Ben Gadd: Pea-brained Propagandist for Zion’s “6 Million” Holohoax Lie by Marcus

victoryinend-copy

“In the end Victory stands!”

Ben  Gadd: Pea-brained Propagandist for Zion’s “6 Million” Holohoax Lie  

by Marcus

atrpeditor300

[Editor’s Note: The following commentary by Marcus on on the post “A Reply and Challenge to Ben Gadd  By Monika Schaefer” was so on point that I decided to publish it as a stand alone article.]

“Are the police and courts “haters” when they accuse the Mafia of crimes?”  I suspect in Ben’s pea sized brain, the answer is no. It’s only a crime when Jews are accused of something.

This little rat doesn’t know his backside from his elbow, but goes on talking about the so-called holocaust as if he’s an expert.  Who knows what thoughts that little brain he has contains, but if he swallowed everything the Jews said, then he also believes the Germans made lampshades from Jews skin and soap from Jews fat and believes that the “NAZIS” killed four million Jews at Auschwitz.  Does he even know that the Jews and the allies have already been exposed as liars for all three of these accusations.  The soap and lampshades stories have been discarded by historians as false (that means the allies and Jews lied) and the authorities at Auschwitz reduced their atrocity claim from four million to one million.  That was obviously a lie too.  They had no evidence (still don’t) and they smeared the German people with that lie.

This double talking guttersnipe works to spread the most vile and hateful things about the German people and he calls others the “haters”.  The Jews and idiots like Ben (or perhaps he is one himself) have made doublespeak a centerpiece of their narrative.  Myself, Monika and all Germans must accept the lies peddled by this Jew or in their twisted minds we are the “haters”.

6milben

I wonder if this know nothing, commie looking draft dodger knows that Jews founded and ran (completely dominated the murderous USSR government by being 80 to 85 percent of it) the most murderous regime in history.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bSAB5OPkwQ

Does this liar know (or recognize) that this has been completely hidden from the public, with the media keeping it out of their reporting for almost 100 years now and that Jews were the leaders of the Soviet government that burned down Russian churches, raped nuns and murdered priests, oversaw the deliberate starvation of millions of Ukrainians and mass murder of millions of politically suspect Russians. The German government knew it and that is why they called it Jewish Bolshevism.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vKOBWz0_4Y

And while world Jewry was making the strongest efforts possible to push the world into WW II by spreading hateful, atrocity propaganda, Germany was at peace before the war broke out in 1939 and Germany’s relatively small Jewish population was safe, with Jews from Poland actually trying to stay or get into Germany.

Yes, those poor, innocent Jews.  Don’t people know that “anti-semitism” has “resulted in the hate-sparked deaths of millions of people over many hundreds of years”?  Ben Gadd sounds like a sayanim and the worst form of propagandizing Jewish liar there is.  The kind that Polish ambassador to the US, Jerzy Potocki was speaking of when he reported back to Warsaw on his observations of the American political scene in 1938:

The pressure of the Jews on President Roosevelt and on the State Department is becoming ever more powerful… The Jews are right now the leaders in creating a war psychosis which would plunge the entire world into war and bring about general catastrophe. This mood is becoming more and more apparent. In their definition of democratic states, the Jews have also created real chaos; they have mixed together the idea of democracy and communism, and have above all raised the banner of burning hatred against Nazism.

This hatred has become a frenzy. It is propagated everywhere and by every means: in theaters, in the cinema, and in the press. The Germans are portrayed as a nation living under the arrogance of Hitler which wants to conquer the whole world and drown all of humanity in an ocean of blood. In conversations with Jewish press representatives, I have repeatedly come up against the inexorable and convinced view that war is inevitable. This international Jewry exploits every means of propaganda to oppose any tendency towards any kind of consolidation and understanding between nations. In this way, the conviction is growing steadily but surely in public opinion here that the Germans and their satellites, in the form of fascism, are enemies who must be subdued by the ‘democratic world.’ (February 9) and then reported back to Warsaw again in January 1939:

The feeling now prevailing in the United States is marked by a growing hatred of Fascism and, above all, of Chancellor Hitler and everything connected with Nazism. Propaganda is mostly in the hands of the Jews, who control almost 100 percent radio, film, daily and periodical press. Although this propaganda is extremely coarse and presents Germany as black as possible—above all religious persecution and concentration camps are exploited—this propaganda is nevertheless extremely effective, since the public here is completely ignorant and knows nothing of the situation in Europe. …

The prevalent hatred against everything which is in any way connected with German Nazism is further kindled by the brutal policy against the Jews in Germany and by the émigré problem. In this action, various Jewish intellectuals participated: for instance, Bernard Baruch; the Governor of New York State, Lehman; the newly appointed judge of the Supreme Court, Felix Frankfurter; Secretary of the Treasury Morgenthau; and others who are personal friends of President Roosevelt. They want the President to become the champion of human rights, freedom of religion and speech, and the man who in the future will punish trouble-makers. These groups of people, who occupy the highest positions in the American government and want to pose as representatives of ‘true Americanism’ and ‘defenders of democracy,’ are, in the last analysis, connected by unbreakable ties with international Jewry.

For this Jewish international, which above all is concerned with the interests of its race, to portray the President of the United States as the ‘idealist’ champion on human rights was a very clever move. In this manner they have created a dangerous hotbed for hatred and hostility in this hemisphere, and divided the world into two hostile camps. The entire issue is worked out in a masterly manner. Roosevelt has been given the foundation for activating American foreign policy, and simultaneously has been procuring enormous military stocks for the coming war, for which the Jews are striving very consciously.

http://inconvenienthistory.com/archive/2014/volume_6/number_2/the_jewish_hand_in_the_world_wars_part_2.php

Meanwhile, in Britain “innocent” Jews (read “warmongering”) were bribing Winston Churchill to start a world war against Germany:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jc9ltEIwpo

And the “innocent” Jews continue to operate today, as they did in the 1930’s and I suspect as they always have.  Here is the “number one contributor to the Republican Party”, casino mogul Sheldon Adelson.  In this speech he says Iran should have a nuclear bomb dropped on it if it doesn’t do what the US says:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sCW4IasWXc

Adelson knows and met each Republican candidate who took the money he offered them and promised to carry out his wishes – every one of them.  Trump refused the money at first.  I’m not sure if he eventually accepted it.

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

The Jewish push for WW II began immediately upon Adolf Hitler taking office as chancellor of Germany.  They immediately began holding atrocity propaganda rallies in New York and international Jewry declared a worldwide boycott of German goods within two months.  Just as in the USSR, the Jews were leaders of the communist party in Germany.  They were violent and had overthrown the Bavarian gov’t shortly after WW I and these were the Jews that were arrested.  There was no terror.  That would come later, as the Jews continued to push for war.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myh-dqvUgYA

In 1936 a Jew named David Frankfurter murdered the Swiss National Socialist politician Wilhelm Gustloff in cold blood.  Two years later the Jew Herschel Grynszpan murdered the young German diplomat Ernst vom Rath in cold blood.  Vom Rath left his wife and young children behind.  This murder kicked off what became known as “Kristallnacht” in which an estimated 91 Jews were killed (not six million or six trillion).  But of course the Jews made the most they could out of it, as they had been lying since Hitler took office.  Compare that to the number of Russians and Ukrainians Jews were murdering at the same time in the USSR.

In 1940 the Jew Theodore Kaufman published his book “Germany Must Perish!” in which he put forth a detailed plan to sterilize the entire German population to kill the Germans off.  His book received rave reviews in the top US media outlets, including Time Magazine.

screen-shot-2017-01-13-at-7-41-32-pm

screen-shot-2017-01-13-at-7-42-18-pm

http://www.ihr.org/books/kaufman/perish.shtml

And this was in the US, a country thousands of miles from Europe that had no business in European affairs.   Charles Lindbergh pointed out the “innocent” Jews as one of three groups (the others being the FDR administration and Great Britain) pushing the US into WW II.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_F48oaOskI

Here is FDR, one of the biggest liars in history, making a speech based upon a phony map and making ridiculous accusations against Germany, claiming it wanted to take over South America and then presumably march on to Washington, D.C, all while the German army was already fighting for its life in the USSR.  FDR justifying the US entry into WW II.  This speech was made a month after Lindbergh’s speech.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ak61DaD32Ww

How the phony map speech came about:

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v06/v06p125_Weber.html

Meanwhile, in Poland and the USSR the Germans noticed that wherever Jews made up a significant part of a population, that is where atrocities against Germans would take place (Bromberg) or partisan attacks on German soldiers or European Nationalists from other countries would be carried out.  The partisan war had begun.  It would end with the Soviet Jew propagandist Ilya Ehrenburg calling for the mass rape of German women, which the Soviet army (and the Americans and British to a much smaller degree) carried out, gang raping two million German women, ranging in age from 8 to 80.  Today that Jewish animal Ehrenburg is honored and buried in Israel (while Germany continues to persecute 90 year old nurses or clerks that served Germany).

Hopefully the bigot Ben Gadd will read this.


In the interests of public justice and truth should anyone wish to contact Ben Rudd his email address is: Ben@bengadd.com

A Reply and Challenge to Ben Gadd By Monika Schaefer

A Reply and Challenge to Ben Gadd

By Monika Schaefer

Sunday, January 8th, 2017

Back in December, Ben Gadd responded to the shock expressed by a mutual friend about my expulsion from the Jasper Environmental Associaton (JEA). A small sample from Ben:

yegaddz

Holocaust denial is a federal offense in Canada, a serious crime. It’s hate speech, not free speech. That’s because it’s a particularly virulent lie promulgated by anti-Semites. And anti-Semitism, as we all know, has resulted in the hate-sparked deaths of millions of people over many hundreds of years. Hate crimes of all sorts occur in Canada, and they are not tolerated, especially this one. Nor is the public expression of the hateful beliefs that fuel such crimes…

The following letter by Rocky Notnes seemed like a natural and logical reaction to a situation by a person who apparently is not affected by all the control words which are meant to elicit a certain programmed response. He penned this letter after learning that I had been expelled from the JEA.

