InYourFaceBook – Cyberspace Thugs Expelling Thought Criminals from Social Media by Justice4Germans

QuesCariSent Editor:Pub

 

[Editor’s Note: It was only recently that I was speaking rather highly about Facebook and defending it against critics who were suggesting that this Jew-owned social media was anathema to real, honest freedom of speech and expression. Given the fact that I was able to publish my own articles and link to others who also were telling the truth about what’s going on in the world I figured that Facebook was actually doing a great service in the pursuit of truth. That was my feeling until I recently got word that my good friend and associate who runs the Justice4Germans blogsite was permanently banned from Facebook for publishing the truth about the real history of Germany and its endless vilification in the Jew media.

Justice4Germans (J4G) was doing an excellent job of presenting the German side of the true story of the 20th Century in a very professional-like manner without any of the grossness that one sees elsewhere on the net. His efforts were well received by those who were following his posts on Facebook and I, for one, was most appreciative of his superb efforts.

Now J4G is banned permanently for presenting his research for people to read.

His story is not that much different from my own in the sense that the censorship arm of the Jewish criminal cartel that desires absolute control of all media has now successfully eliminated J4G from Facebook just as they are attempting to shut down RadicalPress.com and take away my freedom to express alternative news items. In my case of course they have employed the “justice” system to do their dirty work via the use of first sec. 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act and secondly by using sec. 319(2) of the Canadian Criminal Code. Either way, no matter how you look at it, the Jewish lobbyists and their cowardly complicit components within the Gentile society are hell-bent on shutting up all dissident voices and only permitting their own heinous propaganda to be spread around the world wide web.

As J4G explains in his fine essay below the front organization for the International B’nai Brith, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) is, as usual, fully involved in all efforts at censorship of the Internet. Funny thing is they are also the same secretive, occult, Freemason organization that’s been hounding and harassing me now since 2007.

Some things never appear to change and the Jew’s psychopathic preoccupation with controlling the thoughts and ideas and opinions of the world’s population is one of them. That situation is fortunately changing whether they like it or not for no group of power crazed individuals can ever gain absolute control over the Truth. The only thing necessary is for the truth seekers to continue to expose their hypocritical asses whenever they attempt to pull off their Bolshevik/Cheka Big Brother bullshit censorship agenda. Until I see Justice4Germans back on Facebook I will not be supporting this “social media” propaganda venue again.]

 

Screen Shot 2013-06-11 at 11.50.40 PM

by Justice4Germans

justice4germansyoutube-logo3

thought-crime

 

“In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act.” ~ George Orwell

Welcome to the world of “Anti-Social media”! Virtual Pogroms and Cyber-Expulsions are now underway across the Internet to prevent awake and aware thought criminals and activists from socializing and sharing information, as well as, from organizing to protect themselves and their interests from global tyranny and the New World Order agenda.

Over the past few weeks, this writer has experienced Bolshevik style stalking, surveillance harassment and bullying first hand!  Both my J4G Facebook profile and my personal FB profile have been the subject of continual attacks resulting several temporary blocks ranging from 12 to 24 hours, as well as repeated deletion of material and status messages that I’ve posted, on completely bogus charges of having violating their “community standards”. My posts have in no way shape or form violated these standards of conduct! The same has happened to dozens of my “Facebook friends”!

Early on Monday morning [June 11, 2013 Ed.] I was finally expelled from Facebook.  My J4G account was disabled by the Cyber-Thugs and I was locked out, probably for good, based upon yet even more dangerous, ludicrous and absurd charges.  I have sent them a letter of protest, though I am not holding by breath for a response nor any sort of hearing, much less a reversal of their decision. This process is entirely arbitrary and sudden. No warnings are given, no proof provided, and and no chance of rebuttal is given. They act as judge, jury and executioners, much like the Soviet Secret Police.

Here is a screenshot of what they said ….

account-disabled-goodbye

 

Excuse me ??

I can assure my readers that I have NEVER posted any material or messages which promote violence  or which depict, promote or condone ANY of the above, and many of my Facebook friends and followers can attest to this fact! Nor have I permitted any such comments on my “wall”. In fact, I have previously deleted and blocked well over 100 people from friends’ list due the content they shared or comments they posted on my wall which violate the FB terms and thereby put my account at risk, and in some cases, which also offended me. They are welcome to their opinions, but not within my realm, be that on Facebook or other social media, or as comments on my blog, or in such a way that puts work and reputation at risk.

So, what’s really behind this?  

It is pure Soviet style censorship of the TRUTH under the guise of “antisemitism”. Sadly,  most of the sheeple have been conditioned to believe that word to mean “hatred of Jews” with an implied meaning of “intention to harm Jews”.  In fact, the term refers to a variety of middle-eastern languages “Semitic languages”, and not at all to “race”, much less to so-called “Jews”  but who are in fact overwhelmingly “Khazars” and thus,  perpetrating fraud against humanity (the Gentiles).

thefreedictionary.com says:
Se·mit·ic (s-mtk) adj.
1. Of or relating to the Semites or their languages or cultures.
2. Of, relating to, or constituting a subgroup of the Afro-Asiatic language group that includes Arabic, Hebrew, Amharic, and Aramaic.
n.
1. The Semitic languages.
2. Any one of the Semitic languages.

So,  if anything really needs to be banned,  it should be the use of that fully perverted word,  as it’s implied meaning is a farce and used as a weapon of mass destruction , just as much as the word “Nazi” is another bogus term, as I have explained in a previous post. It is used to smear, tar and feather all those who speaks the truth about the International Bankster Gangsters or “Usury Mafia” (and who call themselves “Jews”, and are not) which run this planet, and to stifle dissent and to bully anyone who exposes how this criminal gang operates,  and what their agenda really is.  Other such epithets used to stifle dissent and debate include terms like “conspiracy theorist”, or when they are really desperate, they will use the word “terrorist” too demonize the truth-tellers and activists, because apparently, the truth scares them to death!

big-brother-facebook1

 

Indeed, it is all very Orwellian.  Black is white, white is black. Up is down. Wrong is right. Right is wrong. And it is “in your face” now. They are not only liars,  criminals and thugs, but also haters; the very thing they accuse everyone else of being.

