Lisbon And The Zionist Nightmare

By Mike James in Germany – 8 November 2009

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

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

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

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

But you are heroes. And I love you.

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

(more…)

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

By Rev. Ted Pike

October 11, 2009

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Email these two messages to the President immediately:

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

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

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

Your emails should be there first thing Monday morning.

Endnote:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Editor’s Note: After posting this last night and sending it out to my list I received word from one of my readers that the creator of this petition, Joseph C. Ben-Ami, is connected with B’nai Brith Canada. The following bio is from his website.

Joseph C. Ben-Ami

“Widely regarded as one of Canada’s leading conservative thinkers and strategists, Joseph C. Ben-Ami is the president of the Canadian Centre for Policy Studies. Before joining the Centre, Ben-Ami was Executive Director of the Institute for Canadian Values and, before that, Director of Government Relations and Diplomatic Affairs for the well known Jewish human rights group B’nai Brith. Prior to this he was a policy aid to Stephen Harper, Canada’s current Prime Minister, and Stockwell Day, Harper’s predecessor as party leader. He also served as National Director of Operations on Day’s 2002 leadership campaign. Ben-Ami writes extensively on current affairs and public policy and is a much sought after public speaker and frequent radio and television commentator. A strong and unapologetic defender of conservatism and conservative values, Ben-Ami is known for his clear and independent thinking on issues.”

Bearing this in mind it begs the question as to his motives in creating the petition? Is it designed to furnish B’nai Brith Canada with a list of those who oppose sec. 13 of the CHR Act? Or possibly a poll for the Zionist forces working here in Canada?

Whatever it is I still think it’s a damn good way of determining the efficacy of the Canadian blogging and communication network that exists outside the mainstream Zionist-controlled media.

If people are too scared to sign their name for a petition to save their freedom of speech then they’ve already succumbed to the wishes of BB (that’s Big Brother or B’nai Brith. Take your pick).

Please try to pass this petition to as many folks as you can. Don’t stall on doing so. Your freedom of expression is in mortal danger at this point in Canada’s history.]

——————–

Joseph C. Ben-Ami
Reflections of an unrepentant conservative

October 15, 2009

As you know, freedom of speech is an essential characteristic of a free society. In Canada, however, this freedom has been under attack in recent years under the pretext of protecting and promoting human rights. Laws that prohibit the free expression of opinion undermine the very foundations of a free and tolerant society and are, therefore, illegitimate and must be abolished.

The Canadian Centre for Policy Studies ( http://www.policystudies.ca/ ) has just launched an online petition calling on lawmakers at all levels of government in Canada to examine legislation within their jurisdiction intended to protect and promote human rights, and to remove those provisions that prohibit or otherwise limit the free and sincere expression of opinion, i.e. section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

Please take a minute to sign this petition yourself and email it to your friends and family for their signature as well. You can do so now by clicking on the following link or by cutting and pasting the url into your browser. You can also post the link to social networking sites like facebook or in any forum you regularly visit.

Let’s see how many signatures we can gather on this important issue.

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/defend-freedom-of-speech-in-canada.html

On behalf of my lovely wife Shastah and myself I want to take this moment to thank everyone who made our trip to the 24th annual George Orwell dinner in Victoria, B.C. a reality.

Travel from our relatively remote area of the province to the island is expensive and it was only due to the generosity of those who donated funds that we were able to attend this important gathering of free speech advocates from across Canada.

This was the second time that we were able to enjoy the fellowship of people on the front lines of those fighting to retain the right to speak out their truths in the face of a brutal and alarmingly dangerous force: the government of Canada and its bureaucratic agent known as the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC).

Due to time restrictions at the moment I cannot elaborate on the meeting but will do so over the next while.

Arthur Topham

Pub/Ed

RadicalPress.com

[Editor’s Note: No sooner had I published my recent article of October 6, 2009 on Harry Abrams and his attempts to vilify me and RadicalPress.com by putting words in my mouth that weren’t mine I learned from FreeDominion.com that co-owner Mark Fournier had made the decision to ban Harry for yet another alleged case of further lying and defamation and alteration of documents designed to make Marc Lemire appear to be an unsavory character.

The following thread from the FreeDominion.com forum will explain the details of why Mark Fournier took such drastic action against B’nai Brith Canada’s B.C. representative for the League for Human Rights.]

——————–
(more…)

                  Douglas Christie - Canadian Free Speech League
___________________________________________________________________________

CANADIAN FREE SPEECH LEAGUE
PO Box 24052
4420 West Saanich Road
Victoria, BC  V8Z 7E7
Telephone 250-590-2979   Fax 250-479-3294

BY EMAIL

nancy.lafontant@chrt-tcdp.gc.ca

October 6, 2009

Nancy LaFontant, Registry Officer
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
160 Elgin Street, 11th Floor
Ottawa, ON K1A 1J4

Dear Ms. LaFontant:

Re:      Harry Abrams and The League of Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada v. Arthur Topham and RadicalPress.com
Complaint No. : 20071016

Hearing

I would like to indicate, on behalf of the Canadian Free Speech League, that the decision of Member Hadjis in Lemire is morally binding and legally persuasive to the argument that the hearing against Mr. Topham should not proceed. This would be a waste of judicial time and contrary to fundamental justice. We are of the view, in light of the Canadian Human Rights Commission’s seeking of judicial review, that the CHRC regards Member Hadjis’s decision as more than just affecting penalty clauses.

Our view is that this matter should be dealt with by a preliminary motion in order to avoid unnecessary waste of time and expense in the defence of the matter and the re-litigation of the constitutional question, which would be inevitably necessary, if this matter were to proceed.

It is unfair in the extreme, for government-funded entities like the Commission and well-funded organizations like B’nai Brith to put private individuals and small-organizations defending free speech to the expense of a full-blow hearing, when the constitutional validity of the enabling legislation is impugned by the Tribunal itself. The principle of stare decisis requires this matter be resolved by a higher authority, if there is any doubt, and there certainly seems to be doubt in the mind of the Commission, considering its decision to seek judicial review.

Our view is that this issue of whether to proceed or not needs a separate hearing as soon as possible. Would the Tribunal please accept this as a motion on our part, accepting the issue of constitutional validity directly: That a date be set for argument about constitutional validity and the existing hearing dates be abandoned.

Yours truly,
Douglas H. Christie
General Counsel
DHC/kmg

cc
Arthur Topham
Daniel Poulin
Anita Bromberg
Harry Abrams
Marvin Kurz
Paul Fromm
Danielle Desrosiers

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

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

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

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

(more…)

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

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

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

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

God grant them courage to continue on!]