December 17, 2016

Dear JEA members

This is Rocky Notnes from the Entrance ranch near Hinton. Some of you will know me through the Alberta Environmental Network over the past 30 or so years.

Some, if not all of you probably also know that I wrote a letter to the Jasper newspapers, which was published in both, defending Monika Schaefer’s right to free speech re the holocaust. So my stand will not be news to you.

When I learned that she was expelled from JEA for her views as well as almost everything else I was quite surprised and disappointed. It seems like JEA have jumped on the anti-Monika bandwagon with most of the people in Jasper in what seems to have become a stampede. It is as if people are trying to distance themselves as if they think they are guilty by virtue of just knowing her.

I have known Monika before and after and I do not see her having changed, other than speaking out on an issue that obviously is taboo! While I am not a “holocaust denier” as it is called now, I find your, and others in Jasper, reaction appalling. It seems to me that if members of the JEA felt so strongly about it they could have issued a statement that they do not support Monika in her views. That’s all.  But this is democracy “in reaction”, not “action”!

I feel the same way about Elizabeth May and the Green Party,,, they could have issued a statement disassociating themselves from her views. But to boot somebody out for expressing a view, regardless of the topic, when she has been an upstanding member of the community all her life is, going over the top, in my view.

 

Regards, Rocky Notnes


The following day this rather patronizing diatribe came from Ben Gadd:

Thanks for writing to all of us, Rocky. I didn’t think I’d ever disagree with you about anything, but in Monika’s case I have to. Hers is not a free-speech issue. Here’s why.

Holocaust denial is a federal offense in Canada, a serious crime. It’s hate speech, not free speech. That’s because it’s a particularly virulent lie promulgated by anti-Semites. And anti-Semitism, as we all know, has resulted in the hate-sparked deaths of millions of people over many hundreds of years. Hate crimes of all sorts occur in Canada, and they are not tolerated, especially this one. Nor is the public expression of the hateful beliefs that fuel such crimes.

If Monika had kept her views to herself, as many anti-Semites do, none of this would have come up. But she hasn’t. In 2013, out of the blue, she sent me a “truther” video blaming the 9/11 attacks on the “Zionists,” i.e. the Jews.

Like other fake news on the Internet, this is a complete fabrication. Go to http://www.debunking911.com for a detailed analysis.

Monika approached other JEA members, too. We didn’t push her away at that point. Some of us took the time to reason with her and direct her to factual sources. I told her that such conspiracy theories are hazardous. They inevitably lead to hatred of whoever is accused of directing the conspiracy. I thought that Monika — the Monika we used to know and love — would realize the depth and danger of the rabbit hole she was going down and quickly reverse her direction.

But she rejected such advice and kept going, deeper and deeper, until now she seems to have reached the bottom, a scary place shared by the likes of Ernst Zündel and James Keegstra (and, alas, Monika’s own brother Alfred). At that point I pushed her away. As has the JEA.

The JEA is a group of like-minded, high-minded folks. We don’t hate anyone. We don’t hate Monika. Rather, our group works together to watch over Jasper National Park and alert the world to activities we see as harmful to this place we love. For that job the organization needs the public on side. And they are. As the polls show, Canadians believe what environmental groups such as the JEA have to say about the value of the park and how it needs to be protected, while Canadians do not buy the commercially-tainted stuff that park exploiters try to sell everyone in their self-promotional ad campaigns. Given the facts, which is what the JEA provides, it’s easy for people to tell the difference between the JEA’s clear and honest position of integrity and some corporation’s clever attempt to get what it wants.

So maintaining our integrity is crucial to the JEA. Opening our membership to vocal haters of any sort, who have accepted obvious lies and seek to spread them, would seriously damage that integrity.

Not only that, any society incorporated in Alberta must exist for a “benevolent, philanthropic, charitable, provident, scientific, artistic, literary, social, educational, agricultural, sporting or other useful purpose” [Societies Act, section 3(1)]. It goes without saying that (a) members should be in agreement with this statement and the goals of the society, (b) that spreading hatred is not included in the statement or in the JEA’s goals, and (c) that anyone doing so cannot be a member.

Monika can go on and on about how she’s the one with integrity, how she’s the victim and those organizations that have rejected her are the haters, but these are just tactics. They are used all the time by people held to account for bad behavior.

A good definition of integrity is “the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles; moral uprightness.” (Just Google the word.) A person of integrity doesn’t try to convince others that dark-skinned people, for example (substitute indigenous people or Muslims or Jews, etc.) are evil and/or subhuman and should be discriminated against. Such beliefs are in themselves evil, because they are lies. These are not honest beliefs. These are falsehoods so easily exposed that they can be accepted only by the willing suspension of disbelief. You have to want to believe them, despite all the evidence. And there goes your integrity.

Worse, hateful beliefs provide excuses to hurt people. Bigoted mistreatment of minorities occurs all the time, even in Canada, and I’m sure that you, as I, abhor it. Anyone engaged in it is not acting with integrity.

And here’s what really hurts me. I think that Monika — pleasant, friendly Monika, the likeable Jasper violinist — is being used by her new anti-Semitic associates to give Holocaust denial a fresh face. They are turning her into something she’s basically not.

I hope that she awakens one morning to the truth about this (the real truth, not the “truther” truth) and disavows both the intellectual poison she has been fed and the whole crowd purveying it. I hope this occurs soon, before it brings her further mental and emotional injury and before the fully committed haters who are manipulating her succeed in recruiting others through her.

If Monika comes to her senses, all she has to do to extricate herself from this mess is to publicly disavow it, even if she’s sitting in prison for breaking the law, which might be the case. She needs to tell everyone that she was misled, that she was wrong, and that she is sorry for the hateful things she has said. If this happens, I have no doubt that she will mean it, and I will forgive her. I think we would all forgive her. We’d give her a hug and welcome her back to the real world.

Believing in Monika and anticipating that she will turn her life around,

 

— Ben


Screen Shot 2016-08-07 at 4.23.58 PM

Monika Schaefer

My Open Letter to Ben Gadd and the Jasper Environmental Association, January 5 2017 ~ by Monika Schaefer

Happy New Year to you all! Let us hope that this will be the year during which the light of truth becomes ever brighter.

Ben you seem intent on seeing me imprisoned. Let me assure you, that if it should come to that (which I doubt), I would rather be in jail with a free mind, than be a mind-controlled Pavlovian conditioned slave in the Orwellian world of double-speak where peace is war and black is white.

Truth is Hate to those who Hate the Truth.

CIA Director William Casey said in February 1981 in a staff meeting with newly elected President Ronald Reagan, “We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.”

Thank you very much Ben for bringing up 9/11 in your letter. Most people around the world know that was a false flag event and that controlled demolition brought down the three towers. You claim I sent you a video blaming 9/11 on Zionists, therefore anti-Semitic. In fact I gave you the DVD called “Experts Speak Out” by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. Their hallmark is that they investigate the physical aspects of what happened on 9/11, never the “who-done-it”. You reveal your prejudice on that story by implying that ae911truth.org is an anti-Semitic organization. How exactly does their scientific analysis of the chemistry, the architecture, the physics, the thermodynamics etc., add up to anti-Semitism? Who planted that meme into your head?

True, 9/11 was in fact a Zionist operation, therefore the powers-that-be preemptively try to steer people in another direction by using weaponized words such as “anti-Semitic” against anyone who dares question the official narrative.

Would you call me anti-Semitic for pointing out that Israel attacked the USS Liberty in 1967, killing 34 American Servicemen and injuring many more, and tried to blame Egypt? Had they succeeded in sinking the ship, they might have got away with the deception of blaming another country. Blaming a third party for misdeeds is what is called false flag and Israel is very good at it. I would venture a guess that some people in the JEA have never heard of the USS Liberty. That unfortunate “incident” was suppressed by the Johnston administration, and the mainstream media dutifully fell into line.

What about the Zionist bombing of the King David Hotel in 1946, which helped to speed up the establishment of the state of Israel? According to the Jerusalem Post, they rarely call that a terrorist event in Israel, they commemorate it instead.

http://www.jpost.com/Features/In-Thespotlight/This-Week-in-History-The-King-David-Hotel-bombing

Is it anti-Semitic to point out these well-documented facts? “Anti-Semitic” is just a Weaponized Control Trigger word which is meant to shut down rational thought and discussion. In fact, former Israeli Minister Shulamit Aloni agrees with my assessment of that. She calls it a trick, “we always use it…”

Former Israeli Minister Shulamit Aloni- Anti-Semitic Trick!

The Israeli Mossad motto is “By way of Deception, thou shalt make War”. Wouldn’t it be more noble to have a motto about standing up for Truth and Justice and Peace? By way of deception — think about that word!

Formerly Jewish Israeli Gilad Atzmon puts it this way: Jewish power is the ability to silence criticism of Jewish Power.

Regarding WW2 history, nobody has been able to answer my question about the basic maths. In Auschwitz alone, the official death count has dropped by almost 3 million, yet the mythical 6 million number remains the same. In January 1933, the Jewish population of Germany was approximately 522,000. More than half emigrated during the following 6 years. It is difficult to imagine how 6 million could have been herded into gas chambers, even when Jewish populations from surrounding countries are taken into account. The numbers simply don’t add up. And how could there have been so many “survivors”, who then collected reparation money, and still collect reparations to this day, if 6 million were killed? And how is it that pre- and post-war population figures indicate no reduction in Jewish numbers – was there a giant unprecedented baby boom the likes of which has never been seen before or since?