They are engaged in “Anti-Gentilism” with an agenda to co-opt, subjugate and rule over ALL of humanity (all races, nations and cultures).   And no, I am NOT talking of a “Jewish Conspiracy” but a “Criminal Conspiracy” of global proportions.  Again,  THEY are the ones who call themselves “Jews”, not me!.  I don’t buy their BS nor use their terminology, but rather, I attempt to expose it. They are haters of truth and of truth-tellers, because they know that “THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE” from their tyranny and global hegemony, and so, and as history has shown, this criminal cabal will go to any and all lengths, including inciting, causing and funding World Wars to protect their interests, or to further them. They care not how many millions of lives are lost in the process, nor how much long-term suffering is caused, and will also profit from it.  They did it twice with Germany and to many other countries since, and are doing even today.

Some assert that this is a Zionist agenda and all for a rinky-dink peace of real estate in Palestine, but I don’t buy that. They already have that. These fraudsters or posers merely use IsraHell and the lessers of their Khazarian Klan as a wedge, and as a “firewall” to protect and furhter their global interests.  These Bankster Gangsters  could care less what happens to those of the lower caste as they have demonstrated many times in the past. Indeed, they are very happy to see the peons get the blame and to take the repercussions for their own innumerable evil deeds and “crimes against humanity”, which go on to this day, all because of “sheeple”  (including self-described “Jews”) who buy into their BS and swallow it whole, or even use it to their own ends.  They too need a “wake up” call, to grow a conscience,  and some balls,  and to start speaking the truth, as have Brother Nathaniel, Henry Makow, Benjamin Friedman, Myron Fagan and others.

Here is how they are manipulating the sheeple and social media, in addition to Law Enforcement and Alphabet Soup agencies to do their “dirty work” and do so to their OWN detriment, at their own expense, out of their own ignorance and gullibility.

“My people perish for lack of knowledge” ~ God

facebook-offended

 

Facebook’s blind spot to Antisemitism

Jerusalem Post
By Internet Engagement

Internet Engagement

Monday Mar 25, 2013

Cover(2)

 

Facebook’s refusal to recognize Holocaust denial as hate speech, and ban it from the social media platform, is today well known. I have monitored this and other manifestations of antisemitism on social media platforms since first exposing the problem of “Antisemitism 2.0” five years ago. Last week, however, I released a major new report [2] revealing additional blind spots in Facebook’s understanding of antisemitism. The nature of these blind spots is startling, from racist images directly based on Nazi propaganda to copies of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. (snip)

Subtle and insidious forms of antisemitism, like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and messages calling for the elimination of the Jewish state are  (and blah, blah, blah…)

CONTINUES HERE

Enter Abe Foxman …

2013-06-04-viralhate2

 

Huffington Post, o6.04.13

“[…]Today, while it is a marvelous medium for education, communication, entertainment and commerce, the ways in which the Internet is being used to disseminate and promote hateful and violent beliefs and attitudes are astounding, varied and continually multiplying. In an effort to look more closely at the extent of the problem — and to probe for possible solutions – I recently joined together with my longtime friend and colleague Christopher Wolf, an expert in Internet law and Chair of the Anti-Defamation League’s Civil Rights Committee, to explore these issues and to offer a blueprint for the Internet industry, the world community and societies to work together toward a solution.

The result of this collaborative effort is our new book, Viral Hate: Containing Its Spread on the Internet (Palgrave Macmillan), available in bookstores and for download to e-readers today. Facebook’s announcement that it would tighten its policies on hate speech posts in response to complaints from users about misogynistic posts, including pictures of women being beaten and messages promoting violence against women,* was the most recent reminder of the problems posed by online hate speech.

In a letter in today’s New York Times, we commend Facebook for tackling the issue head on, and will be working with them in the coming months as they see to develop new tactics to address hate speech on their pages.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/abraham-h-foxman/why-we-wrote-viral-hate_b_3383859.html

* that this is what Facebook has FALSELY accused me and others I know of doing!

Well, well, well.  Isn’t it wonderful that these fraudsters and racketeers, who already control the media, are allowed to spew their story all over the internet too, and with mere accusations, in no time flat, can invoke the government, NGOs and Social Media sites to immediately do their bidding? And they are obviously complying too, aren’t they?  It’s as if God himself has spoken to Facebook, except that, in reality it would be the Devil.  And do not put it past them to be creating fake user profiles to disseminate ”fake hate” images and messages in order to justify a massive and tyrannical response either!

The truth is, Facebook is turning a blind eye to antigentilism perpetrated by frauds like YOU and others of your Khazar Klan, who are not asking, but ordering websites to cover up mass murder, genocide, theft, rape and torture being carried out by international war criminals at the behest of your Overlord Banker Buddies who own your ass. Because, and you readers can bet, that if anyone harms one hair on the head of one of their Klan it will be all over their media and the Internet, and they will not say a word about it being “offensive” content!  …will they, hmmm?

And oh,  in case you haven’t noticed, they HATE YOUR FREEDOM too. So use it while you can, think for yourself and stop letting them get away with this BULLYING! You can bet that all of this is going to get a whole lot worse now, unless YOU are prepared to speak up about it and will stop going along with it.

To wrap up, here is a one hour interview which also exposes the real agenda behind all this.  I do NOT necessarily agree with everything said, but I invite you to listen and make up your own minds.  Isn’t that what “freedom” is about?