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

What’s New

01/10/2009

Judicial Review Application in the Warman v. Lemire case

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

————

THANKS TO MAIKERU OF FREEDOMINION.COM FOR THIS APT IMAGE

A New Day or the Same Old Shit?
By Arthur Topham
October 1, 2009

The decision on September 30th, 2009 by the Canadian Human Rights Commission to obstinately forge ahead with the Harry Abrams & B’nai Brith Canada v. Arthur Topham and RadicalPress.com sec. 13(1) “hate crime” hearing was, given all the past machinations by this quasi-judicial state policing organ, practically a foregone conclusion.

Still, one member on www.FreeDominion put it into a rather succinct and poignant context by posting the above image; one which basically symbolizes the mindset of this government appointed bounty-hunting group who, over the past decade or so have ridden roughshod over the sacred rights of all Canadians in their endless quest to appease the politically correct crowd of foreign lobbyists such as B’nai Brith Canada and the Canadian Jewish Congress better known today, thanks to Ezra Levant and the blogosphere, as Canada’s “Official Jews” or “OJs” for short. Sort of brings to mind OJ Simpson for some reason.

I suppose one could also have used the album cover from the old British rock group “Blind Faith” as well as it too exemplifies this pig-headed, mulish refusal to recognize the obvious fact that Canadians are not in the least impressed with government agencies and highly suspect legislation that strips them of their fundamental Charter rights to freedom of speech, especially legislation that with the recent Hadjis decision of September 2, 2009, clearly shows that sec. 13(1) is an unreasonable infringement of Canadians’ rights to freedom of speech as written into our Constitution.

The Commission’s dogged refusal to see the light on sec. 13(1) is reason enough to expect Canadians to grit their teeth and growl in indignation. Such chutzpah on the part of these Bolshevik Cheka baboons to expect approval from the public for their highly suspect actions given the recent Hadjis decision in the Warman v. Lemire case.

Some recent comments from other victims and commentators on this draconian, unconstitutional legislation include:

Ezra Levant:

“P.S. Here’s proof of how malicious the CHRC is — and how disrespectful they are of Hadjis, Lustig and the CHRT. They are still prosecuting section 13 cases, even though the law has been declared illegal. They are literally using a law that is not functional, to censor Canadians in disregard of our Charter.

That’s malicious prosecution territory; that’s abuse of office territory; that’s piercing the corporate veil and suing Lynch and her mob personally territory. I have no idea who has given them that legal advice, but if I were a section 13 victim still being hounded by Lynch, I’d sue her and every staffer involved personally for illegal conduct. Here’s what I mean: [quotes Poulin’s letter of Sept. 30. Ed.]

Disgusting. And as a former member of the B’nai Brith Youth Organization and a former camper at Camp B’nai Brith in Pine Lake, Alberta, I’m embarrassed that an organization I once loved would be party to such an un-Jewish, un-Canadian, illiberal prosecution. Jews using the state to bully their political enemies into silence: are they trying to take the bookburner title away from Burny and the CJC? Book burners: they’ve already got the right initials. I can’t think of a more effective way to promote hatred against Jews than to have Jews as the public face of bullying censorship. All this, after B’nai Brith itself tasted, first-hand, the unfairness of HRC censorship complaints at the hands of radical Islam.

Fire. Them. All.

And then Sue. Them. All.”
—————————-

Jay Currie:

“What strikes me as interesting here is that the CHRC seems to take the position that Hadjis’s decision in Lemire was strictly with respect to the unconstitutionality of s. 54(1)(c). Certainly Hadjis’ words can be construed in that manner:

However, I have also concluded that s. 13(1) in conjunction with ss. 54(1) and (1.1) are inconsistent with s. 2(b) of the Charter, which guarantees the freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression. The restriction imposed by these provisions is not a reasonable limit within the meaning of s. 1 of the Charter. Lemire

Whether that is what Hadjis actually meant is a whole other question. His analysis of Taylor turns on the remedial and conciliatory assumption made by Dickson in Taylor. As I wrote earlier, the Warmanization of the Commission, its transformation into a prosecutorial entity when it came to “hate speech” cases, lies at the root of Hadjis decision.

But what is equally interesting here is that the Commission seems to be signaling that it will not appeal Lemire but rather try to brazen it out in Topham.

Which will be interesting as Topham and the intervenors are like to raise the constitutional issue at every turn.”

BlazingFurCat:

[In comments section writes:]

“You are right CHRC is a 4 letter word now, however we have to drive a stake through Section 13’s heart as Jenny is in full Vampire Zombie mode.”

———————

Upon receiving word from Daniel Poulin, Counsel for the damned CHRC, I wrote the following reply which was sent off to the Tribunal and all parties very early this a.m. It basically summarizes my position with respect to both the Commission and the Complainants. Please pass this information along to your friends and associates. Thank you.

October 1,  2009

Nancy Lafontant
Registry Officer
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Nancy.Lafontant@chrt-tcdp.gc.ca

Dear Nancy Lafontant,

RE: Harry Abrams and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada v. Arthur Topham and the RadicalPress.com
File Number: T1360/9008

In an email to all parties sent September 30, 2009, Commission counsel Daniel Poulin states:

“Dear Tribunal and Parties,

We write further to the correspondence that has been exchanged by the parties in regards to the impact of the Warman v Lemire decision recently rendered by the Tribunal.

It is the position of the Commission submits [sic] that the Tribunal should proceed on hearing the matter pending before it in the present case. Consequently, the matter should neither be adjourned sine die or simply dismissed.

In Warman v. Lemire, the Tribunal found that the penalty provision in s. 54(1)(c) was not a reasonable limit on freedom of expression under the Charter.  In the instant case, the Commission will no longer be seeking a penalty under 54(1)(c) of the Act as was originally included in its Statement of Particulars.  The Commission therefore respectfully submits that the Tribunal ought to proceed with a hearing of the Complaint to determine if section 13 has been infringed, and if so, to exercise its discretion under s. 54(1)(a).

Yours truly,

Daniel Poulin

Legal Counsel

Canadian Human Rights Commission”

Allow me to state to the Tribunal at this pivotal juncture in the current proceedings that the decision by the Commission to pursue this case in the face of the recent Hadjis decision of September 2, 2009 concerning Warman v. Lemire, although it comes as no surprise to the Respondent, nonetheless is still a shocking indictment of the maliciousness of this quasi-judicial organization.

There are definite reasons why the Commission is persisting in its attempt to carry on with this case which need to be addressed again at this time.

The peculiar and possibly precedent-setting nature of the Harry Abrams and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada v. Arthur Topham and the RadicalPress.com complaint makes it an extraordinary benchmark case and is therefore being assigned significant importance by both the Commission and the Complainants. It is the sense of the Respondent (expressed to the Tribunal on numerous previous occasions) that the outcome of this particular case will have far-reaching effects upon any future cases of its kind should the now discredited section of the CHR Act continue to remain in force.