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=85432

The mythical 6 million number appeared many times in the decades preceding WW2.

http://balder.org/judea/Six-Million-140-Occurrences-Of-The-Word-Holocaust-And-The-Number-6,000,000-Before-The-Nuremberg-Trials-Began.php

Are you familiar with the Doctrine of Judicial Notice? This doctrine allows courts to recognize as “fact” matters that are “common knowledge”. This doctrine has been used in the courts to avoid actual evidence which might run contrary to the victor’s version and Hollywood depiction of the so-called Jewish Holocaust. Evidence is not required because “The Holocaust” is self-evident. How is that for circular logic? Articles 19 and 21 of the Nuremberg trials stated as much, and Justice Thomas T. Johnson used the doctrine of judicial notice in the case by Mel Mermelstein against the Institute for Historical Review in 1981.

See this article for a thorough discussion of the Nuremberg Trials and the Holocaust. You might choose to dismiss it as it comes from the Institute for Historical Review, but keep in mind the perverse logic of the doctrine which I explained in the previous paragraph.  It is a 2-part article, highly footnoted, and very educational.

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v12/v12p167_webera.html

To all the people who have actively spurned me, actively expelled me from organizations, actively ostracized me (you figure prominently in the JEA strangely enough), it is especially important for you to spend a little bit of time looking into these matters. Even just reading the one article from the IHR to which I supplied the link above, should give you pause to consider that it might not be me who is so 100% wildly wrong on these very important matters. If you react with the common “I refuse to debate this and I refuse to look at this”, how can you be so sure you are 100% right?

Meanwhile you go along with the casting of stones. Are you afraid to look? Do you actually believe I have lost my sanity, causing me to risk all – and to what end? Or might it occur to you in a tiny corner of your brain and heart and soul that just maybe, just maybe, there is another story here, one which is being viciously suppressed.

The Nuremberg Trials truly can be compared to the witch trials of the Middle Ages. This short video puts the matter into that context.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-o_Fk0ezls

Ben Gadd, you of all people surprise me the most. The American draft dodger from the Vietnam era, the environmental guru, you always stood up for what you believed in. You always told us: question everything, don’t trust authority, governments lie to us. In that light, your outright dismissal and condemnation of me make absolutely no sense to me.

Your behaviour only makes sense if you were Sayanim. If that is the case, everything makes sense!

The fact that this one event in our history is untouchable should be enough to raise serious questions about it. Why are we not allowed to question and investigate this one event? Might it be because there is something to hide? Might it also be due to a particular group of people benefitting from it?

Voltaire said, “To learn who rules over you, simply ask who you are not allowed to criticize.

Finally, to answer the question that some have asked me: “To what end Monika?” A world of lies and deceptions is a world of war and turmoil. That is not the world I want to sit idle in and leave it as such for our children and grandchildren. I desire a world of Peace, Light, Love and Beauty. That comes only through charting our course through the world with a map based on Truth.

Monika Schaefer

Some further thoughts, …

Ben Gadd’s letter gave me the opportunity to write my response (above). I provided many links and many documented facts and I asked a few basic questions. None of that was addressed in this following response from Ben which came the very next day. It is interesting to note that instead of answering any questions or addressing any of the issues at hand, Ben uses language that is intended to so intimidate the mind-softened people to not even dare consider using their own brain. He continues to engage in name-calling and to use plenty of Weaponized Control Trigger words.


January 6th, 2017 from Ben:

Monika’s torrent of words leads to her saying this of me:

“Your behaviour only makes sense if you were Sayanim. If that is the case, everything makes sense!”

I had to look up “Sayanim.” It’s Hebrew for “assistants,” and it refers to Jews living outside Israel who assist the Mossad. More generally, it means Israeli secret agents.

Yikes! I’ve been exposed. (But it does remind to me go give my handler a ring. My cheque is late this month.)

All kidding aside, I am not now, nor have I ever been anyone’s secret agent for anything. Monika is just playing the ultimate card in the conspiracy theorist’s deck. Anyone who opposes the theory is part of the conspiracy.

This is paranoid-delusional, I know, but it’s also a bit scary. Anti-Semites can be quite nasty. They have their enemies list, and if I wasn’t on it already I am now. Should the Truthers come to power — a growing possibility in the Age of Trump — I can expect them to come after me.

That’s how hate speech works. The haters find their targets, denounce them and wait for the mob to do the rest.

After I sent that long reply to Rocky back on December 18th, I noted a long gap in new postings to Monika’s website. (Her anti-Semitic “freespeechmonika.wordpress.com” website, not her benign “monikaschaefer.ca” website.) Perhaps she was just taking some time off from her campaign, but I was hoping that she had withdrawn for some reflection on where all this was taking her. I was really hoping that the next posting would be a heartfelt retraction of the venemous stuff she had been saying.

Alas, not to be. At the end of the year Monika was back, attacking Elizabeth May again as some sort of Zionist puppet and telling us that climate change is caused by you-know-who spreading chemicals through the sky in the form of passenger-jet contrails. This is loonie stuff, but loads of unhappy, gullible people looking for someone to blame their troubles on believe it. Intelligent, articulate and reasonable-sounding Monika is clearly a rising star in their world. I haven’t seen a Donate button on her site, but perhaps that will be next.

Whatever, I’m done with this. Rocky, I’ve said my piece. Monika, for the last time, please, pretty-please, realize that the road you are on leads to Holocaust II.

Sincerely, and ‘bye for now,

 

— Ben


Ben is right in a way, in that I should have been clearer and simply said that his behaviour is like someone who is a Sayan and not imply (with my word if..) that he might actually be a real live Sayan. He says he is not, so there you have it.

For this he calls me “paranoid-delusional”, while in the next breath, engages in his own “paranoid-delusional” thoughts by saying, … “Anti-Semites can be quite nasty. They have their enemies list, and if I wasn’t on it already I am now. Should the Truthers come to power — a growing possibility in the Age of Trump — I can expect them to come after me.”

Ben, take a big breath, calm down and don’t worry your little PC heart that the knock on the door at 2 or 3 pm is the new Gestapo. (PC does not stand for Progressive Conservative like here in Canada, so just in case you have to look it up – its Politically Correct!) It will just be your neighbour wanting to borrow a cup of sweet lies that you have accepted and stored in abundance. Sweet comfortable lies that I have now thrown in the trash.

Ben then accuses me of being a “hater” and of saying “venomous” stuff. Isn’t this an ironic accusation when all I’m saying with regard to the “Holocaust” is that the German people were NOT guilty of that crime and there is overwhelming evidence to support that position? Now with 9/11, I am accusing organised jewry of carrying out that crime. So, you see, accusations of being a “hater”, etc., cuts both ways and can be used to prevent the truth from coming out. Are the police and courts “haters” when they accuse the Mafia of crimes? Are the police and courts “haters” when they sentence revisionists to years in prison for thinking the wrong thoughts?

Finally Ben ends with this melodramatic flourish, … “Whatever, I’m done with this. Rocky, I’ve said my piece. Monika, for the last time, please, pretty-please, realize that the road you are on leads to Holocaust II.”

Besides begging the very question of “Holocaust I” that is at the heart of the issue at hand, I believe that people like Ben Gadd are unwittingly helping to create a horrifying tyranny that allows no dissent, that crushes anyone who questions what organised jewry says.

So Ben, don’t run away in “outrage”. Perhaps I am wrong, so please engage me in polite and reasoned debate on substantial issues like the “Holocaust” or 9/11.

You never know how minds can be changed.


SOURCE ARTICLE

Regina v Radical Press Legal Update # 25 by Arthur Topham

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

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

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

Dear Free Speech Defenders and Radical Press Supporters,First, allow me to extend my sincere apologies to all of those who have been waiting so long for this legal update. It has been delayed for over a year now primarily due to the snail’s pace at which the R v Roy Arthur Topham Charter challenge has been crawling through the BC Supreme Court legal system. Delay after delay meant postponement of an overview that might provide a useful picture of all the salient events. As a result coverage of all that’s gone down demands a somewhat lengthy update.

To recap the issue for readers – Constitutional notice was first served to the Crown on March 23rd, 2015 and and the process, such as it was, did not conclude until November 8th and 9th, 2016 in Victoria, B.C. where the final two days of argument took place. That amounts to a little over 19 months this aspect of the case has been ongoing.

From the onset it was Crown’s position that they wanted the Constitutional Charter challenge put off until after the end of the trial. Following the pre-trial hearing on the matter that began in Vancouver, BC’s SC on June 22nd, 2015 – in his Reasons for Judgment handed down July 8, 2015 – SC Justice Butler, citing case law, ruled that it would be better to hold off on the Charter argument until after the trial so as to not “fragment” the criminal proceedings. He also decided that in the case of constitutional challenges it’s better to wait until after the trial to adjudicate such issues because by then a “factual foundation” would be in place.

Arthur and the Three Hookers
As well, prior to Justice Butler’s decision of July 8th, during a June 10th, 2015 appearance, he ruled that in order for the Constitutional Charter challenge to proceed it would first be necessary for the Defence to provide sound reasons which would satisfy the Justice the “Bedford Test” had been met in order for the proceedings to move to the stage where the actual challenge to the legislation would take place.

In a nutshell the Bedford “Test” or “Threshold”, as it’s often called, is a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Canada (Attorney General) v Bedford handed down on December 20, 2013, wherein the Supreme Court ruled that some of Canada’s prostitution laws were unconstitutional. Bedford was the surname of one of the three prostitutes who challenged the legislation.

One of the principal issues that the S.C. of Canada deliberated in that case was whether a trial judge could consider Charter arguments not raised in a previous case about the same law. Legal tradition has always held that a lower court (in my case the BC S.C.) is ‘bound’ by decisions made by the SC of Canada. It’s this particular principle and precedent (in Latin called stare decisis) which Crown has been arguing over-rides my arguments as presented in my Memorandum of Argument Regarding the Threshold Issue where I state that the decision in Keegstra is no longer binding upon my case due to similarities with the Bedford case where the Supreme Court of Canada found that lower courts may revisit binding authorities from higher courts in cases where new legal issues are raised, or where a change in the evidence or circumstances fundamentally shifts the parameters of the debate.

