barbara Kulaszka and his comrades in arms Mr. Paul Fromm of the Canadian Association for Free Expression (CAFE) and of course Canada’s and the world’s No. 1 Freedom of Speech fighting lawyer Mr. Douglas Christie all pictured together in their famous INTERNET FREEDOM DEFENCE TEAM photo below. Every freedom loving Canadian who values their basic right to express themselves on paper or on the Internet owes this magnificent and dedicated crew of conscientious, responsible citizens a debt of gratitude.


In terms of Canada’s struggle to retain its Constitutional rights as contained in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, September 2, 2009, may go down in Canadian history as the day that the citizens who believe in freedom of speech finally managed to throw a monkey-wrench into the gears of the Zionist Censorship Juggernaut that has been rolling relentlessly over our rights and freedoms for the past half a century.

At 9:30 EST the Decision in the long-awaited section 13 “hate crimes” complaint Warman v. Lemire finally appeared on the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal’s website http://chrt-tcdp.gc.ca/aspinc/search/vhtml-eng.asp?doid=981&lg=_e&isruling=0 . The gist of the ruling by Tribunal Member Athanasios D. Hadjis respecting the manner in which this controversial law was used in the six year long trial of Marc Lemire for allegedly posting “hate” materials is contained in my Motion to the Tribunal (see below) which I sent off today after receiving word of the Decision.

But lest readers jump to the conclusion that this means the end of this draconian law designed to silence any and all criticism of Israel or political Zionism please be advised that while it is truly a decisive victory in terms of the battle being waged to rid this country of sec. 13(1) it doesn’t automatically mean that the war itself has been won.

[Read more...]