File #     20071016
Mr. Arthur Topham
4633 Barkerville Highway
Quesnel,B.C. V2J 6T8
September 17th, 2008

CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
Natalie Dagenais
Director, Investigations Division
344 Slater Street, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 1E1

Dear Ms. Dagenais:

I received your investigation Report regarding the CHRC complaint against me and my website Radicalpress.com filed by Harry Abrams and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada on September 5th, 2008. Reading through it I immediately noted that you had imposed a rather stringent ultimatum regarding the time which I would have to reply with any further comments. Such a deadline, 17 September 2008, left me only 12 days to compose my comments regardless of whatever circumstances might have been in place at the time. I found this gesture of ill-will on your part to be exceedingly arbitrary, unfair and frankly, insulting.

It is disturbing enough that your investigation process has taken from January 3rd, 2008 until August 27th, 2008 in order to come up with this report and in the interim period has subjected me to months and months of needless mental and financial duress only to then inform me that I have approximately 12 days within which to respond to it. Such a decision on your part Ms. Dagenais can only signal a calculated strategy and does not bode well for the CHRC’s impartiality in terms of it being viewed by Canadians as a fair and just body. I might justifiably ask whether Mr. Harry Abrams and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada also were given only 12 days to comment on my Response to the initial complaint sent to your office on January 3rd, 2008? It begs the question from the start as to whether we’re playing on a level field here. Had I been away on holidays for two weeks during the first part of September or out of town on business or otherwise unable to pick up my mail I would have been out of luck in terms of sending additional comments to the commission. Therefore, due to such unreasonable restrictions on both time and space for responding I feel compelled right at the commencement of this reply to express my sincere dissatisfaction with the manner in which you are treating me.

That said I will move directly into commenting on some of the highlights of your report, specifically those sections where I have noted errors in your facts and the inclusion of unwarranted assumptions.

I ought to also state at this point that while it is not my intention to be either rude or insolent it is most likely that you will find my comments, in most cases, highly uncomplimentary to both the complainants and to the Canadian Human Rights Commission and Tribunal. What I write is without prejudice or malice and is stated only in the interests of truth and justice.

Over the past two days, (September 15th & 16th, 2008) I have been observing the behaviour of CHRC members and their attorneys, as well as the lawyer for the Attorney-General of Canada, in the Lemire constitutional challenge to Section 13. What I have witnesssed thus far is a determined, adamant show of resistance on the part of CHRC lawyer Margot Blight and Simon Fothergill, the lawyer for the Attorney-General of Canada, to acknowledge any possibility that the CHRC might in any way be at fault in their zealous defence of this heinous section of the Canadian Human Rights Act. As well, while on the surface CHR Tribunal member Athanasios Hadjis is appearing to spar somewhat with both Fothergill and Blight it remains to be seen exactly where his sentiments lay.

Both this current constitutional challenge and the supposed “independent review” of the CHRC’s hate speech mandate by Richard Moon of the University of Windsor are possibly determining factors in the outcome of Mr. Lemire’s challenge to Section 13. They also have had an influence on my comments regarding your Report.

As I originally stated in my Response to this complaint, sent to Ms. Sandy Kozak on January 3rd, 2008, I steadfastly maintain that the complaint is a vexatious, spurious, and disingenuous charge and should have been dismissed outright after a thorough investigation by your division. Obviously that did not transpire. Now, judging from the scant amount of reference to my lengthy and detailed Response to the charges contained in your report it gives me pause to reflect as to exactly how much actual investigation and consideration were given to that document. From outer appearances the impression I got from reading the Report is that you already had in place (and I will touch upon this further on) a template response to whatever I had furnished in the way of explanations and you merely inserted the various bits of “evidence” that Mr. Abrams and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada supplied you with.

As well, it goes without saying that I have been following in depth all of the machinations which have been taking place throughout the blogosphere and in the media regarding the general public’s reaction to this unjust, draconian section of the CHR Act. I’ve spent countless hours reading and writing and debating the issues surrounding the origins and implementation and abuse of this tiny, yet dangerous, piece of anti-democratic legislation which has been repeatedly misused by both CHRC members and associated individuals for partisan purposes that should never have been allowed.

Since the commencement of this unjust process in November of 2007, when I first received this complaint, I have had to sacrifice untold amounts of energy and money in order to deal with something that no law-abiding Canadian citizen ought to be subjected to. The loss of self-employment from November 20th, 2007 to now has cost me thousands upon thousands of dollars in lost wages. My only means of supporting my family and maintaining a decent living is through the carpentry business that I operate but due to the draconian demands made upon me, necessitating a halt in my normal work schedule to deal with this issue, I have lost important contracts and numerous jobs that are essential to staying in business and remaining an independent and responsible member of society. You cannot obviously relate to this just as you cannot relate to the mental and emotional turmoil that subjecting someone to such a process puts a person through. Only experience of such a process would show you what it does to the victim and in the case of this complaint that is precisely what I am going through (and my family as well).