As a result of Justice Butler’s ruling my challenge was therefore postponed until the trial was completed. The trial ran from October 26, 2015 to November 12, 2015 (a period of 14 days) and when it concluded I was found guilty on Count 1 of the charge of “willfully promoting hatred against an identifiable group, contrary to s. 319(2) of the Criminal Code”. At the same time the jury also acquitted me on Count 2 which was the same identical charge.***

Fixing a date with the Queen of England no easy task
After the trial ended I appeared again in Quesnel SC on December 7th, 2015 to “fix a date” for the Charter hearing to take place. During this appearance Rodney G. Garson, a special Crown Prosecutor out of the Prosecution Support Unit within the Crown Law Division of the Ministry of Justice filed a requisition with the court to appear on behalf of the Crown to argue the Charter matter.

It was also then that a new date of January 25th, 2016 was set to fix another date to argue the question of who it was, Crown or Defence, that bears the onus of having to prove that Sec. 2(b) of the Charter is infringed upon by s. 319(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada and is therefore open to challenge, regardless of the former landmark Keegstra decision.

The January 25th, 2016 appearance came and went. During court my legal counsel Barclay Johnson informed the Justice and Crown that the Defence would be calling Expert Witnesses to testify during the Charter hearing. In that instance Dr. Michael Persinger’s name was given to the court. Once again we didn’t get to “fixing a date” and the issue was put over to March 29th, 2016.

On March 29th, 2016 we met again to “fix a date” but, alas, it didn’t happen. My counsel, Barclay Johnson did notify the court at that time that we would also be calling Dr. Timothy Jay as an Expert Witness. He also brought up the issue of the double verdicts, i.e. one Guilty count and one Not Guilty count for the same identical charge. A new date was set for April 4th, 2016 to “fix a date” for the Charter hearing.

Like all the others dates April 4th, 2016 came and went and still no date was fixed. A new date of May 2nd, 2016 was set.

On May 2nd, 2016 I again attended court. Murphy’s Law still being in effect this time there were computer problems in the court room and so Quesnel Crown counsel Jennifer Johnston appeared on behalf of Crown Prosecutor Rodney Garson and a new date of June 6th, 2016 was set to “fix a date” for the Charter hearing.

On June 6th, 2016 the “fix a date” phenomenon was getting so bad that my own counsel’s computer went on the blink and we had to set another date! This time it was for July 11th, 2016.

When July 11th, 2016 rolled around and a miracle occurred. We finally were able to “fix a date” for the commencement of the Charter hearing. The week of October 3rd, 2016 to October 7th, 2016 was SET! During this time Crown chose the date of October 31st, 2016 for “sentencing” in the event that I lost my Charter argument.

The Hearing (Part 1)
One day prior to the commencement of the hearing on October 3rd I was informed by my legal counsel that the scheduled week would not see the completion of the Charter argument. Crown Prosecutor Rodney Garson informed the court that he would require additional time in order to cross-examine the two Expert Witnesses that Defence was planning to call and he didn’t feel there would be enough time to also argue the issue of the Bedford Threshold.

Along with Dr. Persinger and Dr. Jay there was a third witness present in court on October 3rd. Jeremy Maddock, who was my former lawyer Doug Christie’s legal assistant and is currently assisting my counsel Barclay Johnson, appeared in order to testify to the various websites online where the materials that were posted on RadicalPress.com could also be found. This was one of our principal arguments – that all of the online books that I have posted on my website are also readily available on numerous other websites around the world as well as being openly sold on major book-selling sites like Amazon.com and Amazon.ca. Jeremy Maddock presented to the court 22 screenshots of other websites that he had researched which clearly showed that the impugned books and articles were freely available elsewhere on the net.

In cross-examination Crown Prosecutor Garson attempted to dismiss the screen shots of the various websites that Mr. Maddock presented suggesting that they weren’t reliable and also that the numbers shown in the Google searches were also irrelevant. Defence lawyer Barclay Johnson responded by referring to the hundreds of pages of screen shots that Crown had introduced into evidence during the trial and suggesting that if they weren’t relevant then Crown should not have presented them to the jury. Justice Butler, having sat through the trial, was well aware of this fact and didn’t buy into Crown’s argument and accepted Maddock’s testimony as both relevant and admissible.

The Defence’s first Expert Witness was Dr. Timothy Jay. (It should be noted here, prior to discussing Dr. Jay’s testimony, that throughout the trial Crown consistently made reference to my satire Israel Must Perish! , an article created by me in order to show the glaring hypocrisy of Jewish lobbyists like B’nai Brith Canada – one of the two complainants who had filed the Sec. 319(2) charge against me and my website – who were accusing me of spreading “hate” when one of their own kind, Theodore N. Kaufman, had unquestionably written one of the most vile, hate-filled books titled Germany Must Perish! back in 1941 that basically called for the absolute genocide of the German nation and all of its people.)

Dr. Jay, a full professor with the Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts, is considered to be an expert in the field of cognitive and linguistic psychology and has extensive experience interpreting allegedly obscene speech in the context of U.S. radio and television regulation. He’s also written numerous books and articles dealing with the issue of controversial language and for purposes of the Charter hearing had written a paper in my defence called “Opinion Regarding Arthur Topham’s Israel Must Perish” the gist of which was:

“It is my opinion as a cognitive psychologist that a satirical reading of Israel Must Perish! by an average adult reader would not result in the satire being considered hate speech. There are several mitigating factors which must be taken into account regarding how people read and comprehend literature, for example, what frame of mind the reader brings to the literature, what the reader thinks the literature is “about” or “means”, what impact a satirical reading might have on a reader, and what a reader would ultimately remember about the literature. I also consider the context in which the reader encounters the literature.”

My legal counsel Barclay Johnson presented Dr. Jay’s curriculum vitae [a fancy Latin term for a resume. A.T.] to the court and Dr. Jay appeared via telephone to answer any questions that the Defence or Crown or Justice Butler might have.

From the onset Crown Prosecutor Rodney Garson was quick to respond to Defence’s introduction of Dr. Jay and began citing a number of case law examples regarding “expert opinion” in order to challenge Dr. Jay’s qualifications. He went on about how an expert witness should be “impartial”, “independent”, “unbiased”, “fair”, “objective” and “non-partisan”, all the while overlooking the fact that during the trial itself the Crown’s own “Expert Witness”, former Canadian Jewish Congress CEO Len Rudner, had outright proven to the court that he was anything but impartial and independent and unbiased and objective and, to top it all off, had unabashedly committed perjury during his testimony, a fact which SC Justice Butler was made aware of but chose to ignore. Garson of course wasn’t present during the trial but given these facts all his feigned and overtly aggressive protestations against Dr. Jay’s credentials and his ability to offer expert opinion appeared rather disingenuous, especially when he exclaimed to the court that he had a “realistic concern” about Dr. Jay’s qualifications.

The thrust of the Crown’s argument was that Dr. Jay’s opinions on my satire Israel Must Perish! was biased and would “undermine” the decision of the jury and “the administration of justice” and put SC Justice Butler in an “invidious” position. Going further, Crown Prosecutor Garson told the court that the jurors’ decision cannot be questioned or “further evidence” be added by an expert witness. It was clearly evident that the Crown didn’t want any expert opinion on my satire to be considered or even an acknowledgment that it was a satire and not a “book” as the Crown consistently referred to it as during the trial.

On Tuesday, October 8th at 2 p.m. SC Justice Butler gave his oral decision regarding Dr. Timothy Jay’s qualifications and ruled that Dr. Jay’s evidence impinged upon the question of my guilt or innocence and was therefore a “collateral attack” on the jury’s “guilty” verdict and wasn’t permissible.

In a recent article published in the Friends of Freedom newsletter (A private newsletter for the supporters of the Canadian Free Speech League, dealing in cases of the censorship and persecution of political, religious, and historical opinion.) titled “Topham Embarks on Long-Awaited Challenge of Hate Speech Law” by Jeremy Maddock he has the following to say about Justice Butler’s decision to disallow Dr. Jay’s evidence:

“Justice Butler’s decision leaves the defence in a very difficult position. On one hand, the Supreme Court of Canada’s Whatcott decision provides that hate speech laws must be narrowly construed, and are only constitutional to the extent that they ‘prohibit expression that is likely to cause … discrimination and the other societal harms of hate speech.’

At trial, defence counsel was told in no uncertain terms that he was not permitted to call evidence on the constitutional question, which is an issue for the judge alone to decide, and cannot be put to the jury. By limiting the trial evidence in this way, then subsequently ruling that evidence about the effects of the impugned material is inadmissible on the constitutional application, the Court has made it exceedingly difficult for the defence to meet the test in Whatcott.”

A Bloody Disgrace
What ought to be of immediate concern to readers and especially supporters of this Charter hearing is the fact that I had worked hard to raise funds via my GoGetFunding site to hire Dr. Jay to write his report. It was an endeavour which cost the Defence $2,000.00 in US funds the money ultimately coming from numerous supporters around the world who donated their hard-earned cash to make it happen. Justice Butler’s decision to not allow Dr. Jay to testify meant all that money had been wasted yet in the case of Crown’s “Expert Witness” Len Rudner during trial, hardly a second thought was given to granting him the same official status. Then, on top of that, I recently received, via my legal counsel, another invoice from Dr. Jay requesting an additional $1,700.00 US funds for his time spent in court on the 3rd and 4th of October, an amount which still must be raised in order to fulfill Defence’s commitments. In total that amounts to $3,700.00 US which translates into $5,112.29 Canadian dollars all raised in vain. The matter is blithely brushed aside as being just a part of the process of doing the legal dance but from my perspective it’s nothing short of being a bloody disgrace and an insult to all who have given their financial support to this ongoing “hate speech” trial.