Revolt of the Plebs Broadcast June 6, 2013

Screen Shot 2013-06-12 at 12.00.41 AM

(Please click on url above image to view video)

Description: “Keith welcomes Professor Ray Goodwin of the Barnes Review to discuss ADL director Abe Foxman’s latest book, entitled Viral Hate, and the concerted efforts to censor discourse on the Internet.”

The only people who would applaud such tyranny and  thought control, and who would attack your most basic right to freedom of expression are guys like this one …

faceboook_stalin3

 

“It is necessary to repeat the truth over and over again, because the falsehoods around us are also being constantly repeated, not by individuals but by the masses, in newspapers and encyclopedias, in the schools and at the universities. Everywhere, falsehood is on top, comfortable and secure in the knowledge that the majority is on its side.” ~ Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, 1828.

J4G

Eighty Years of Infamy by Arthur Topham

Screen Shot 2013-05-22 at 5.31.19 PM

This dynamic volume [Germany Must Perish!] outlines a comprehensive plan for the extinction of the German nation and the total eradication from the earth, of all her people.”

“It is a definite obligation which the world owes to those who struggled and died against the German yesterday, and to those who are fighting him again today, as it is the bounden duty of the present generation to those yet unborn, to make certain that the vicious fangs of the German serpent shall never strike again. And since the venom of those fangs derives its fatal poison not from within the body, but from the war-soul of the German, nothing else would assure humanity safety and security but that that war-soul be forever expunged, and the diseased carcass which harbors it forever removed from this world. There is no longer any alternative: Germany Must Perish!”
~ Theodore N. Kaufman, Germany Must Perish!, Argyle Press, Newark, New Jersey, 1941

On Thursday, March 23rd, 1933 the newly democratically elected Chancellor of Germany Adolf Hitler and his cabinet, in a vote taken in the Kroll Opera House in Berlin by the Reichstag on proposed legislation known as the Enabling Act – the “Law for Removing the Distress of People and Reich,” were given a four year mandate to rule Germany, unrestrained by Parliament. The vote, when taken, was: 441 for and 84 against.

On Friday, March 24th, 1933 one day after this historic event, world Jewry openly declared war on Germany.

JudeaDeclaresWarGermany 700

Thus was set the stage upon which Germany and the world at large would be continually forced to bear witness to world Jewry’s endless and psychopathic vengeful obsession with their ongoing campaign of vitriolic lies, racism and HATRED toward the German people and the German nation.

2013 marks the 80th anniversary of this planned strategy of intentional conditioning of generation upon generation of western civilization’s citizens to fear, loathe and despise first and foremost the National Socialist Party of Germany (termed “NAZI” by the Jew media), its leader Adolf Hitler and then, by extrapolation, the German people as a whole.

After eight decades of defamation and endless slurring it begs the question as to why world Jewry would continue to, as the saying goes, flog a dead horse over and over and over again? To what (or whose) advantage is is to constantly harken back nearly a century in order to reinforce what is now, thanks to the tireless efforts of historical revisionists, evidently the most profoundly provocative and colossal LIE ever foisted upon the world?

A day never passes when the so-called “mainstream media (msm)” doesn’t make mention of either Adolf Hitler or the Nazi’s or the purported “Jewish Holocaust”. Relentless and hard-hearted as the tax man or the bill collector the Jew-controlled msm, like the ancient Mariner in Coleridge’s famed poem, holds the general pubic’s attention hostage with its “glittering (tv) eye” while spinning out its slanderous tales of endless misery and woe and persecution, all of which is maliciously and willfully designed to shore up a deceit that is now unravelling before the world thanks to the miracle of the Internet.

Only those born before 1933 could honestly say that they lived in a period of history when libel of Germany wasn’t an all-pervasive reality and the numbers of people living today who are of that age and still conscious of their former world are few and far between.

Those of us born after world Jewry’s 1933 declaration have all been subjected to the unceasing assault on the German nation that still persists today.

It was writers like Theodore N. Kaufmann, quoted above, who spear-headed the intentional promotion of HATRED toward Germany prior to America’s involvement in a war that Hitler and the German nation never wanted and never were guilty of causing. Kaufmann and world Jewry’s aim was to change the attitude of the American people; one that was then either neutral or pro-German rather than anti and twist the truth about Hitler and the National Socialist government and their amazing accomplishments from 1933 until 1939. And so his hate-filled screed titled German Must Perish! was promoted by the most prestigious msm publications in the USA when it appeared in 1941 prior to America’s entry into the conflict. Magazines like Time and newspapers like the New York Times and the Washington Post lauded the idea of absolutely destroying the German nation and the German race as a whole referring to the grotesquely contemptible concept as a “SENSATIONAL IDEA!”

GermanyPerishF&BCovers copy 3

Once world Jewry was successful in dragging the USA into the war via their choreographed “Pearl Harbour” maneuver all stops were pulled out and the vicious denigration of Hitler and Germany began in earnest never to abate even to this day.

Canadian children growing up during the war years were subjected to all the anti-German hatred propaganda that was carried in the media. Images of Hitler and the “Nazis” were ever-present and for all the German Canadian citizens throughout the nation the devastating effect of such vile and systematic psychic abuse worked its way into the minds and subconscious of those who, prior to world Jewry’s intensions, had been respected members of Canadian society.

HitlerSnowball 2

HitlerDartboard

When the war finally culminated in a victory for Soviet Communism, world Jewry and so-called western “democracy” in 1945 one would think that soon thereafter the hatred and vilification of the German people would have slowly wound down but that was not to be the case.

In February of 1945 the Allied powers met to sign the Protocol of the Yalta Conference.It was then that U.S. president Franklin D. Roosevelt first articulated the policy of “Unconditional Surrender”, a demand that the Axis powers yield to the Allies without concessions or negotiations. It was Douglas Reed in his 1956 book The Controversy of Zion, who stated in  Chapter 42 of his book aptly titled ‘The Talmudic Vengeance’, that it was an act of “blind vengeance” which meant that “the enemy would not be granted peace at any price whatever, and this was the absolute reversal of all “principles” previously proclaimed by the Western leaders….