Of paramount importance to the Complainants, who it must always be recognized are acting not on behalf of Canada but on behalf of a foreign nation-state, i.e. Israel, is the critical need to establish in Canadian law a special precedent that will potentially prohibit every Canadian from publishing on the Internet any material critical of the Zionist policies of the Israeli state;  policies now recognized around the world as being fundamentally racist, supremacist and apartheid in nature.

This malefic condition, contained in the actual wording of the complaint itself, where it is clearly stated “and/or citizens of Israel,” is vital to the B’nai Brith International agenda now being fervently and feverishly pursued throughout all Western democracies under various guises. Its tell-tale identifying mark is detectable by the common thread of “hate” linking them all together.

In essence, this case reflects not only B’nai Brith Canada’s determination to maintain their present (unwarranted) status within Canadian society as one of its most powerful foreign Zionist lobbyist groups (again exemplified in the pro-Zionist foreign policies of the current Harper Conservative government) but of even greater importance for them, of fulfilling their hidden, seditious agreement with this foreign nation to maintain and enforce, via this now unconstitutional section of the Canadian Human Rights Act, their longstanding ability to control the essential freedoms of all Canadians presently guaranteed by Canada’s Constitution Act of 1981.

The whole of the content on RadicalPress.com complained of by B’nai Brith Canada exemplifies the position that I have steadfastly maintained regarding the extremely dangerous, supremacist political ideology known as Zionism. It is for this reason and this reason alone that B’nai Brith Canada is using and abusing sec. 13(1) of the CHR Act in order to accomplish what they obviously believe to be a political fait accompli based upon this despicable, anti-democratic, anti-Charter legislation.

In a truly free and democratic society (one not dominated by these special foreign Zionist lobbyists), those supporting and professing to believe in such a heinous, racist ideology would be forced to defend their position via logic, reason, intellect, open debate and actual evidence rather than resorting to such unscrupulous totalitarian tactics as feigning being “minority” victims of “hate” and “anti-Semitism” and attempting to use the now discredited sec. 13(1) of the CHR Act to escape the necessity of defending their political doctrines via a free exchange of ideas by having the state intervene on their behalf under false pretenses.

The Commission, by its overt, stubborn refusal to acknowledge the obvious, i.e., the unconstitutionality of sec. 13(1), has revealed itself to be what most critics of this section have deemed it to be – a willing, colluding, malicious participant and supporter of the harshest, most repressive piece of legislation ever to have graced Canada’s once proud legal tradition of fair and just jurisprudence. This revelation alone ought to give the Tribunal cause to pause and reconsider the Commission’s unfortunate, misguided and unconstitutional decision to persist in its frivolous folly.

The Hadjis decision has made it abundantly clear for all reasonable Canadians that sec. 13(1) is unjust, irrational, anti-democratic, vindictive and counter to Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I trust that when the Tribunal rules on my motion to dismiss this vexatious, spiteful attack upon my basic human rights that it will see fit to rise above the transparent, ill-conceived and antiquated arguments of both the Commission and the Complainants and rule in favour of true democracy and freedom of speech in the same honorable and expedient manner as that displayed by Member Hadjis.

If there is any further formality that you require, please let me know as soon as possible.

Sincerely,

Arthur Topham pro se
Publisher/Editor
——————-

Arthur Topham is the Publisher and Editor of RadicalPress.com. He is currently involved in a free speech battle with the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada.

He is also in extremely dire need of financial support to sustain this battle with the forces of repression and censorship as he is not able to work during this period of intense litigation with the Canadian Human Rights Commission and the CHR Tribunal. Any donations therefore would be most welcome. Please see the following url on the Home Page (upper right hand corner) http://www.radicalpress.com/?page_id=657 regarding donations. Also there is a “DONATE” button there for Paypal or here at https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=4466120 . Feel free to use any of them if you can help out. Thanks.

Arthur welcomes all feedback to his articles and can be reached at radical@radicalpress.com .

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

Holman Hunt: The Finding of the Saviour in the Temple
________________________________________________________________________

http://www.radicalpress.com/?page_id=1097
The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today
by Elizabeth Dilling
(First Published 1966)

Elizabeth Dilling
_________________________

Dear Radical Reader,

Elizabeth Dilling, an American born in 1894 in Chicago, was one of those personalities who, like Douglas Reed of Great Britain and author of the classic on Political Zionism, The Controversy of Zion, chose to give up a life of comfort in order to do her part in exposing the Zionist Beast which she recognized back in the early 1930s when on a trip to Soviet Russia as an imminent and growing threat to every democratic nation that wished to live in peace and harmony.

Like every writer who digs long and deep enough into the soils of history searching for the root causes of the apparent woes of our contemporary world Elizabeth Dilling soon realized that behind the facade of this new “workers’”, “communist” system, brought about by alien forces which were able to capture, through vast sums of blood money, sleuth and deception and coup, one of the world’s then greatest nations, there lurked the same Rothschild Jewish cabal who had been instrumental in destroying nations since the time of the French Revolution.

Due to Mrs. Dilling being a devout Christian and because she was able to witness the blatant, malicious attitude of the Bolsheviks toward anything Christian in Russia after the coup of 1917, upon her return to the states she set out to reveal the faces of these murderous attackers and destroyers who were torturing and starving and killing Christian (and non-Christian) Russians by the millions. In doing so she also came to realize that her own nation was being deeply infiltrated and influenced by these same traitorous forces who had conquered Russia. Not only had they slaughtered the Tzar and his whole family and then proceeded to round up millions of Christian citizens and sent them to a sure death in the gulags of northern Russia but most astonishing of all these same people had originally been living in the United States and plotting the overthrow of the Russian Empire for decades!

All things considered therefore I believe that Elizabeth Dilling, like her contemporary Douglas Reed, was a prophetess in her own time. Her various works, including The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today, were some of the first critical analyses, along with those of Henry Ford Sr., of Bolshevism, Communism and Zionism as one and the same Beast with numerous names. Her writings, although tough to dig up due to Zionist subterfuge, remain a living testament to her courage and her foresight in revealing the truth during a period of American history when to speak out was to risk the inevitable attacks of the already brutal and malicious Zionist Jew establishment.

Groups like the American Jewish Congress and B’nai Brith International along with its attack-dog, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), were always ready and willing to slander, malign, vilify and legally harass anyone who dared speak out about the Zionist plan to implement their one world government and Elizabeth Dilling was forced to deal with their Talmudic tactics from the moment she picked up the sword of truth and justice and began wielding it.

One striking thing about Dilling’s early works and her revelations concerning the Zionist forces and their Babylonian Talmudic underpinnings is the fact that the organization known as B’nai Brith International, working throughout the world under various sub-titles such as Canada’s “League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada” remain firmly entrenched in Western democracies and are still performing the same seditious agenda for which they were initially created, that of being the Zionist guard dogs whose purpose is to keep their nefarious agenda well hidden from public purview.