Dr. Persinger takes the stand Day 3 of the hearing began on Wednesday, October 5th with Defence counsel Barclay Johnson introducing our second Expert Witness Dr. Michael Persinger who also was able to appear via telephone.

Dr. Michael A. Persinger is a Full Professor in the Departments of Psychology and Biology Behavioural Neuroscience, Biomolecular Sciences and Human Studies Programs at Laurentian University in Sudbury, Ontario and his curriculum vitae is, like Dr. Jay’s, also long and distinguished.

Dr. Persinger had written a paper titled, The Anachronism of Policies and Laws for Hate Speech in Modern Canada: The Current Negative Cultural Impact of Legal Punishment upon Extreme Verbal Behaviour, the focus of which was a review of an earlier related document published back in 1966 titled Report to the Minister of Justice of theSpecial Committee on Hate Propaganda in Canada [Also referred to as the Cohen Committee Report. A.T.]. It was this paper which the Defence introduced as part of the reasons for having Dr. Persinger testify.

The report had been commissioned by The Honourable Lucien Cardin, Minister of Justice and Attorney-General of Canada in 1965 during the time when the Cohen Committee was laying the groundwork for the implementation of Canada’s current Hate Propaganda legislation. (Background information on that period is contained in an article I published on RadicalPress.com in March of 2014 titled, Bad Moon Rising: How the Jewish Lobbies Created Canada’s “Hate Propaganda” Laws).

As Dr. Persinger states in his paper, “Although the document (the Cohen Committee Report) was primarily a legal text, it contained a review of social psychological analysis of hate propaganda by Dr. Harry Kaufmann, an Associate Professor of Psychology at the University of Toronto. The mass of this literature was not empirical but based upon theories that are now almost fifty or more years old. There were almost no experimental data, not surprisingly because social psychology was in its infancy and neurocognitive psychology with the powerful tools of brain imaging, did not exist.”

Further, Dr. Persinger also stated that, “The policies upon which contemporary laws for hate propaganda and hate speech have been based in Canada appear to be primarily derived from” Dr. Harry Kaufmann’s Report to the Minister of Justice of theSpecial Committee on Hate Propaganda in Canada. He then goes on to say that, “Today’s environment is dominated by the Internet, the multiple variants of cell phone media, and the requirement for the average person to be more evaluative with respect to what is read and what is said within chat rooms, bulletin boards, and other electronic forms of information exchange. The world of Google and of search engines has shaped a generation with premature sagacity for challenge and resistance to gullibility that did not exist in the population of the 1950s and 1960s. Those individuals would have constituted the focus of concern at the time the document was published.”

One additional statement in Dr. Persinger’s paper claimed that “The assertion by the Cohen Committee that ‘individuals subjected to racial or religious hatred may suffer substantial psychological stress, the damaging consequences including a loss of self-esteem, feelings of anger, and outrage’ is confounded by archaic concepts of psychological processes.” Basically put Persinger’s position was that the psychological methods used back in the mid-1960’s to determine whether or not “hate propaganda” was dangerous and in need of criminal protection are now completely out of date and irrelevant.

Having stated his position Crown then responded by going on the same attack used in cross-examining Dr. Jay. Prosecutor Rodney Garson did all he could to down play and dismiss Dr. Persinger’s expertise, focussing primarily on the fact that Dr. Persinger had not, in his estimation, read or written scholarly articles on “hate speech”. Garson then quoted a number of reviews written in legal journals that focussed on the subject of “hate speech”. As he referenced them it became quite apparent to myself that all of the authors of the articles were Jewish and their arguments were specifically designed to buttress the whole concept of “hate speech” in order to lend a fabricated sense of authenticity to it.

Earlier in his presentation Dr. Persinger had already stated that he doesn’t use the term “hate speech” in his work for the simple reason that it’s too vague, unscientific and open to multiply shades of interpretation. He didn’t go so far as to state that the term itself is actually a cognitive construct coined by the Jews for their own propaganda purposes but it was evident that the whole notion of “Hate Propaganda” is one that was created by Jewish lobbyists in order to justify their implementation of “Hate Propaganda” laws into Canada’s Criminal Code. Dr. Persinger also made a point of stating at the start of his testimony that he doesn’t read legal documents as they are generally out of his sphere of expertise yet Crown kept on doggedly asking Dr. Persinger if he’d read this book or that book or any of the plethora of materials on “hate speech” (the vast majority written by Jews) and eventually the good Dr. responded to Garson’s incessant questioning by stating, “No, I’m not familiar with that book. I usually read detective books.”

By Thursday, October 6th the arguments still continued back and forth as to whether or not Dr. Persinger was qualified to give expert testimony related to the issues surrounding the Charter challenge. Prior to the morning recess S.C. Justice Butler told the court that after the break he would give his oral ruling on the matter. He returned at 11:59 a.m. and ruled that Dr. Persinger was qualified to testify.

Court did not resume until 2:35 that afternoon. Dr. Persinger’s health was such that he could only speak for certain lengths of time and then it was necessary for him to take a break. By 3:30 p.m. during Crown’s cross-examination Dr. Persinger’s energy was waining and Justice Butler decided that it would be better stop and set another date when Crown might be able to complete their portion of the cross-examination. A new date of October 19th, 2016 was set with the proceedings to take place in the Vancouver Supreme Court and following that the week of November 7th, 8th and 9th, 2016 was set for the completion of arguments on the Bedford Threshold.

The Hearing (Part 2)
The Vancouver SC portion of Crown’s final cross-examination of Dr. Persinger was over within a couple of hours in the afternoon. Due to the fact that I was already down on the coast on other personal matters I was able to attend in person.

The Hearing (Part 3)
In attendance for the final two days of arguments were SC Justice Bruce Butler, my lawyer Barclay Johnson, Crown Prosecutor Rodney G. Garson and Barclay’s legal assistant Jeremy Maddock. Due to a critical issue with Legal Aid over funding my counsel, Barclay Johnson, was unable to fly up to Quesnel and so the hearing was rescheduled to resume in Victoria, BC SC where Justice Butler was already scheduled to appear for those three days. The sudden change of venue meant I couldn’t attend in person but was able to listen in from my home in Cottonwood, BC via a telephone link.

Final arguments were exchanged and when the hearing concluded SC Justice Bruce Butler announced to both Defence and Crown and myself that he would not be handing down his decision on the Charter argument until March 11th, 2017. When that date arrives either a new sentencing date will be set if we lose the argument or Justice Butler will make a positive pronouncement on the defence’s argument that Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code constitutes an infringement of Section 2(b) of Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Conclusion
The R v Roy Arthur Topham “hate speech” case essentially began February 14th, 2007 when I first was attacked by the foreign lobby organization B’nai Brith Canada and accused of posting anti-Semitic, hate articles on my website. This coming February 14th, 2017 will mark the 10 year anniversary of this assault upon my constitutional right to freedom of expression. Given that my next court appearance is not until March 11th, 2017 it’s basically a done deal that the trials and tribulations surrounding this decade long travesty of justice will have surpassed the 10 year mark.

When SC Justice Butler hands down his decision on March 11th, 2017 we will know what my options are for the future. Should Justice Butler see fit to find the circumstances surrounding this case do in fact warrant a constitutional challenge to Sec. 319(2) of the Criminal Code then the immediate result will be a stay of the charge against me but that, in all probability, will only continue until the BC Crown in all likelihood appeals the decision of Justice Butler and the whole proceeding then shifts from the BC Supreme Court level to the federal Supreme Court for further adjudication.

On the other hand, should Justice Butler find my argument doesn’t pass the Bedford Threshold test then I will be faced with Sentencing on the guilty verdict in Count 1 soon after his decision. At that time I will have to decide whether or not to appeal the verdict in Count 1 and begin all over again with a new trial or else accept the verdict and whatever legal repercussions it entails.

Barclay Johnson, my legal counsel throughout the trial and the Charter hearing, has informed me that should the case go to the Supreme Court of Canada on appeal that it would entail a very costly and lengthy process of litigation running into hundreds of thousands of dollars and possibly a number of year of more court appearances which would occur not here in my home town of Quesnel but require my travelling to Ottawa, Ontario. Given the fact that I don’t fly this would be an additionally onerous undertaking that I’m not excited about. Therefore, speaking frankly, at this point in time I don’t find the prospect of years of more litigation a very attractive option for either myself or my wife who is dealing with serious medical issues that require urgent attention. This coming February I will turn 70 years old. That is also another factor which will affect whether or not I decide to enter into a further protracted legal battle which I can hardly afford to undertake considering the reasons given above. If wishes were horses then beggars would ride and I might be able to hand the reins over to a younger free speech warrior who could take up the torch and carry on to Ottawa with it but, unfortunately, wishes are not our four-footed friends.

The only thing that appears relatively certain at this point in time is that I and my wife will have close to four months off and a chance to rest up and consider our options for the future.

In final closing I would like to quote once again from Jeremy Maddock’s article in the Friends of Freedom newsletter with respect to funding. He writes, “As this complex process unfolds, Mr. Topham depends on donations to fund various expenses, including expert witnesses, transcripts, and ongoing legal research support. This is the first time since Keegstra (in 1990) that the Courts have entertained a constitutional challenge of the Criminal Code hate speech provision, and it could be the best opportunity in a generation to support internet free speech.”

There are still bills to pay and costs involved so if there is any chance supporters can afford to contribute toward these expenses I would be sincerely appreciative of any assistance. Please go the following website to making a donation or else send a donation to the mailing address shown below:

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

Top 10 reasons to be a holocaust denier By Kevin Barrett Veterans Today Editor

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/10/29/top10holo/

kevinblogo

Top 10 reasons to be a holocaust denier
By Kevin Barrett on October 29, 2016

screen-shot-2016-10-30-at-9-25-04-am
It is possible not only to survive, but to actually thrive as a “holocaust denier.” Here are the top ten benefits of being so labeled.
By Kevin Barrett, Veterans Today Editor

It is very, very easy to become a “holocaust denier.”