“Thus at Casablanca in 1943 the decision to wreak vengeance was first taken. This was the background to the “Morgenthau Plan” of September 1944 (obviously first devised in Moscow, then drafted by Mr. Harry Dexter White for his superior, then forwarded by Mr. Morgenthau to Mr. Roosevelt, who with Mr. Churchill initialed it), the spirit of which pervaded the Yalta Conference and its Protocol. Mr. Roosevelt’s later expression of astonishment (“he had no idea how he could have initialed this”) and Mr. Churchill’s words of regret (“I had not time to examine the Morgenthau Plan in detail … I am sorry I put my initials to it”) are both voided by the fact that both then signed the Yalta document, its child and the charter of vengeance.”

Screen Shot 2013-05-22 at 2.35.32 PM

No sooner had the Yalta Protocol been signed than the propaganda machines in Canada started churning out their deceptive misinformation regarding what this Protoc0l truly meant for the German nation.

After world Jewry achieved their “unconditional surrender” of Germany (thanks to Roosevelt and Churchill), and the Bolshevik Communists were victorious in gaining full hegemony over all of eastern Europe including Poland and half of Germany then came the next phase of hate animosity toward the German people as the Jews, aided and abetted by their Marxist/Communist compatriots, began to reveal their quintessential ‘ace-up-the-sleeve’ scheme of  blaming Hitler and the National Socialists and Germany itself with having “holocausted” 6 million Jews during the three year period when anti-German collaborators had been placed in work camps throughout eastern Europe.

crucifixion-

It was an old ruse that had been attempted numerous time before throughout the early part of the 20 century but now that world Jewry was able to conspire with Stalin and their Communist counterpart and fabricate false and incriminating “evidence” of such a deed the picture changed dramatically. Using the moral abomination called the Nuremberg Trials, a pseudo-legal process not unlike that of the Canadian Human Rights Commission and its attendant Tribunal, where truth is no defence, the victors, via torture, terror and trauma, were able to force “confessions” out of former German military leaders that was then cultivated into fields of propaganda which yielded an endless supply of an adulterated diet of falsehoods for generations to come.

Nuremberg1

Reed also tells us that by 1945 world Jewry’s U.S. propaganda “hate” wing, the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai Brith was already carrying out “a high-powered educational program, geared to reach every man, woman and child” in America through the press, radio, advertising, children’s comic books and school books, lectures, films, “churches” and trade unions. This program included “219 broadcasts a day”, full-page advertisements in 397 newspapers, poster advertising in 130 cities, and “persuasions” subtly incorporated in the printed matter on blotters, matchbox covers, and envelopes. The entire national press (“1900 dailies with a 43,000,000 circulation”) and the provincial, Negro, foreign-language and labour newspapers were kept supplied with, “and used”, its material in the form of “news, background material, cartoons and comic strips”. In addition, the A.D.L. in 1945 distributed “more than 330,000 copies of important books carrying our message to libraries and other institutions”, furnished authors with “material and complete ideas”, and circulated nine million pamphlets “all tailored to fit the audiences to which they are directed”. It found “comic books” to be a particularly effective way of reaching the minds of young people, soldiers, sailors and airmen, and circulated “millions of copies” of propaganda in this form. Its organization consisted of the national headquarters, public relations committees in 150 cities, eleven regional offices, and “2,000 key men in 1,000 cities”.

Constantly beating and pushing their hate-filled anti-Semitic drums, world Jewry’s unremitting mind control operations have carried on right up to the present with book after book and magazine article after magazine article and newspaper clipping after newspaper clipping eulogizing the “6 Million” and lying through their teeth about mythical “Nazi” atrocities in Germany’s “death camps”.

Pulp fiction propaganda such as that depicted in the graphics below are typical of the Jewish publishing houses and reflect their psychotic obsession with publishing HATRED toward the German people.

Screen Shot 2013-05-22 at 3.43.23 PM

EichmannPropaganda copy

HolocautBook copy

Recently I was in a book shop perusing the shelves when I spotted the following title “Hitler’s Daughter.” I couldn’t believe my eyes. Upon looking at the book I realized that it had been published by Scholastic Books the famed publisher of children’s literature.

When the Jew say there’s “no business like Shoah [holocaust. Ed.] business,” the lesson truly sinks home when one considers the depth of depravity that they will sink to in order to brainwash future generations into believing their insane paradigm of opprobrium against the German people.

Hitler'sDaughter copy

The Final Solution

The triumph of world Jewry over the past eighty years is something to behold. Since 1933 they have worked overtime in an all out effort to flush Germany down the shit hole of history. In the process millions of otherwise sincere and honest individuals have been slowly and steadily insidiously conditioned into believing lies of such a magnitude that only now, after ten decades of deception are they finally beginning to lose their grip over the minds of the masses as the Internet and dedicated historical revisionists continue to make headway in their dismantling of the myths of the 20th century that have perpetuated a degree of HATRED never before witnessed on such a global scale.

Any such force willing and capable of deceiving the world on such a gargantuan scale is obviously not unaware of what has been taking place since the advent of the net, email and social media sites such as Facebook where these topics are slowly permeating and drawing more and more attention. The sense of desperation and panic on the part of world Jewry is palpable. If a person has been studying these events over the past quarter century or longer they can taste it in the rarefied air of cyberspace with each passing day. The pillars are beginning to shake and the deceivers are in a mode of defence that they’ve never had to contend with for a very long time. What to do? How do we stop the sheeple from becoming informed of our Great Deception and becoming aware and concerned people?