This has always been my position with respect to the Canadian Human Rights Act sec. 13(1) “hate crime” complaint laid against myself and RadicalPress.com by Harry Abrams and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada. It has nothing to do with discrimination against “Jews and/or citizens of Israel” but everything to do with silencing one of the rare websites in Canada that is willing to do what Elizabeth Dilling did and what Douglas Reed did over half a century ago, i.e. expose the Zionist agenda to the public eye.

In their Statement of Particulars to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal the complainants, Harry Abrams and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada, listed a number of the earlier chapters contained in Elizabeth Dilling’s book The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today which I had posted on my site. Likely they would have posted all of the chapters had I been able to format and get them up but thanks to having to write legal papers in my defense I didn’t have the time to do that. Now I have found the time and the remainder of the book is up on the RadicalPress site and can be located on the Home Page in the upper right hand corner under “Pages” where its title appears. Just click on the title and you will be taken to the page you see below.

Dilling’s study of the Babylonian Talmud – its orgins, purpose and contents – is an eye-opener, not only for Christians who may still be suffering under the delusion that the Zionist Jews are somehow their best friends and allies and God’s “chosen people” but for non-Christians as well who, whether they’re members of another faith or atheists or merely secular students of life, still may be ignorant of the details contained within this horrendous book of self-deception. Once read, this study of Elizabeth Dillings ought to dispel any misconceptions concerning why one can’t walk into any library in the country and find an English copy of the Babylonian Talmud standing amongst the Holy Bible or the Qu’ran or any of the other notable writings of the world’s great religions.

Now Harry Abrams tells us in a thread on the FreeDomion.com website (see: Harry Abrams, Classical Liberalism vs. Human Rights Page 7) where he has been posting lately, “I don’t know much about the Talmud myself…” yet he and B’nai Brith Canada have gone to great lengths to suggest that what I published of Elizabeth Dilling’s work is not true and that I only published it in order to promote “hatred” toward “Jews and/or citizens of Israel.” I will leave it up to readers to judge as to whether or not Harry is correct in his allegations.

One final thing. This book is not just about the Jewish “religion.” It’s about the type of mindset that is created when people are fed the ideas that are contained in it. It’s also about how those ideas are then further translated into political programs such as Zionism which reflect the inherent views of the Talmudic Rabbis who have been instilling this paradigm into the heads and hearts of Jews for over two thousand years; views which have created over time a group psychopathology wherein the Zionists of today firmly believe that they actually ARE God’s chosen people and that they ARE IN FACT the MESSIAH and have been assigned by GOD to lead and control the rest of humanity as if we were but dumb cattle or sheep in need of a guiding, earthly shepherd.

Please pass this on to others who may find the information contained in Elizabeth Dilling’s book of value in figuring out why all the pieces of the puzzle still haven’t fallen into place and the Zionist ideology and the mystifying state of Israel continue to remain an enigma for so many.

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

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

——————————-

http://www.radicalpress.com/?page_id=1097

The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today
by Elizabeth Dilling

http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=766
The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today
by Elizabeth Dilling
Ch. I: THE PHARISEES, THE TALMUD, AND MODERN JUDAISM

http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=767
The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today
by Elizabeth Dilling
Ch. II: THE TALMUD REVILED

http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=773
The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today
by Elizabeth Dilling
Ch. III: THE TALMUD AND BIBLE BELIEVERS

http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=870
The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today
by Elizabeth Dilling
Ch. IV: JUDAISM — ANTI-GENTILISM AND EXPLOITATION OF NON-JEWS

http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=871
The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today
by Elizabeth Dilling
Ch. V: TALMUDIC IMMORALITY, ASININITY AND PORNOGRAPHY: THE REPROBATE MIND

http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=873
The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today
by Elizabeth Dilling
Ch. VI: JUDAISM NOT MONOTHEISTIC

http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=881
The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today
by Elizabeth Dilling
Ch. VII: JUDAISM AND PAGANISM

http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=1090
The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today
by Elizabeth Dilling
Ch. VIII: DEMONOLOGY OF THE PHARISEES

http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=1091
The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today
by Elizabeth Dilling
IX: JEWS NOT A RACE

http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=1092
The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today
by Elizabeth Dilling
X: JEWS GOD’S “CHOSEN”?

http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=1093
The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today
by Elizabeth Dilling
XI: JEWS AND MARXISM — SOCIALISM — COMMUNISM

http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=1094
The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today
by Elizabeth Dilling
XII: THE JEWS AND THE COMMUNIZATION OF RUSSIA

http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=1095
The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today
by Elizabeth Dilling
Ch. XIII: MODERN JEWISH “ANTI-COMMUNISM”

http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=1096
The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today
by Elizabeth Dilling
Ch. XIV: PROPHECY AND THE DEVELOPING ANTI-CHRIST WORLD GOVERNMENT

———————-

Arthur Topham is the Publisher and Editor of RadicalPress.com. He is currently involved in a free speech battle with the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada.

He is also in extremely dire need of financial support to sustain this battle with the forces of repression and censorship as he is not able to work during this period of intense litigation with the Canadian Human Rights Commission and the CHR Tribunal. Any donations therefore would be most welcome. Please see the following url on the Home Page (upper right hand corner) http://www.radicalpress.com/?page_id=657 regarding donations. Also there is a “DONATE” button there for Paypal or here at https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=4466120 . Feel free to use any of them if you can help out. Thanks.

Arthur welcomes all feedback to his articles and can be reached at radical@radicalpress.com .

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

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

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

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

—————

Foreword

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

French miniature of 1278 showing King Solomon reading Torah
_____________________________________________________________

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

Foreword

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

—————

Foreword

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(more…)

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

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

—————

Foreword

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

—————

Foreword

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Foreword

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Catch-22

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

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

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

Bishop Richard Williamson

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

Lawyer Sylvia Stolz and Revisionist and lawyer Horst Mahler

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

  Scientist Germar Rudolf

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

Robert Faurisson-French Revisionist

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

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

Where is Amnesty International?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Canadian B’nai B’rith

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

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

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

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

Who’s Afraid of the Big Bad Truth?

Is somebody afraid of the truth here?

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

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

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

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

It’s a dog’s life for Israel’s pet politicians
Canadian Arab News

By Greg Felton
September 10, 2009

(Judith, a university student in her early 20s picks up the TV remote and sits down on her living room sofa. The TV comes on, and she calls to her mother.) “Hey Mom, what channel is that reality show of yours on?”

Mother: “87.”

Judith: “It’s not here. There’s some kind of political talk show.”

Mother: (comes in from the kitchen) Oh, I forgot! Damned cable company shuffled the channels again. Try channel…Hey, isn’t that Brian Cohen? Oooh, I like him! He made mincemeat of that idiot Stephen Harper on Face of the Nation. Looks like he’s got a new show. (She sits down next to Judith) Turn it up! Turn it up!”