It boggles my mind at times when I reflect on how a body of people such as yourselves can go through the motions of pretending that you are actually serving some noble and just purpose in doing what you do to your fellow citizens. I ask myself, “How would I feel at the end of the day if I were tormenting a fellow human being and treating them like a lowly criminal and judging them as if they were somehow unfit to be treated with respect and dignity simply because another person with another agenda happened to lay some spurious, vexatious charge against someone?”

This Section 13 of the CHR Act is not a means of insuring that Canadians are treated equally and fairly Ms. Dagenais. In reality it is nothing short of being a curse; a form of black magic wrapped in the deceptive, linguistic robes of judicial legalese terminology like an iron fist covered by a velvet glove but basically concealed in the darkness of evil intent. You might laugh or think that I’m being over-dramatic in making such a radical pronouncement but were YOU the subject of such an attack I know that you would not be sitting there snickering to yourself and pretending that I must be out to lunch in making such apparently strange accusations.

Let me tell you a small story regarding this. It is has always been a common practice amongst the Talmudic Jews to employ curses in their efforts at keeping their fellow members in line and obeying the dictates of the Rabbis. Sufficient documentation exists within the Jewish Encyclopedia on the subject of “Cursing” to prove this fact. Bear in mind that the Jewish Encyclopedia is NOT a book published by anti-Semites or Jew haters but by the Talmudic Jews themselves. The article itself states, “Talmudic literature betrays a belief, amounting to downright superstition, in the mere power of the word…Not only is a curse uttered by a scholar unfailing even if undeserved…Scholars cursed sometimes not only with their mouths, but by an angry, fixed look. The unfailing consequence of such a look was either immediate death or poverty”. This notion of giving someone the “evil eye” is still used today and as the Jewish Encyclopedia shows it is a prescribed legal penalty under the Judaic Law. A modern day illustration of this practise is contained in the book The Witness, by Whittaker Chambers, the former Soviet spy who exposed the traitor Alger Hiss, who had infiltrated the U.S. State Department and was passing highly confidential documents to the then former Soviet Union during the 1930s and 1940s. In Chambers’ case, while he was in court he was faced with these very same curses by the Zionist Jewish lawyers defending Alger Hiss during this historic trial. Soon after Mr. Chambers’ experiences in court he relates how he was driven to the point of suicide by these very actions and but for a stroke of luck he failed in his attempt.

Another case is the historic example of the cursing of the famed Jewish philosopher Baruch Spinoza in the 17th Century by the Amsterdam rabbinate. Because he disagreed with the Talmud the following curse was put upon him: “By the sentence of the angels, by the decree of the saints, we anathematise, cut off, curse and execrate Baruch Spinoza, in the presence of these sacred books with the six hundred and thirteen precepts which are written therein, with the anathema wherein Joshua anathematized Jericho; with the cursing wherein Elisha cursed the children; and with all the cursings which are written in the Torah; cursed be he by day and cursed by night; cursed when he goeth out, and cursed when he cometh in; the Lord pardon him never; the wrath and fury of the Lord burn upon this man; and bring upon him all the curses of the firmament which are written in the Torah. There shall be no man to speak to him, no man to write him, no man show him any kindness, no man stay under the same roof with him, no man come nigh unto him”.

Spinoza was then banished from Amsterdam, persecuted and shunned until he died destitute at the age of forty-four in a Gentile city far from the Talmudic government that had laid this curse upon him.

Regardless of whether or not you believe these statements, they are, nonetheless, historic events and they find their place within the context of these comments because, the spirit and intent and language of the written words contained within Section 13 allow for this very process to manifest in ways that for most human beings unaffected by its evil pronouncements, the surreptitious, hidden effects of its power go unnoticed. It will also be noted that I believe, as I have stated in my Response, that certain personages who are of Zionist Jewish origins and who represent themselves to both Canada and Israel as duel citizens have played a decisive role in the insertion of this language into the CHR Act. For someone such as myself who has spend a considerable amount of time and energy over the years studiously documenting the methods by which the Zionists infiltrate and subvert unwary democratic governments this, of course, is no surprise but for those not versed in Zionist subterfuge and espionage tactics such assertions appear as bizarre as the one about cursing.

Having read this Ms. Dagenais you will now most likely refer to your little manual containing the “hallmarks of hatred” and compare notes with the list. Ah, yes, let’s see. Oh, yes, there it is. “ b) The messages use “true stories”, news reports, pictures and references from purportedly reputable sources to make negative generalizations about the targeted group”. Finding it you then promptly dismiss all that I have said from your mind.

But, if you do so, again you will have failed to grasp the true picture of what this legislation is all about. Ever since November 20th, 2007, when I first received the complaint from Harry Abrams and League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada I have literally been under its spell. There is not a day that has passed since that date when I haven’t carried the mental/emotional burden on my shoulders that such a charge produces. It’s the last thing on my mind as I lay in bed at night and the first thing on my mind when I awake either during my regular sleep or in the morning. It’s on my mind while I’m at work building a sundeck or repairing a roof or tiling a floor. It even haunts me in my dreams although not to the point of having nightmares over it. This has been ongoing now for 10 months or approximately 300 days. In many ways it is not only a curse but a form of mental torture as well and, as I have said, unless you are the victim of it, chances are your mind never ventures into such nether regions. Nonetheless, it is essential that you are made aware of it.

[Read more...]