Those who have been controlling the historic dialogue since 1933 have always displayed one trait – the fervent need to CONTROL the non-Jewish gentiles (or goyim/cattle as they are wont to refer to the rest of the world’s population). Laws must be enacted to prevent the Truth from getting out and the overall population eventually realizing to what degree they have been lied to all their lives. Laws? What sort of laws could possibly prevent the people from debriefing themselves at this advanced stage of the game? Why HATE LAWS! Laws that will penalize and imprison those who are exposing our planned program of global deception. Laws that will make Truth an invalid, useless reason to speak out against the infamy. Laws that will make any factual evidence irrelevant. Laws that will make it a crime just to DENY that world Jewry’s interpretation of history might possibly be skewed and biased in favour of their own New World Order agenda for global dominance. Laws that will prevent the population from coming to the only plausible and reasonable conclusion that makes common sense, that being, the creators of the HATE LAWS are the very same folks who have been spreading universal HATRED toward the German people for the past eighty years. In other words Hate Laws for the haters and prison and fines and censorship for the Truth seekers of the world who are now on to their scam. Oi veh! what can you say?

Screen Shot 2013-05-22 at 5.22.38 PM

Well, given my own predicament and the fact that I have been under extreme attack by world Jewry myself for over six years now, I have pondered this question again and again and finally a solution that appears to be almost self-evident now that it came to my mind has arisen.

When the Jewish lobby groups here in Canada who have been instigating and pushing their “HATE LAWS” realized some years ago that sec. 13(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act was actually a double-edged sword and some Muslim groups had the unmitigated audacity to turn these same laws upon the Jews they quickly began an all out effort to have sec. 13 of the Act removed from the statutes*. What that exercise illustrated was that any such “HATE” law, be it in the domain of the Human Rights Commissions or the Criminal Code of Canada is amenable to all Canadians, not just the Jewish lobbies. Thus the obvious answer to the goyim’s woes.

It’s time for Canadians of Germanic descent to stand up and take the bull by the horns and stop simply accepting their fate as victims of world Jewry’s program of hatred and instead become pro-active and utilize these same laws in their own defence. It’s time to stop retreating and time to go on the offensive. Time to reach out and grasp the sword of Truth, pick it up and begin to wield it, challenging the haters by applying the same hate crime laws to the actual perpetrators.

Let us fill our courtrooms around the nation with Section 319(2) “HATE CRIME” complaints against every Jewish person and Jewish media conglomerate and Jewish publishing house that has been spewing forth their vitriolic hatred against the German people for the past eighty years. Let us see how they like it when THEIR freedoms and their “rights” to defame and slander the German people are suddenly challenged from every quarter. Let us see how our federal government likes it when they have to investigate and act upon each and every legitimate grievance that the German people of Canada have to offer them in the way of injustice, prejudice and discrimination to their ethnic community. And let us see how the Jewish-controlled msm reacts to this unprecedented move by ethnic German Canadians who finally say to the government and to the world ENOUGH!

Prologue

I am certain that somewhere beyond this third rock from the Sun there must be a place of peace and truth where honesty and love prevail and children grow up free of mental conditioning so they can spend their productive adult lives doing positive and life-enhancing things that make them happy and joyful and fill their hearts with laughter. In such a place I imagine is where Adolf Hitler now resides watching over his people awaiting the day when their great sacrifices of 1939 to 1945 will eventually be vindicated and along with that vindication will come the release of the rest of the world from the restraints and the deception that have been imposed upon us all.

God be with us all.

———–

* At the moment it is sitting in the Senate awaiting final reading and approval by the Conservative government of Canada.

The Radical Press would like to pay a special thank you to Mr. Ian V. Macdonald for granting permission to use three of the Star Weekly front page illustrations from his superb book “Star Weekly at War” in this article.

StarWkly@War700

 

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

ARRESTSTATEMENT

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

“Willful Promotion of Hatred CC 319(2)”

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

By

Arthur Topham

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What’s Up with Bill C-304?

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

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

senate of canada1

                                Senate of Canada

 

Here are two things you can do:

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

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

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

Sample Senate letter:

Dear Honourable Senator,

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

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

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

Thank you for your service to this country.

Sincerely yours,

 

Sample Prime Minister letter:

To the Right Honourable Stephen Harper,

Dear Prime Minister,

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

Sincerely yours,

 

Contact information for Prime Minister Harper

Telephone: 613-992-4211

EMail: stephen.harper@parl.gc.ca

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

Senators: Alberta

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

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

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

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

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

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

Paul Fromm CAFE copy

By Kevin MacDonald
April 13, 2013

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

WhatcottImage1

Some excerpts and comments:

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

The Whatcott decision holds that in human rights cases:

· Truth is no defence;?

· Intent is no defence;?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Fromm emphasizes the Jewish role in this decision:

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

abellaFlag_zpsbf55ffb4

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

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

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

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

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

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

—–

CHRC: Gag Lemire Now – Who cares whether or not Section 13 is constitutional?

 

CHRC: Gag Lemire Now – Who cares whether or not Section 13 is constitutional?

 

Fanatical CHRC wants to impose a lifetime speech ban against Marc Lemire and refuses to wait for Court of Appeals to even rule on the constitutionality of the internet censorship law

http://blog.freedomsite.org/2012/12/chrc-gag-lemire-now-who-cares-whether.html

http://canadianhumanrightscommission.blogspot.ca/2012/12/chrc-gag-lemire-now-who-cares-whether.html

The fanatical and discredited Canadian Human Rights Commission is demanding that a lifetime speech ban be placed on internet webmaster Marc Lemire – and they are refusing to even allow the Federal Court of Appeals to make a ruling on the Constitutionality of Canada’s shameful internet censorship legislation – Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

The utter arrogance and obsession with censorship that infests all those who staff the Canadian Human Rights Commission is shocking to many Canadians.  Is it any wonder that its senior investigators consider freedom of speech to be “an American concept?”

But even in the face of their censorship empire (Section 13) crumbling around them, the censors insist on remaining aboard a sinking ship.” 