Brian Cohen: “… and welcome again to Pet Politicians, the show where we talk to politicians and the animals they love. Today, I’m pleased to welcome to the show Alan Baker, Israel’s ambassador to Canada. Welcome, Alan.”

Alan Baker: “Good to be here, Brian.”

Cohen: “And I see you brought two friends along.” (The two men are sitting in club chairs across from each other in a den-like room. Two dogs are sitting in front of Alan Baker and jumping up for attention.) “Who’s this” (pointing to the shar-pei).

Baker: “This is Harper. I’ve had her for about four years now.”

Cohen: “Harper? Did you name her after Harper Lee, who wrote To Kill a Mockingbird?”

Baker: “Nope—the prime minister. Despite the difference in sex, it seemed like the logical thing to do.” The four-legged one here (Baker starts petting Harper enthusiastically) doesn’t bark and is easy to please.”

Harper takes a break from a summer romp at his favourite dog park.

Cohen: “Er, how do those factors relate to the two-legged Harper?”

Baker: “The prime minister can absolutely be relied on not to make Israel look bad. No matter what news might get reported by anti-Israeli news hounds or other governments, Stephen doesn’t say anything. He’s absolutely loyal. It’s almost as if he doesn’t know any bad news is going on. (To Harper) Just like you, huh girl? Who doesn’t make a fuss, eh? Who’s a good dog! (Harper jumps up and licks Baker’s face repeatedly.)

Cohen: “That’s not very complimentary of the prime minister, though, is it?”

Baker: “Sure it is! For example, Canada doesn’t need to hear the story of how Israelis are killing Palestinians for their organs to sell on the black market. Just because some anti-Semitic Swedish newspaper chose to print this ‘blood libel’ doesn’t mean Harper has to give it credibility by talking about it. Also, when Israel threw two Arab families out of their homes in East Jerusalem where they had lived for 56 years, many in the world turned on Israel. Not Stephen! Not a peep.”

Cohen: “But these stories are true. Israel has been killing Palestinians for their organs, at least since 1992, and Israel has no right to any part of East Jerusalem. That’s Palestinian land under international law and…

Baker: “True?! False?! International law?! What’s the difference! If news makes Israel look bad it’s anti-Semitic!” (Baker is starting to get a little testy.)

Cohen: (changes tack fast) “So-o-o, Harper the shar-pei…she looks pretty healthy.”

Baker: (calmed down) “Yes, we take good care of her. I stroke her regularly, give her treats when she’s been especially good, and feed her a special food, the same one she had when she was a pup.”

Cohen:“Did you get her from a breeder?”

Baker: “Yes, we went to B’nai Brith Kennels. They have an excellent record in breeding and developing dogs in Ottawa. All their animals are fed Hasbara, a food specially formulated to make them look good and feel good. B’nai Brith also spays and neuters all its political animals and conducts rigorous obedience training.”

Cohen: “So, she listens to you?”

Baker: “Does she ever! She rolls over and plays dead on command, always keeps two steps behind me….”

Cohen: “I assume this trait is also analogous to the PM.”

Baker: “Of course. What else but ‘obedient’ can you call a politician who puts Israel’s interests ahead of his own citizens’ constitutional rights? For example, Abousfian Abdelrazik, tortured in his native Sudan, was kept in the Canadian embassy for a year before being allowed to return home to Canada.

“Suaad Hagi Mohamud, a Toronto woman, was stopped at Nairobi’s airport because an official (chuckle!) didn’t think her lips matched her passport photo. Rather than help her, Harper upheld our policy of Muslim profiling and forced her to endure an 11-week ordeal and a DNA test to prove her identity.

“Of course, Harper’s refusal to do anything to bring child soldier Omar Khadr home from Guantánamo is legendary.” (The other dog, a chihuahua, has been yipping throughout the interview and now Baker finally picks her up.) “Yes, Kenney, I see you, there! I haven’t forgotten you!”

Cohen: “Kenney?! Do I have to ask?”

Baker: “Probably not, but you might as well.”

Cohen: “Is she named after immigration minister Jason Kenney?”

Baker: “Not exactly, She’s named for the Jason Kennels, where we got her. It’s the small-dog subsidiary of B’nai Brith Kennels. Still, there are similarities with the minister.”

Cohen: “Such as?”

Kenney at the cottage

Baker: “She’s very touchy and goes into barking hysterics at the least provocation. Quite the opposite of Harper, actually.”

Cohen: “How does that make her like Jason Kenney? ”

Baker: “Earlier this year during Israel’s operation in Gaza, Khaled Mouammar, president of the Canadian Arab Federation, called Kenney a ‘professional whore who supports war.’ Kenney went barking mad! He went and cut off all federal funding to CAF. That was clearly an uncalled-for overreaction, but it’s understandable. It just kills Kenney to hear anyone condemn Israel’s right to defend its homeland.”

Cohen: “But the concept of a ‘Jewish people’ was debunked by no less than an Israeli scholar, Professor Shlomo Sand, so the idea of Jewish ‘homeland‘ is logically fallacious.” (Kenney starts to growl and bark.)

Baker: “See what happens when you upset Kenney?”

Cohen: “Indeed. Well that’s all the time we have. Thank you, Alan Baker, for being our guest. (They reach across and shake hands.) And thank you for bringing Harper and Kenney. It just proves that there’s no bitch like a political bitch. See you next time on Pet Politicians.”

Mother: (presses the mute button) “Whoa! You don’t see that kind of honesty on regular TV. What channel is this?”

Judith: “WTFN.”

Mother: “Better make a note of it.”

The End

————-

Greg Felton can be reached at gregf@gregfelton.com

September 5, 2009

FROM THE EDITOR’S DESK:

RADICAL EDITOR & PUBLISHER ARTHUR TOPHAM
__________________________________________________

Dear Radical Reader,

The recent and still very provocative ruling by Canadian Human Rights Tribunal Member Athanasios Hadjis on September 2, 2009, (the Lemire Decision) – one that holds great promise of finally bringing down the massive house of cards better known as the Canadian Human Rights Commission – has finally freed up at least one of countless mainstream media online news service agencies, allowing them the much needed freedom to give some long sought coverage to the CHRC’s “hate crime” complaint case involving Harry Abrams and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada v. Arthur Topham and RadicalPress.com.

As the Editor and Publisher of RadicalPress.com I must gratefully and gleefully take off my hat to Merv Richie, publisher and owner of the Terrace Daily.ca, an online news service located in the northwestern community of Terrace, British Columbia, Canada and extend a firm handshake to him and say thank you for having both the wisdom and the courage to do what the rest of Canada’s supposedly independent and objective news media should have done two years ago when this controversial case first became public.