I have never denied any holocausts. All I did was say that it looked like Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld and their friends did 9/11. Out of nowhere, the ADL and B’nai Brith and their ilk all started screaming at me: “Why are you saying THAT, you anti-Semitic holocaust denier?!”

I was labeled a “supporter of holocaust deniers” on my Wikipedia page, even though I knew nothing about the “holocaust deniers” that some blogger claimed I supported.

That was roughly from 2006 to 2013. For all those years I couldn’t get my Wikipedia entry changed, even though it was absurdly false and referenced an unknown blogger as the source. Remove the lie, and it would be back up in hours, if not minutes.

Then I was officially labeled a “holocaust denier” myself – for the first time as far as I know – by Jonathan Kay in his book Among the Truthers. Kay cites no evidence whatsoever that I have ever denied any holocausts.

anthony-hall

“Like Professor Anthony Hall—who was suspended from his tenured Full Professorship at the University of Lethbridge because someone planted a “genocidal holocaust denying” image on his Facebook page—I support open debate on all holocausts, and all other issues as well.”

Let me repeat: I don’t deny anything. I just support open debate.

So, using ADL/B’nai Brith nomenclature, I guess that makes me (in their eyes) a “holocaust denier.”

Since I had better make the best of it, here is a list of the most wonderful things about being a “holocaust denier.”

Top 10 Reasons to Be a Holocaust Denier

holothatwantnew1000-copy

10) Incessantly bombarded with holocaust memorials, holocaust museums, and holocaust references in popular culture, you won’t have to get angry and gloomy and depressed and feel guilty (if you are not a Jew) or paranoid (if you are a Jew) but instead can shrug your shoulders and say, “It probably wasn’t quite THAT bad” and go about your business in a normal frame of mind. The cumulative effect of missing out on all that depression, anger, and guilt will add at least ten years to your life expectancy.

9) You can retire early and enjoy hobbies and gardening, since YOU WILL NEVER WORK IN THIS TOWN AGAIN. With all that extra life expectancy, you will have a very long and productive retirement.

8) The good news is that when holocaust denial finally becomes “cool” you will have gotten there first. The bad news is that your retirement may have to continue for many decades for you to live so long.

7) Holocaust denial is rapidly growing industry with openings for authors, documentary filmmakers, persecution victims, and false flag provocateurs for the ADL (the latter being by far the best-paying category).

6) You will lose all your “friends” who were neither terribly smart nor your friends. Good riddance!

5) You may get a chance to rub shoulders with famous people whose lives have recently been glamorized by Hollywood, such as David Irving.

4) When you become an erudite and prolific holocaust denying scholar, you can get a job in the field of Holocaust Studies. Since it is in Iran, you will need to be fluent in Farsi.

3) You can visit David Cole and partake of some of the stash he saved from his Republican Party Animal days. But be careful, since it seems to cause 9/11 truth denial and other symptoms of possible brain damage.

2) Your intrepid holocaust denying utterances will thrill your friends and mortify your enemies.

1) European governments will love you so much that next time you take a vacation there, they will insist that your vacation continue indefinitely, and they will even provide you with free food and housing.

[Arthur Topham’s Note: This may be the perfect time and place to add an additional 11th reason to be a Holocaust Denier. It would allow a person to add the letters “Ph.D” to their signature. The “Ph.D” would of course stand for “Professional Holocaust Denier (Ph.D)”! :-)]
—-

URGENT!! You must STAND up for Anthony Hall against B’nai B’rith!!! By Trevor Labonte for TUT

https://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/2016/10/07/urgent-you-must-stand-up-for-anthony-hall-against-bnai-brith/

URGENT!! You must STAND up for Anthony Hall against B’nai B’rith!!!
By Trevor Labonte
 

holocxt?

Letter to Lethbridge University, written by Trevor LaBonte

Mr. Mahon,

I know that you have recently been a victim of strong-arming by the infamous jewish secret society/hate-cult known as B’nai B’rith.

I know their tactics, they left you no choice but to fire the good Dr. Hall. All of the jewish organizations threatened to withhold funding for Lethbridge unless demands were met. This is standard operating procedure for these gangsters.

I have been featured on Iranian national news and many other shows and I am just telling you the facts that millions or maybe billions of people already know. Anyone who has made any serious inquiry into 9/11 has been met with an enormous array of extremely damning evidence that 9/11 was a zionist operation designed to draw America and other countries into a series of genocidal wars for expansionist Israel.

“Apartheid” does not BEGIN to describe the atrocities the zionist entity commits against the innocent Palestinian people, who only want to live on their own land which has belonged to them for thousands of years.

This paradigm of zionist propaganda will not last much longer. We are in the midst of a great awakening.

I highly encourage you, brother, to reinstate Dr. Hall, and you will be met with cheers and support from all over the world. Let’s chalk up a victory for truth and justice. Don’t make an innocent, heroic man homeless and destitute. This is a crime against humanity that you are being forced to commit at the childish behest of the Jewish lobby, who marches your children into genocidal, illegal wars that nobody but said lobby wants.

Also it may shock you to learn that the holocaust story we have all been taught is fraught with fantastical, physically impossible claims that are 100% without real evidence. The entire source of the story is the Nuremberg trials, which were nothing but a show trial ginned up by the victorious “Allies,” hardly a fair or impartial affair. It was nothing but a farce and a big kangaroo court which only further proved the Allies’ criminality after they firebombed hundreds of thousands of innocent people, dropped nuclear bombs on Japan, and killed millions of defenseless German prisoners AFTER the war was supposedly over. It was hardly a “good war” and is definitely nothing of which to be proud.

Interestingly, in the charter for the trial, in articles 19 and 20, it states that “the trial will not be bound by the rules of technical evidence.” Translated from legalese to English, this means they took the rules and threw them into the trash can. All this talk, for all these years, and all these articles, movies, etc…and here there has never been a single shred of evidence that a single jew was ever “gassed.” There was no “exermination” program, period. The emaciated bodies we see in Allied propaganda photographs are actually proof of Allied atrocities, namely the Allied bombings of supply lines that led directly to mass starvation and typhus outbreak. Yes, the jews that died in Germany’s camps were actually victims of Allied bombings.

 ?no-proof

These are all things that true intellectuals and researchers have known for certain for at least 40 years. It is so very sad that our educational institutions are being forced to peddle such a fraudulent narrative, deceiving, misleading, indoctrinating, and defrauding students of a true education based on facts and evidence. Students going into lifelong debt, just so they can be brainwashed and manipulated. What an epic catastrophe. And here you had ONE good professor, with the courage to investigate the truth, and you let yourself be bullied into throwing him onto the streets for the benefit of the world’s most dangerous gangsters.

This is your chance to be a hero. You will never find a finer example of a human than Dr. Hall. His work is famous around the world for its accurate revelations.

Do the right thing. Don’t martyr Dr. Hall. His blood will be on your hands for the rest of your life, and people around the world already bitterly resent this setback you have just dealt to the global truth community.

Our numbers are massive and we are growing exponentially everyday. We would love you forever if you can help us win this battle instead of capitulating to the tyrannical demands of Jews who believe they are the “Chosen people of God,” and who think they can do no wrong and are above the law. They are an ideological collective of moral relativists who believe that non-Jewish life has no sanctity or importance, and as such, they are hell-bound as well as dead wrong. Don’t do anything to support their racist, anti-gentile agenda.

This world is just a test. Your only job in this place is to do the right thing. Always remember that. Also it is only a matter of time until the truth emerges victorious, so NEVER lose faith, and NEVER be caught on the wrong side of truth.

Sincerely,

Trevor Labonte


trevor-labonte-copy

Jazz artist and peace/truth activist/journalist/blogger/international political commentator Trevor LaBonte

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

rancourtvtisraelgazaattack2014

In a shameful display of state hubris, Canada is using illegal concocted provisions of its Criminal Code to prosecute a citizen for innocuous postings on a personal blog (The Radical Press). The provisions allow a maximum 2-year prison sentence, where the state prosecutor (“Crown”) does not need to prove intent to harm or any actual harm to a single person. Intent and actual harm are not even relevant legal considerations in the proceeding. Both harm and intent are presumed.

The said Criminal Code provisions are straight out of the playbook of a totalitarian state.

The show trial was separated into two parts, despite the objections of the accused. In the first part the accused was found criminally guilty, for one blogpost, while not guilty for the other blogpost of the Crown’s charge. In the second part, which is scheduled to start tomorrow Monday October 3rd, the constitutionality of the law is being challenged on limited grounds. Any sentencing will be decided after the ruling on constitutionality.

The process of thus dividing the show trial into two parts is equivalent to first determining that the witch is guilty of blasphemy or worst, followed by a hearing to determine if burning at the stake in the town square is still within the bounds of community standards, rather than evaluating the legitimacy of the law at the same time (and before the same jury) that the nature of the “offense” is evaluated.

The process of thus dividing the show trial into two parts is equivalent to first determining that the witch is guilty of blasphemy or worst, followed by a hearing to determine if burning at the stake in the town square is still within the bounds of community standards, rather than evaluating the legitimacy of the law at the same time (and before the same jury) that the nature of the “offense” is evaluated.

Meanwhile, the “defendant” was gagged from identifying the original complainants (the usual crew) but allowed to continue blogging about the process until a conviction is finally secured, and has mounted a funding campaign for the expensive constitutional challenge.