Over the past few years, Canadians of all political stripes have roundly condemned the fanatical and outrageous behavior of the Canadian Human Rights Commission and their “nazi fetishist” investigators.  Front page articles in the National Post denounced the CHRC.  Editorials from every major mainstream newspaper have called for the CHRC to get out of the thought control business.  The House of Commons has voted to repeal Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act and that bill is now before the Senate of Canada.   In the Lemire case, the handpicked Canadian Human Rights Tribunal was so disgusted over how the CHRC was conducting itself that a Senior Tribunal member not only found that Section 13 was unconstitutional, but that it was also an affront to the guarantees of freedom of speech in our Charter of Rights and Freedoms

As is typical for the elitist CHRC censors, they simply brushed aside all legitimate criticism. They responded by once again screwing Canadian taxpayers by hiring the super expensive public relations firm Hill & Knowlton for a whopping $170,000! This was a futile and an expensive attempt to reverse the tide of public opinion that was turning against them. But a leopard never changes its spots as the CHRC continued with its devious ways, including spying and trying to entrap Marc Lemire.

So desperate was the CHRC to repair the damage that had been done to its image that it hand picked an expert to write a review of Section 13. After collecting a hefty sum of money, the reviewer turned on them by recommending thatSection 13 be repealed! The only people supporting the CHRC’s draconian thought control regime were those who were directly paid and/or living off the ‘human rights teat.’

Knowing that their days of harassing and abusing Internet writers, bloggers and message board owners are numbered, the CHRC censors knew that the only thing they can do now, is to grind many people through the systems as possible, before their house of cards comes crashing down.

But they have a big problem, and that problems name is Marc Lemire!

Because of his nine year legal battle with the CHRC, and the fact that all human rights cases have been stopped pending a final determination in his case, the CHRC can’t pull out its Coup de grace, and issue lifetime speech bans on all those waiting.

Not only do they demand that a lifetime free speech ban be applied on Marc Lemire, but they don’t even have the decency to wait for the Federal Court of Appeals to rule whether Section 13 is even constitutional.

The CHRC has refused to agree to a stay of an earlier decision of the Federal Court – which is currently under appeal to the Federal Court of Appeals.  As crazy as that sounds, the CHRC is pushing for the punishment against Lemire even before the Federal Court of Appeals can even examine the case.

Because of the CHRC’s refusal; this now opens up a costly two-front battle that Lemire has to face.  While before the Federal Court of Appeals, he also has to fight a case before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal simultaneously.

Merry Christmas from Lemire:  Motion to Stay

As an early Christmas present to the censors, Marc Lemire has filed a 240 page motion to the Federal Court of Appeals requesting a stay of the earlier Federal Court ruling so that the CHRC cannot issue a lifetime speech ban against Lemire.

Here is a copy of the motion filed with the Federal Court of Appeals on December 11th, 2012, written by Marc Lemire’s courageous and brilliant lawyer – Barbara Kulaszka.

 

APPLICANT’S WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS

1.      The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, in a decision dated September 2, 2009, held that the applicant had contravened s. 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act by posting an article entitled AIDS Secrets on his website, the Freedomsite.  However, the Tribunal also concluded that s. 13(1) in conjunction with ss. 54(1) and (1.1) were inconsistent with s. 2(b) of the Charter, which guaranteed the freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression in that these provisions were not a reasonable limit within the meaning of s. 1 of the Charter. Since a formal declaration of invalidity was not a remedy available to the Tribunal, it refused to apply the provisions for the purposes of the complaint against the applicant and did not issue any remedial order against him. [CHRT Decision, para. 307 at Motion Record, page 116]

2.      The respondent Canadian Human Rights Commission filed a judicial review application which was allowed by Mr. Justice Mosley of the Federal Court on October 2, 2012. He upheld the constitutionality of section 13 by severing the penalty provisions of the Act which he declared unconstitutional. [Agent Y v. Lemire, [2012] F.C.J. No. 1233 at Motion Record, pp. 119-187]

3.      The Federal Court held that the application for judicial review was granted and the following judgment granted:

1. The application for judicial review is granted and the matter is remitted to

the Tribunal to;

a. issue a declaration that the publication of the article “AIDS Secrets”

by the respondent Marc Lemire constituted a breach of s 13 of the

Canadian Human Rights Act ; and

b. for determination of whether a remedy for the breach is to be

imposed under ss. 13 and 54(1)(a) and (b) of the Act;

2. It is declared that ss 54 (1) (c) and 54 (1.1) of the Canadian Human Rights

Act are of no force or effect pursuant to s 52 (1) of The Constitution Act,

1982, being schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (U.K.), 1982, c. 11,1982;

3. The respondent Agent Y is awarded costs for the preparation of

his record and his out of pocket disbursements for attendance at the

hearing against the respondent Marc Lemire.

[Judgment of the Federal Court, at Motion Record, p. 187]

4.      The applicant filed a Notice of Appeal from the decision of Mr. Justice Mosley on the following grounds:

(a)    Mr. Justice Mosley erred in applying the doctrine of severance in upholding s. 13 and ss. 54(1)(a) and (b) of the Canadian Human Rights Act;

(b)   Mr. Justice Mosley erred in basing his decision on a misreading of the Canadian Human Rights Act as it existed at the time s. 13 was upheld as a reasonable limit on freedom of expression under s. 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms by the Supreme Court of Canada in Canada (Human Rights Commission) v. Taylor, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 892;  this misreading of the Act informed the reasons given by Mr. Justice Mosley and led him into further error in upholding the constitutionality of s. 13 and 54(1)(a) and (b) of the Canadian Human Rights Act;

(c)    Pursuant to s. 50(2) of the Canadian Human Rights Act;  the Tribunal was entitled to examine the real and factual context in which s. 13 and s. 54 existed in determining whether the provisions remained a reasonable limit on freedom of expression within the meaning of  s. 1 of the Charter, including the manner in which complaints were prosecuted and the practical operation of the statutory scheme. The decision of the Tribunal that this evidence showed that ss. 13 and 54 were no longer a reasonable limit on freedom of expression was correct;