I had long hoped that my own community newspaper, the Quesnel Cariboo Observer, would have been the one to have broke the story but after initially covering the issue back in early 2008 they were immediately silenced by a false threat of a law suit from the very personage who now appears to have lost his case against against Marc Lemire in this outstanding ruling – none other than Richard Warman, good friend of Harry Abrams the Complainant who laid the infamous sec. 13(1) “hate crime” charge against myself and my website back in July of 2007.

While this important ruling is the first major step in the eventual dismantling of this quasi-judicial internal censorship syndicate created by the Zionist lobby groups currently permeating all aspects of Canadian government, industry, media and academia it isn’t the final end for this vile, draconian sec. 13(1) anti-free speech law. As I recently wrote to one email correspondent regarding this issue, “When one is dealing with a deadly serpent it’s best not to take your attention off it until its head is severed from its body. In my case the head of this viper is still very much intact.”

Mr. Merv Richie has done a great service for everyone who believes in our Charter rights to freedom of expression and freedom of the press and he deserves a round of applause and encouragement for his willingness to put his shoulder to wheel at a time when this vehicle of expression is only just beginning to budge out from the Stalinist rut it’s been stuck in for the past twenty odd years. Please do write to him and thank him and pass this article to all you can.

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

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

http://www.terracedaily.ca/show4688a/STUNNING_VICTORY_FOR_FREEDOM_OF_SPEECH
STUNNING VICTORY FOR FREEDOM OF SPEECH
by Merv Ritchie

2nd September 2009

This morning a new light shines across Canada. The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (CHRT) has had its fangs trimmed. Section 13, the law that prohibits speaking openly about uncomfortable truths has finally been defeated. Commonly referred to as the anti hate law it has been used to stifle criticism of policy and ideology on almost every medium. The first use of the law was to force a man, John Ross Taylor, to stop using his own personal telephone answering machine to leave messages for people that wanted to call in and hear what he had to say. Generally his thoughts were against Canada’s immigration laws. The latest use of the law was to charge a man, Marc Lemire, who ran an internet chat forum. Although he did not approve postings to the message board (it was an open message forum) he was held to account for what others posted.

A BC website (operated by a former Kitimat native) is also currently under indictment by the CHRT for criticizing an ultra right wing faction of Israeli/Jewish politics called Zionists. Many do not like Arthur Topham’s blunt, unorthodox, politically incorrect writings on his website, Radicalpress.com, however he provides evidence and background to back up everything he writes. Truth is not a defence against the CHRT as every person and organization that has come under their radar has discovered, as they all were convicted. That is a 100 percent prosecutorial success rate, a rate unheard of anywhere in the world except in this secretive organization that has recently been investigated by the RCMP.

In his decision Athanasios D. Hadjis set a very high bar for new prosecutions under this act. Only the most vile and alarmist writings should be considered for prosecutions and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects Canadians, allows Canadians, to discuss issues that are not politically correct. The conclusion is as follows;

V. CONCLUSION
I have determined that Mr. Lemire contravened s. 13 of the Act in only one of the instances alleged by Mr. Warman, namely the AIDS Secrets article. However, I have also concluded that s. 13(1) in conjunction with ss. 54(1) and (1.1) are inconsistent with s. 2(b) of the Charter, which guarantees the freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression. The restriction imposed by these provisions is not a reasonable limit within the meaning of s. 1 of the Charter. Since a formal declaration of invalidity is not a remedy available to the Tribunal (see Cuddy Chicks Ltd. V. Ontario (Labour Relations Board), [1991] 2 S.C.R. 5), I will simply refuse to apply these provisions for the purposes of the complaint against Mr. Lemire and I will not issue any remedial order against him (see Nova Scotia (Workers’ Compensation Board) v. Martin, 2003 SCC 54 at paras. 26-7).

His comments on the AIDS Secret article in part are as follows;

In my view, the material found in the AIDS Secrets article expresses unusually strong and deep-felt emotions of detestation and vilification towards homosexuals in particular. The article is rife with hyperbole and moral condemnation. Homosexuals, and Blacks to a lesser extent, are denigrated as purveyors of a “killer” that is on the loose, agonizingly destroying the lives of American children and adults alike. Extreme language is used to vilify them and their lifestyles. They are portrayed as a powerful force that is conspiring to bring harm to others. Rather than using the statistics and studies in a dispassionately scientific manner, the article adopts an alarmist, almost hysteric tone, which along the above mentioned characterizations, is likely to expose them to hatred or contempt.

This is a very dramatic shift in the manner in which Canadians might discuss issues. It allows for a much greater freedom to engage in discussions. It also has very profound impacts on internet websites and forums.

Although Mr. Lemire did not compose the AIDS Secrets article he allowed it to be posted on his website and therefore was found responsible for distributing this material.

The conclusion found Section 13 to be at odds with the Charter of Rights. The next few weeks and months will determine the future of the CHRT. It has caused much grief for many individuals who wanted to expose some knowledge they discovered to the general public. Today a fresh wind of freedom to speak out has blown across Canada.
———–

Also see the following: Two of your articles are posted on our site here. Merv.

http://www.terracedaily.ca/show13s/PROVOCATIVE

—————–

Arthur Topham is the Publisher and Editor of RadicalPress.com. He is currently involved in a free speech battle with the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada.

He is also in extremely dire need of financial support to sustain this battle with the forces of repression and censorship as he is not able to work during this period of intense litigation with the Canadian Human Rights Commission and the CHR Tribunal. Any donations therefore would be most welcome. Please see the following url on the Home Page (upper right hand corner) http://www.radicalpress.com/?page_id=657 regarding donations. Also there is a “DONATE” button there for Paypal or here at https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=4466120 . Feel free to use any of them if you can help out. Thanks.

Arthur welcomes all feedback to his articles and can be reached at radical@radicalpress.com .

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

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

September 2, 2009
RadicalNewsNetwork

Dear Radical Reader,

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

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

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

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

(more…)

August 28, 2009

Dear Radical Reader,

It’s been awhile since I’ve posted any articles. My apologies to those who wait with great anticipation for more information on either the Abrams v. Topham complaint or materials on the Zionist Beast.

Apart from having to be away from home for awhile I’ve also been spending a lot of time over at http://www.FreeDominion.com enjoying all the lively discussions taking place since Harry Abrams finally registered on their forum and has been fielding all sorts of questions from FDers related to sec. 13(1).

Of course I am only an observer there as I’ve been banished from the forum for quite some time but even though I cannot speak, thanks to regular FD member fourhorses, who posts my legal documents for FDers to study and comment on, the Abrams v. Topham complaint is getting a lot of free coverage. For that alone I owe the owner, Connie Fournier, a debt of gratitude for allowing such discussion to proceed. Considering that FD considers itself to be the number one website in Canada in terms of support for the Zionist state of Israel and for all things Jewish this is indeed a generous and open-minded position for her to take.