These kinds of show-trial proceedings and the associated media assaults are attempts to create a false impression of a victimized Israel, to shield the apartheid state from international condemnation for its on-going violations of the Geneva Conventions, illegal annexation, constant violations of human rights, and mass-murder “mowing of the grass” in Gaza. Israel wants a free hand to continuously expand by the same criminal methods it has used for decades. Therefore, when successful, the domestic show trials (most prominent in Canada, France, and Germany) are geopolitical in character by virtue of Israel’s leading role in US interference in the Middle East, with Canada and France as lead accompanying sycophant states.

Canada’s Ontario Civil Liberties Association (OCLA) has defended Arthur Topham against the state’s attack on freedom of thought and expression with several interventions. OCLA applies the principle that those who’s views are most at odds with orthodoxy and who are most aggressively attacked using the state apparatus are those most in need of civil defense.

The OCLA’s 2014 on-line petition to the state authority gathered over 1,400 signatures. OCLA also, in 2015, intervened by letter against other “civil liberties” associations that adopted a statement that harmed Mr. Topham’s case.

This year, OCLA intervened prior to the constitutional part of the trial by sending a letter directly to the trial judge, with all the state actors in cc. OCLA’s letter, reproduced below, spells out the illegal character of the criminal law being used in this particular show trial and witch hunt:

January 13, 2016
The Honourable Mr. Justice Butler, Supreme Court of British Columbia

Your Honour:

Re: Unconstitutionality of s. 319(2) of the Criminal Code (R. v. Topham, Court File No. 25166, Quesnel Registry)

The Ontario Civil Liberties Association (OCLA) wishes to make this intervention, in letter form, to assist the Court in its hearing of the defendant’s constitutional challenge of s. 319(2) of the Criminal Code (“Code”), to be heard in the Supreme Court of British Columbia.
The defendant submits that s. 319(2) of the Code infringes on the s. 2(b) guarantee of freedom of expression contained in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and is not saved by s. 1 of the Charter.[1]
The Supreme Court of Canada has determined and reaffirmed that the Charter must provide at least as much protection for basic freedoms as is found in the international human rights documents adopted by Canada:[2]
“And this Court reaffirmed in Divito v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), [2013] 3 S.C.R. 157, at para. 23, “the Charter should be presumed to provide at least as great a level of protection as is found in the international human rights documents that Canada has ratified”.”[Emphasis added.]
Canada has ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (“Covenant”). Article 19, para. 2 of the Covenant protects freedom of expression:[3]
“2. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice.”
Further, the U.N. Human Rights Committee, in its General Comment dated 12 September 2011, has specified that any restrictions[4] to the protection of freedom of expression “must conform to the strict tests of necessity and proportionality”:[5]
“35. When a State party invokes a legitimate ground for restriction of freedom of expression, it must demonstrate in specific and individualized fashion the precise nature of the threat, and the necessity and proportionality of the specific action taken, in particular by establishing a direct and immediate connection between the expression and the threat.” [Emphasis added.][6]
The impugned provision in the Code does not require the Crown to prove any actual harm, and no evidence of actual harm to any individual or group was presented in the trial of R. v. Topham. There is no “direct and immediate connection” between Mr. Topham’s expression on his blog and any threat that would permit restriction of his expression.
The OCLA submits that the current jurisprudence of the Covenant, including the 2011 General Comment No. 34, represents both Canada’s obligation and the current status of reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society, in relation to state-enforced limits on expression. The process and the jury-conviction to date in the instant case establish that s. 319(2) of the Code exceeds these limits, and is therefore not constitutional.
Furthermore, s. 319(2) of the Code allows a maximum punishment of “imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years”. The Code punishment of imprisonment exceeds the “strict tests of necessity and proportionality” prescribed by the Covenant.
In addition, in paragraph 47 of General Comment No. 34, it is specified that: “States parties should consider the decriminalization of defamation and, in any case, the application of the criminal law should only be countenanced in the most serious of cases and imprisonment is never an appropriate penalty.” [Emphasis added.] In the penal defamation envisaged in the Covenant, unlike in s. 319(2) in the Code, the state has an onus to prove actual harm.
And in relation to state concerns or prohibitions about so-called “Holocaust denial”, paragraph 49 of the said General Comment has:
“Laws that penalize the expression of opinions about historical facts are incompatible with the obligations that the Covenant imposes on States parties in relation to the respect for freedom of opinion and expression.”
Finally, the OCLA submits that the feature of s. 319(2) that gives the Attorney General direct say regarding proceeding to prosecution (the requirement for the Attorney General’s “consent”)[7] is unconstitutional because it is contrary to the fundamental principle of the rule of law, wherein provisions in a statute cannot be subject to arbitrary application or be politically motivated or appear as such. The fundamental principle of the rule of law underlies the constitution.[8]
For these reasons, the OCLA is of the opinion that s. 319(2) of Canada’s Criminal Code is unconstitutional and incompatible with the values of a free and democratic society.
If the Court requests it, the OCLA will be pleased to make itself available to provide any further assistance in relation to the instant submission.
Yours sincerely,

Joseph Hickey
Executive Director
Ontario Civil Liberties Association (OCLA)

[1] Defendant’s “Memorandum of Argument Regarding Charter Issues”, R. v. Topham, Court File No. 25166, Quesnel Registry.
[2] Saskatchewan Federation of Labour v. Saskatchewan [2015 SCC 4], at para. 64.
[3] International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 19, at para. 2.
[4] Ibid., Article 19, at para. 3, and Article 20.
[5] General Comment No. 34, UN Human Rights Committee [CCPR/C/GC/34], at para. 22.
[6] Ibid., at para. 35.
[7] Criminal Code (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46), s. 319(6).
[8] For a recent example where unconstitutionality arising from the rule of law was the main issue before the court, see: Trial Lawyers Association of British Columbia v. British Columbia (Attorney General), 2014 SCC 59 (CanLII); and see Committee for the Commonwealth of Canada v. Canada, [1991] 1 SCR 139, 1991 CanLII 119 (SCC), p. 210 (i).


SOURCE ARTICLE

The megalomania of the Zionist Jews: Robert Faurisson found “guilty of racial defamation for 2006 Tehran talk”

jewmegalomania

Robert Faurisson found guilty of racial defamation for 2006 Tehran talk
September 27th, 2016

On June 21, 2016 Professor Robert Faurisson was prosecuted, with regard to his 2006 talk in Tehran and his paper “The Victories of Revisionism“ [http://robertfaurisson.blogspot.it/2006/12/victories-of-revisionism.html], for “disputing the existence of crimes against humanity“, and, because of his 60-word sentence alone, for “racial defamation“.
Here is the result of that trial as conveyed to us [Bocage] by the Professor’s barrister:
“On September 27, 2016, in the case of the talk given by Robert Faurisson in Tehran in 2006, the 17th chamber of the Paris correctional court ruled as follows:
Two charges of disputing the existence of crimes against humanity were declared null.
The third charge, that of racial defamation for the sentence of approximately 60 words [included in his talk], resulted in Robert Faurisson’s conviction and sentence to four months’ imprisonment (suspended) along with a fine of €4,000. The LICRA [Ligue internationale contre le racisme et l’antisémitisme], plaintiff, obtained €3,000 in damages and €2,000 in legal costs. Thus, a judgment totalling €9,000.
Professor Faurisson immediately lodged an appeal against this decision.
Tomorrow, September 28, at 1.30 pm, Robert Faurisson will appear again before the same court for having spoken about the Nazi gas chambers on the website Meta TV [in June 2014: http://meta.tv/robert-faurisson-au-bal-des-quenelles].
Damien Viguier
Barrister”

The bravery of old women By John Kaminski

braveryofolderwomenhdr

The bravery of old women

Detoxifying the disinfo that keeps us enslaved

INSPIRING THE YOUNG WITH COURAGEOUS GRACE AND AUTHENTIC INTEGRITY

By John Kaminski
pseudoskylax@gmail.com
http://therebel.is/news/kaminski

“Only lies need to be protected by laws. The truth stands on its own.” 
— Monika Schaefer, Canadian fiddler
recently blacklisted for thoughtful Holocaust video

We are the ones who make war. We allow war to be made in our names. Millions of people have died because of the lies we refused to challenge. Millions more today and tomorrow will die needlessly because we remain silent and/or ignorant of the secret forces that engineer our enslavement and profit from our indifference.

Today’s heroes are old women, no longer shackled by social etiquette, directly describing the culture of crime that keeps them from living securely in their homes. The world needs to listen to them.

The main paradigm in the battle for people’s minds, I was surprised to learn, turns out to be the Holocaust issue, which half the world has been taught to be afraid to discuss. Too many careers have been ruined for even mentioning the subject. Since Roman days (according to Cicero), the behavior of our governments is directly determined by what Jewish influence will permit.

Belief in the Holocaust allows the Jews to maintain a sacrosanct status that attempts to solicit pity for their self-inflicted suffering. This despicable act camouflages their worldwide financial crime syndicate, which is fueled by the guilt of their imagined persecution projected upon the duped goyim. The worldwide phenomenon of Holocaust reparations — the payment of today’s generations for yesterday’s supposed crimes — has allowed the Jews to rob several European countries of hundreds of billions of dollars.

The latest object lesson in the annals of Holocaust swindles involves a Canadian violinist who had the temerity to record a YouTube video titled “Sorry Mom, I was wrong about the Holocaust” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0_BZphQ7Qo. But as the video goes viral, Monika Schaefer’s violin jobs are disappearing amid petty whispers about her Nazi sympathies.

The longtime activist has dared transgress the taboo about talking about the events of World War II in a way that is not approved by Jews, which in most European countries and especially Canada can earn such truth tellers quick and long jail sentences.

Schaefer’s disheartening ordeal was recapped on Red Ice radio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLGJJF9tssA Her trouble with the Canadian government is reported here http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/hate-speech-complaint-filed-against-jasper-woman-for-holocaust-denial-video-1.3679917.