(d)   The extension in 2001 in the Anti- Terrorism Act, S.C. 2001, c. 41 of the application of s. 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act from telephone answering machines, as considered in Taylor,  to computer networks, including the Internet, has rendered s. 13 an unreasonable and unjustifiable limit on freedom of expression within the meaning of s. 1 of the Charter;

(e)    The allegation of “hatred” in s. 13 of the Act imports moral blameworthiness and stigma which renders the provision an unreasonable and unjustifiable limit on freedom of expression pursuant to s. 1 of the Charter;

(f)     The words “hatred” and “contempt” in s. 13 are vague, overbroad and highly subjective, rendering the provision an unreasonable and unjustifiable limit on freedom of expression within the meaning of  s. 1 of the Charter;

(g)    There is no rational, non-arbitrary or fair connection between s. 13 and the objectives of the Canadian Human Rights Act, rendering the provision an unreasonable and unjustifiable limit on freedom of expression within the meaning of s. 1 of the Charter;

(h)    Mr. Justice Mosley erred in challenging and reversing findings of fact made by the Tribunal to which he owed deference;

(i)      Mr. Justice Mosley erred in failing to respect and defer to Parliament’s repeal of s. 13 and s. 54(1) and (1.1) in Bill C-304, which passed the House of Commons on June 6, 2012 to protect freedom of expression.

5.      The article which the Tribunal found contravened section 13 was voluntarily removed from the Freedomsite by the applicant on April 9, 2004, some two weeks after he received notice of the complaint from the Commission.

6.      Only 8 persons from Canada viewed the article, a number which would include the applicant, the complainant Agent Y and the investigators at the respondent Canadian Human Rights Commission.

7.      The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal has adjourned two pending cases before it under section 13 on a sine die basis, until final determination of this case.

8.      In Canadian Jewish Congress v. Makow[2010] C.H.R.D. No. 13 the Tribunal held:

    I have reviewed the submissions of the parties and have concluded that it would be appropriate and would properly serve the interests of justice if this matter was adjourned. While the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled in Canada (Human Rights Commission) v. Taylor, 1990 3 S.C.R. 892 that s. 13 (1) of the CHRA is constitutional, the application now before the Federal Court seeks to bring clarity to this issue in view of the distinct factual and legal context giving rise to this Tribunal’s decision in Agent Y v. Lemire. Clearly Member Hadjis’ decision goes beyond the consideration alone of the penalty provisions in s. 54 of the CHRA, as he chose not to “read out” the penalty provisions and preserve s. 13 of the CHRA. It is now up to the Federal Court to determine the operability of s. 13 of the CHRA. This will achieve the clarity that the Commission has indicated and that I agree is desirable in order to allow the Tribunal to be able to determine this and other cases brought under s. 13 of the CHRA.

    For these reasons I hereby adjourn these proceedings sine die pending the final outcome in the Agent Y v. Lemire case.

9.      A similar ruling was made in Agent X v. Topham[2010] C.H.R.D. No. 14.

ARGUMENT

10.  This  Court is granted the jurisdiction to impose a stay of proceedings pursuant to Rule 50(1)(b) of the Federal Courts Rules which provides:

50. (1) The Federal Court of Appeal or the Federal Court may, in its discretion, stay proceedings in any cause or matter

(a)…

(b) where for any other reason it is in the interest of justice that the proceedings be stayed.

11.  In RJR-MacDonald Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 311, the Supreme Court of Canada set out a three-part test for determining whether a stay should be granted: (1) Whether there is a serious question to be tried; (2) Whether the applicant would suffer irreparable harm if the relief is not granted; and (3) Whether the balance of convenience is in favour of granting the stay.

(a)   Serious question to be tried

12.  It is submitted that the case raises a serious issue to be tried, namely, the constitutionality of  section 13 and ss. 54(1)(a) and (b) of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

13.  The Notice of Appeal raises serious issues with respect to the effect on freedom of speech of section 13, including whether the doctrine of severance was correctly applied by Mr. Justice Mosley and whether section 13 is still a justifiable limitation on Charter rights to free speech under s. 2(b) given its legislative extension in 2001 to the Internet and other computer mediated networks.

(b)   Irreparable harm

14.  If the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal, it can no longer issue a penalty order as the provisions authorizing such an order have been declared unconstitutional by the Federal Court. However, it can issue a cease and desist order against the applicant which is in effect for his lifetime and is a direct violation of his freedom of speech. The order, once made, would remain in effect notwithstanding any subsequent finding in this case that section 13 is unconstitutional.

15.  No damages can compensate the applicant for the loss of his right to free speech under such a cease and desist order.

(c)    Balance of convenience

16.  The article “AIDS Secrets” was voluntarily removed by the applicant in April of 2004 in an effort to settle the complaint, some two weeks after he received notice of the complaint. His remedial actions were ignored by the Canadian Human Rights Commission and the complainant, who instead began a search for other material with which to sustain the complaint. None of those other communications were found to be a violation of the Act.

17.  The public interest is not damaged by a stay of the order of Mr. Justice Mosley since the article found to contravene section 13 is not on the applicant’s website and has not been for almost nine years.  Only 8 persons from Canada looked at the article and probably all of those persons were those involved in the complaint, including the complainant, investigators from the Canadian Human Rights Commission and the applicant himself.

18.  There are presently only two cases pending before the Tribunal, that of Makow and Tophamsupra. Both cases have been adjourned sine die by the Tribunal pending final resolution of the Lemire case in order to obtain clarification of the law. This has been a well-founded caution since the penalty provisions of section 13 were declared unconstitutional.