This is the main reason for this post. I wanted to alert readers to the discussions taking place there and also encourage those willing, to possible register and join in the debate. The least that would happen would be to get banished like I did but a reading of the threads should illustrate the fact that they aren’t as narrow-minded as one might think and their humour is also something to be appreciated. Some of the recent cartoons depicting Harry as the Kosher Saviour of Hate Speech legislation are quite funny. Whether Harry eventually retaliates against them is of course another story. But even if you don’t join in, just reading the various threads and studying the positions taken is, in itself, guaranteed to be an eye-opener in terms of gaining a broader perspective on how other Canadians perceive both sec. 13(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act and the actions of Harry Abrams and B’nai Brith Canada. Most questions are cogent and the issues are wide-ranging.

Here are the current threads where section 13(1) and the CHRC and CHRT are being given a thorough working over:

http://www.freedominion.com.pa/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=121507
Free Dominion - battleground in Abrams v Topham case

http://www.freedominion.com.pa/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=121449&sid=a3aced58daa797751d8702300312bd2e
FD thread: Richard Warman attempting to seize elderly couple’s home

http://www.freedominion.com.pa/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=121889
FD thread:  Ezra bitch-slaps B’nai Brith

http://www.freedominion.com.pa/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=122021&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0
FD thread:  Harry Abrams, Classical Liberalism vs. Human Rights

http://www.freedominion.com.pa/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=122246
Innuendo: A Harry Proposition

http://www.freedominion.com.pa/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=122393
FD thread: Abrams v Topham - the next novel approach

I would encourage all readers to check out these discussions. Also, please try to pass this message along to your associates.

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

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

Arthur Topham is the Publisher and Editor of RadicalPress.com. He is currently involved in a free speech battle with the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada.

He is also in extremely dire need of financial support to sustain this battle with the forces of repression and censorship as he is not able to work during this period of intense litigation with the Canadian Human Rights Commission and the CHR Tribunal. Any donations therefore would be most welcome. Please see the following url on the Home Page (upper right hand corner) http://www.radicalpress.com/?page_id=657 regarding donations. Also there is a “DONATE” button there for Paypal or here at https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=4466120 . Feel free to use any of them if you can help out. Thanks.

Arthur welcomes all feedback to his articles and can be reached at radical@radicalpress.com .

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

PAUL FROMM - CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION (CAFE)
_________________________________________________________________________

August 10, 2009

[Editor’s Note: RadicalPress.com is extremely pleased to announce the positive decision by Tribunal chairperson Karen Jensen to grant Interested Party status to the Canadian Association for Free Expression. Direct Paul Fromm and I have been working together on issues for close to a decade now after first meeting online while I was printing my hard copy edition called The Radical.

Mr. Fromm’s many years of experience in battling the good fight to retain freedom of speech and expression for all Canadians makes his participation in this present struggle with B’nai Brith Canada over the Section 13(1) issue one of vital importance. As Paul states in his application one of his goals is to focus on this unusual position by the Complainants of trying to make citizens of foreign countries (i.e. Israel) a part of those protected by Canada’s “hate speech” laws. This is one issue that readers will know is of major concern to many Canadians who have been following this latest Show Trial regarding Freedom of Speech on the Internet in Canada.

And so, from RadicalPress.com and all those supporting the abolition of Section 13(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act, a hearty welcome to the show Paul!]

——————–

CAFE Granted “Interested Party” Status to Intervene in Arthur Topham/Radicalpress Internet Free Speech Case

Canadian Human
Rights Tribunal

BETWEEN:

HARRY ABRAMS AND

THE LEAGUE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS OF B’NAI BRITH CANADA

Complainants

- and -

CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

- and -

ARTHUR TOPHAM

RADICALPRESS.COM

Respondents

- and -

CANADIAN FREE SPEECH LEAGUE

Interested Party

RULING

MEMBER:

Karen Jensen 2009 CHRT 23

2009/08/07

[1] The Canadian Association for Free Expression (CAFE) has applied for Interested Party status in the matter of Harry Abrams and the League for Human Rights of the B’nai Brith Canada v. Arthur Topham and RadicalPress.com

[2] CAFE’s mandate is to work toward the maximum latitude of the freedom of speech, freedom of the press and freedom of belief provisions of s. 2(b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms

Founded in 1981, CAFE has published material in support of these goals, made representations to various levels of government and obtained intervenor or Interested Party status in a number of cases.

[3] CAFE is especially concerned about efforts to restrict the Internet, which it sees as an inexpensive and accessible medium to persons of modest means who might otherwise be excluded from some of the older more established media.

[4] CAFE has participated as an Interested Party in a number of Tribunal cases involving s. 13 of the CHRA.

[5] The Respondents Arthur Topham and RadicalPress.com support CAFE’s motion. The Commission and the Complainants take no position on this motion.

[6] Section 50 of the Canadian Human Rights Act gives the Tribunal discretion to grant interested party status. The onus is on the applicant to demonstrate how its expertise will be of assistance in the determination of the issues. Interested party status will not be granted if it does not add significantly to the legal positions of the parties representing a similar viewpoint:

Schnellv. Machiavelli and Associates Emprize Inc., [2001] C.H.R.D. No. 14 at para. 6 (C.H.R.T.) (QL); Nkwazi v. Canada (Correctional Service), [2002] C.H.R.D. No. 15 at para. 22 (C.H.R.T.)(QL); Warman v. Lemire 2006 CHRT 8.

[7] In a previous ruling, the Tribunal granted interested party status to the Canadian Free Speech League (CFSL) (Abrams and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith v. Arthur Topham and RadicalPress 2009 CHRT 12). That organization is also interested in matters touching upon freedom of expression.

[8] In his communications dated July 17, 2009, Paul Fromm, on behalf of CAFE, stated that while CFSL and CAFE “share a similar libertarian approach to Charter freedoms, CAFE has had considerably more experience as an “interested party” and agent in s. 13 Tribunals and brings this expertise to these proceedings”. In addition, CAFE has special concerns about an effort by the Complainants to expand even further the list of protected groups. It wishes to present the view that the Complainants are seeking to make criticism of a foreign government (in this case Israel) a  “discriminatory” practice.

[9] Mr. Fromm indicated that CAFE wishes to make written and oral submissions as well as to cross-examine witnesses in this matter.

[10] Without making any comment on the merits or relevance of the issues raised in this motion, I am satisfied that CAFE will bring a unique perspective and body of experience to the issues in this matter; it will add significantly to the legal position of the parties.

[11] Therefore, CAFE’s request for interested party status is granted. CAFE’s representative will have the right to cross-examine witnesses and to present oral and written submissions. CAFE should consult with the Respondent and the CFSL to ensure that there is no duplication in their efforts.