19.  In the meantime, the House of Commons repealed section 13 and its remedial provisions in section 54 by Bill C-304 on June 6, 2012 to protect freedom of speech. The Bill is now at second reading before the Senate. The House of Commons recognized the threat section 13 posed to the freedoms of Canadians and passed a bill to repeal the law. This factor must play an important role in determining the balance of convenience in granting a stay.

Order Requested

20.  The applicant requests:

(a)    an order staying the judgment of Mr. Justice Mosley in Canadian Human Rights Commission v. Lemire, T-1640-09 pending final determination of the herein appeal;

(b)   Costs of the motion.

 ————————————

Can I count on you to support the cause of freedom and rid Canada of this disgusting though control legislation? My courageous lawyer Barbara Kulaszka and I have demonstrated what two dedicated freedom fighters can accomplish against overwhelming odds. We have single-handedly and doggedly fought the system and exposed the corrupt underbelly of the “Human Rights” Commission’s racket. Nothing ever comes easy when you are fighting such fanatical censors. This case is a seminal one, where the outcome will have serious implications on our right to think and speak freely in this country for generations to come. All Canadians will benefit when we manage to get this shameful law expunged from our legal books.

I cannot carry on this important fight alone. Your donations literally equal the survival of this case. No organizations are assisting with the bill at all.

Please support Marc Lemire’s Constitutional Challenge of Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

Marc Lemire is the only person to beat the CHRC in it’s 33 year history!

Marc Lemire

762 Upper James St

Suite 384

Hamilton, Ontario

L9C 3A2

 

Email:  marc@lemire.com

Web:  http://www.freedomsite.org | http://www.StopSection13.com

Twitter:  @marc_lemire

 

 

Why we must Support Marc Lemire’s Appeal of the Bizarre Federal Court ruling on Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act

KillSec.13
Why we must Support Marc Lemire’s Appeal of the Bizarre Federal Court ruling on Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act

From: http://christopherdiarmani.com/8674/big-brother/why-must-support-marc-lemire-appeal-bizarre-federal-court-ruling-section-13-censorship/

As you no doubt already know, MP Brian Storseth’s Private Members Bill C-304, an Act to repeal Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, has passed the Canadian Parliament. However, it must still pass the Senate before this piece of freedom-crushing legislation will be gone for good.

In the meantime, Marc Lemire’s long legal battle with serial plaintiff Agent Y continues.  Agent Y is the man who Sun TV commentator Ezra Levant refers to as “Canada’s most offended man” because he is personally responsible for over half of all complaints before Canada’s Human Rights Commission.

Marc Lemire photo

Freedom of Speech fighter Marc Lemire

Federal Court Justice Richard Mosley recently ruled in the case of Agent Y v. Lemire (view PDF of decision) and his decision was quite bizarre.  It struck down the penalty clause of the Human Rights Act, Section 54, while simultaneously upholding the constitutionality of the freedom-killing Section 13.

If you think that is confusing, don’t worry. You’re not alone.  Ezra Levant is also a little puzzled, and he’s done his best to explain what the federal court ruling means with some help from Chris Shafer of the Canadian Constitutional Foundation. You can watch that video at the bottom of this article.

It is important to remember that Marc Lemire is the only person to win their case in the 33 year history of the Canadian Human Rights Commission!  He is the guy who finally broke their 100% conviction rate.

So far this case has eaten up 8 years of Marc Lemire’s life and the battle is still not over.

Since this is currently the law of the land until the bill to repeal Section 13 passes the Senate, Marc Lemire must continue his battle to have the law struck down on constitutional grounds.

But is it really necessary to appeal this ruling since Bill C-304 will inevitably pass the Senate?

Yes, it is, and here’s why.

Sec13DeadlyEnemy

First, at the moment there are dozens of Section 13 cases that are “on hold“ pending the outcome of Marc Lemire’s case. Should Lemire decide NOT to appeal this ruling, then all those cases will be taken off hold and the unjust persecution of those Canadians will resume.

Second, we have no idea when Bill C-304 will pass the Senate, even though it’s practically guaranteed to do so. The problem lies, as I outlined above, with the time period between today and the day when the Bill C-304 is actually proclaimed into law. During this time period cases already “in the system” will move ahead, even though everyone knows the law will be repealed.

Since it is currently the law of the land, it will be applied as such, despite the impending repeal of Section 13.

As I see it, if for no other reason than supporting Lemire’s case prevents all these other cases from resuming, it is well worth supporting.

So I urge you to please join with me in supporting Marc Lemire’s Constitutional Challenge of Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

You can donate online through PayPal (you don’t need a PayPal account to donate as long as you have a credit card) by using this link:

http://christopherdiarmani.com/support-marc-lemire

If you prefer not to use PayPal you can mail your donation directly to Marc Lemire at:

Marc Lemire
762 Upper James St, Suite 384
Hamilton, Ontario  L9C 3A2

But I don’t support what Mr. Lemire says,”  you’re thinking.

So what? That’s not the issue, is it?

I don’t have to agree with what someone says in order to support their right to say it. That’s the whole problem with Section 13 of the Human Rights Act!  It takes Free Speech and turns it into Approved Speech.

The problem with Approved Speech should be obvious. So long as you’re on the side of those who get to decide, you’re okay.  But what happens when the political climate changes and you’re no longer on the side of the “approvers“?

Unless you are content to live in Orwell’s world, support Marc Lemire. He is the good guy in this fight and he has earned our support, if for no other reason than he is the first and only person to ever win a case against the Canadian Human Rights Commission!  Their 100% conviction rate was secure until they went after him.

Subscribe to the: Canadian Rights and Freedom Bulletin

Every week I send out my Rights and Freedom Bulletin to subscribers who want to know the latest developments in the battle for our God-given Rights and Freedoms.

Our government has forgotten the simple fact that governments cannot create rights, and that Government’s role is to protect our rights. My weekly Bulletin is my way of helping all Canadians remind our government of this basic, undeniable fact.

http://bulletin.rightsandfreedoms.org/