“Signed by”

Karen Jensen

OTTAWA, Ontario

August 7, 2009

CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL PARTIES OF RECORD

TRIBUNAL FILE: T1360/9008

STYLE OF CAUSE: Harry Abrams and The League for Human Rights of B’Nai Brith Canada v. Arthur Topham and RadicalPress.com

RULING OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED: August 7, 2009

APPEARANCES:

Marvin Kurz For the Complainants

Daniel Poulin For the Canadian Human Rights Commission

Arthur Topham For himself and Respondent RadicalPress.com

Douglas H. Christie For the Interested Party, Canadian Free Speech League

———–

Paul Fromm can be contacted at: paul@paulfromm.com

[Editor’s Note: The following lengthy piece is my response to the Complainants’ second, amended Statement of Particulars which they submitted to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal on July 12, 2009. In it they attempt once again to allege all sorts of nonsense about myself and my website in a further attempt to smear me as a hatemonger and an “anti-Semite” and racist and so on.

For those who have been following this Show Trial from the start I would recommend reading this reply to see the sorts of subterfuge that these folks resort to in order to meet the demands of the notorious Section 13 entrapment legislation under which they operate.]

Harry Abrams and The League For Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada

v.

Arthur Topham and RADICALPRESS.com

File Number: T1360/9008

REPLY BY RADICALPRESS.COM TO ABRAMS/B’NAI BRITH CANADA AMENDED STATEMENT OF PARTICULARS OF JULY 12, 2009

August 3, 2009

Nancy Lafontant
Registry Officer
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Nancy.Lafontant@chrt-tcdp.gc.ca

Dear Nancy Lafontant,

RE: Harry Abrams and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada v. Arthur Topham and the RadicalPress.com
File Number: T1360/9008

Please find enclosed my reply to further distortions, misrepresentations and erroneous suppositions contained in the Complainant’s Amended Statement of Particulars of July 12, 2009.

For purposes of explanation please note that I will be going through the Complainant’s Amended Statement of Particulars in the order that it was presented and making comments where deemed applicable.

(more…)

Is Your Government Breeding Bolsheviks?
B’nai Brith’s brazen attempt to hardwire Hatred and Censorship into the Canadian Psyche

By Arthur Topham

August 8, 2009

In his 2006 book, The Synagogue of Satan, the British writer Andrew C. Hitchcock has a lot to say about the house of Rothschild. In fact his book is a revelation of our times; the chronology of a crime syndicate that began in 1760 when Mayer Amschel Bauer took over his father’s money lending business in Frankfurt, Germany and changed his name from Bauer to Rothschild, a German word meaning “Red Shield” and hung the symbolic hexagram that now adorns the Israeli flag above his door.

The last 250 years is basically a record of the Rothschild’s devastating effects upon the people and the planet; one that has now brought our 20th Century civilization to the brink of either global disaster, or, should we awake in time to this imminent end and act accordingly, the final dismantling and dissolution of this infamous house of hell that’s been the root cause of humanity’s discontent for the past two and a half centuries.

Andrew Hitchcock’s book[1] in some respects parallel’s the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion in that it too is a road map like the Protocols only one that can lead us out of the wasteland of the present times rather than further into a gloomy and foreboding Big Brother future such as the Protocols reveal.

While Hitchcock’s first and foremost purpose is to document the accomplished deeds of this Rothschild house of horror as they pertain to global finance, politics and media, his particular expose of the secret masonic society of B’nai Brith, one of the many Rothschild enterprises designed to assist in its agenda for world domination, should be of special interest to Canadians; especially those Canadians who have managed to break free to some degree from the mind-numbing influence of the Rothschild controlled mainstream media and are relatively able to view, somewhat objectively, the ongoing machinations of this organization; one initially set up and funded in order to present to the world a viewpoint fundamentally Talmudic, cabalistic and atheistic in scope, nature and purpose.

In the USA when Americans think of B’nai Brith they automatically think of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) the now powerful, aggressive arm of B’nai Brith International originally formed in 1913 by the Rothschild Jews in reaction to a Jewish business man who was convicted of raping and murdering one of his young employees and actually put in jail for his crime.* This was considered an outrage by the then nascent Zionists and so they conspired to come up with an organization that would eventually become the Goliath of gutter journalism, spewing forth volumes of vituperative slander and malignant lies upon any individual, group or organization that ever dared to challenge the tendentious tenets of the Rothschild empire.

I believe Noam Chomsky, Professor of Linguistics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, put it rather succinctly when he once described the ADL as “…one of the ugliest, most powerful pressure groups in the U.S…. Its primary commitment is to use any technique, however dishonest and disgraceful, in order to defame and silence and destroy anybody who dares to criticize the Holy State (’Israel’).”

(more…)

HOOKED WALL HANGING OF “THE RADICAL” BY MOLLY MURPHY, 2000
_________________________________________________________________________

Harry Abrams
and
The League For Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada

v.

Arthur Topham
and
RADICALPRESS.com

File Number: T1360/9008

MOTION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS

JULY 30,  2009

Arthur Topham
Pub/Ed
The Radical Press
4633 Barkerville Hwy
Quesnel, B.C. V2J 6T8
Email: radical@radicalpress.com

July 30,  2009

Nancy Lafontant
Registry Officer
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Nancy.Lafontant@chrt-tcdp.gc.ca

Dear Nancy Lafontant,

RE: Harry Abrams and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada v. Arthur Topham and the RadicalPress.com
File Number: T1360/9008

Please find enclosed a Notice of Motion to Stay proceedings in the above complaint case.
In the interest of all parties in this complaint and with due respect for the judicial system of Canada I feel it is my democratic duty that I ask the Tribunal to consider staying the proceedings in this case. I do so with good reasons and not merely as an attempt to circumvent any of the concerns of the parties involved.

Based upon all the effort thus far expended by the parties in proceeding with this complaint and the fact that it continues to proceed at a pace which would indicate it may extend some months in advance of the present, it is my reasoned opinion that judicial economy would demand that a question, such as this complaint comprises and one which is basically synonymous with that of the Warman v. Lemire case, should not be litigated while the same question is under reserve in a forum of concurrent jurisdiction.
Analysis of the constitutional issue requires a factual foundation, which demands that the proceedings not be bifurcated. To proceed in part saves nothing and is in fact very costly.

It would therefore be unjust and unreasonable to put myself, Arthur Topham, the Respondent, to the needless expense of defending a complaint which may have been brought under an unconstitutional law.
With due consideration to the fact that this complaint has now interfered with and prevented me from earning a living for over a year and a half because of the demands for legal research and the fact that I am unable to afford legal counsel, I feel it behooves the Tribunal to give their reasoned attention to the hardship currently being imposed upon the Respondent to fulfill his obligations when there exists another reserved decision which might dispose of the matter.

As an example of a case which illustrates the pragmatic correctness of my position I would cite the judgment of April 2, 2007 by the Honourable Madam Justice Heneghan in that of Warman v. Kulbashian Tribunal File No. T1073/5405 in the Federal Court; one which stayed a judicial review pending the outcome of Warman v. Lemire.

(more…)