Schaefer’s courageous efforts at promoting historical truth follow on the audacious ordeal 87-year-old Ursula Haverbeck has undertaken simply by talking about the lie Germans have been living since the end of World War II. Haverbeck’s courageous YouTubes and articles about the true, non Jewish facts about World War II recently earned her a nine-month prison sentence, but more importantly created yet another disgraceful example of the Jewish kangaroo courts of Germany, in which truth is no defense and the events of World War II may not be discussed candidly.

A heroine for the truth
https://carolynyeager.net/ursula-haverbeck-once-again-sentenced-jail-germany

Jailed for questioning history
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jR25qa_xTpE

It used to be the young who would wax heroic while advocating for justice and social change, but now it is the wise old women refusing to put up with the silly and toxic artificiality that keeps the entire world locked in a hermetically sealed auditorium where everything may be discussed except the 360 degree Jewish control of reality which poisons the motives of everything it seeks to control.

When patriotism becomes plunder, it’s time to revisit our allegiances. When justice serves only some it is actually serving none.

The Holocaust issue is shunned by many because of the dangers it presents to ordinary people who want to keep their jobs. The dilemma employers face when their employees exercise their free speech rights is that Jewish word of mouth campaign soon deprives these employers of its regular customers. Owners know the score and are faced with the reality that if they pay employees who oppose Jewish policies and mythologies, advertisers and other customers mysteriously disappear.

The much-talked-about Holocaust is the central metaphor in a culture taught to live in an artificial reality, buy artificial products and services, and live artificial, inauthentic lives. That we are not allowed to talk about the Holocaust is emblematic of not being able to talk about our own government’s murderous policies, which make plenty of money for kosher investors and gentile traitors, but very little for the average working class goy.

Plus there is the little matter of killing people for money — something American culture appears to approve of, as politicians say one thing and do another.

The financial difficulty Americans find themselves in today has resulted from spending all that money — all our money! — on wars for Israel and weapons for everyone.

The newspeak of George Orwell’s dark forecast for the future has long since passed into being. The United States in 2016 is a vigilante strike force for Jewish interests, which control every aspect of American society. War is peace. And a little tear comes to your eye as you wave your yellow ribbon at the steady stream of corpses from wars that never needed to happen, and mourn the deaths of all those who never needed to die.

During the time I have been foraging down these mental corridors of thought known as the Internet I have detected the consistent presence of a strong cadre of righteous old women who don’t really need to be informed about the disappointments and deceptions of the world.

The actions of Schaefer and Haverbeck to shatter these shackles that have been placed on our brains serve as beacons for others to follow, had they but the courage to recognize that the information that is poured down upon us by oligarchic politicians and cookie cutter commentators speaking what they are told to speak is all pure poison, meant to deceive us into supporting things most of us would never do in our real lives, and then punishing us for not being more enthusiastic about the disgusting crimes these psychos are committing in our names, in your name.

Do you take responsibility for all these atrocities, and say what really should be said about them, as these women have with such dignity and reasonableness? Or will you continue to remain silent and believe in the false facts that have deformed your lives and now threaten your future?


John Kaminski is a writer who lives on the Gulf Coast of Florida, constantly trying to figure out why we are destroying ourselves, and pinpointing a corrupt belief system as the engine of our demise. Solely dependent on contributions from readers, please support his work by mail: 6871 Willow Creek Circle #103, North Port FL 34287 USA.
http://therebel.is/news/kaminski
http://johnkaminski.info/
http://www.rudemacedon.ca/kaminski/kam-index.html
http://www.serendipity.li/john_kaminski_articles.htm
http://web.archive.org/web/20040323232319/http://johnkaminski.com/

Jim Rizoli Interviews Monika Schaefer, Sept 2016

Screen Shot 2016-08-07 at 4.23.58 PM

Monika Schaefer – Truth Revealer and Social Activist

 

MONIKA SCHAEFER: has been a life-long activist for the environment, peace and justice. She is a musician and a former National Park Warden. In recent years Monika started learning that what we have been told about World War II is full of lies and distortions, and that the Hollywood version of the so-called “holocaust” is false. This awakening was preceded by her learning that 9-11 was a false flag event designed to trigger the fraudulent “War on Terror”. Monika is very happy to be working on the side of truth in spite of some of the “ritual defamation” consequences of her actions. “The truth will set you free” is apt, and Peace and Love is what motivates her.

JIM RIZOLI: Cofounder, producer/interviewer (Fred Leuchter and Assistant, Diane King) of the Series, LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY REVISIONISTS. This also entails seeking out UNSUNG HEROES and German survivors of Allied atrocities – The German Story, The German Way. Hard core historical revisionist, Jim and, his brother, Joe moved from combating the illegal immigrant hordes in their cable shows to dealing with the fundamental and pervading issue of the holocaust. Their immigrant battles led them to the plight of Ernst Zundel in Canada, being prosecuted for having reprinted *Did 6 Million Really Die*! Thus Jim and Joe’s efforts and cable shows also turned toward the issue of the holocaust. That’s when their troubles accelerated. In 2002 – 2003 they began producing numerous (1000s of videos) dealing with many issues and 100s of videos about the holocaust. Consequently, YouTube videos (700) under the name of Jim Rizoli were banned. His name was banned on Facebook. In 2010, their cable shows were suspended. They returned and then were permanently removed in 2014. We are back to provide a venue of/freedom of, telling the story for tried-and-true revisionists and Germans throughout North America, Europe and Australia.

 

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

preludehdr1000

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Section 318 reads as follows:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

May Truth and Justice prevail.
_____

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

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

THANK YOU!

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

Holocaust deniers threaten Green Party credibility by Toronto Sun

Toronto Sun logo

Screen Shot 2016-08-03 at 7.10.27 AM

[***Editor’s Note: Graphics in article compliments of Radical Press]

Holocaust deniers threaten Green Party credibility

By Sue-Ann Levy, Toronto Sun
August 02, 2016

She was a member of the Green Party of Canada when it was founded in 1983 and ran in four elections as a party candidate.

Monika Schaefer, who stood for election provincially in 2004 and federally in 2006, 2008 and 2011, came to the party’s attention in mid-June when she posted a video on YouTube flatly denying the Holocaust.

According to the Jasper resident, who shot the video in Germany, the Holocaust is “the biggest and most pernicious lie in all of history” and there were “no gas chambers there (in Germany or elsewhere)… the only gas used was to get rid of lice.”

MonikaSchaeferSorryMomHdr copy

It appears the Green Party had egg on its face, not just because this woman was a candidate several times over, but because Green Party leader — and the party’s only sitting MP — Elizabeth May didn’t seem to know whether she was still a member, or not, when leading Canadian Jewish groups exposed Schaefer last month.

MayShocked

Reached in Jasper Tuesday, Schaefer said she rescinded her membership a year ago “on a matter of principle” — namely because May distanced herself from a petition seeking an investigation into the events of 9/11.

MonikaSchaeferPhoto

She accused May of “making political hay” out of her video — an affront considering she was a “loyal” Green Party member and candidate and shared her views “widely” with many Green Party members.

“She is bowing to her political masters … The Zionist lobby,” said Schaefer, whose candidacy was rejected in 2014.

Martin Sampson, spokesman for the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, says the Green Party is “particularly susceptible to infiltration” by Holocaust deniers and 9/11 Truthers.

CIJABomb copy 2

“In order to remain credible, the Green Party must stop people who hold these abhorrent views from hijacking the party, distracting it from its mission and relegating it to the margins,” he said.

No kidding.

One has to look no further than this weekend’s annual conference in Ottawa, where two controversial anti-Israel motions — and the only foreign policy positions to be presented at all — will be debated Saturday morning (on the Jewish Sabbath.)

1_boycott-israel-campaign_2006_50_70_amer-shomali-basel-nasr1 copy 2

Those controversial motions urge Green Party members to support the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement (which attempts to restrict ties and business with the Jewish state) and to approve revoking the charitable status of the Jewish National Fund of Canada (a charity that has worked to protect the natural environment of Israel for decades).

Online voting has been so supportive that the motions have made it to the convention’s workshop sessions, where they will be debated and voted on and then sent to full membership for a vote.

Michael Mostyn, CEO of B’nai Brith, says they believe members of the Independent Jewish Voices organization are pushing these Green Party motions — a group he says has spearheaded the anti-Israel boycott movement in Canada, have sent speakers to the highly “morally reprehensible” anti-Semitic Al Quds day rallies and “pretends” to speak for the majority of Jews in Canada, when in fact they do not.

CanadaBBLOBBY3 copy 5

Green Party spokesman Dan Palmer said May has previously indicated publicly that she opposes both motions and that she is just one vote at the convention.

“Policy proposals come from the grassroots of the party and are not vetted before being put to members,” he said Tuesday.

Mostyn said they certainly hope the anti-Israel motions do not pass this weekend and that the Green Party would not be associated with “views of this sort,” especially since the IJV organization have their paw prints all over them.

“You don’t want any political party motions that would single out groups for hatred,” he says.

He added that Schaefer’s video is “horrendous” and “extremely disturbing.”

—–

SLevy@postmedia.com

Source Article

Enough Already! HolocaustDeprogrammingCourse.com

EnjoughAlready!

HolocaustDeprogrammingCourse.com

Holocaust deprogramming course

Do you care to know about how the people you have trusted all your lives have lied to you?

If anything were to ever convince you of the terrible Jewish lies about World War II, this would be that document. You can’t possibly read this compilation of sources by hundreds of serious minded examiners and still believe the lies that mainstream accounts have forced upon you as “the truth” of World War II.

Many thanks to my friend “pdk” in France.
Please read as much as your mind can tolerate. You will never find as many courageous truth tellers represented in one place.
Best wishes,
John Kaminski

Open Letter to Green Party Leader and Executives: Your ill-advised condemnation of Monika Schaefer of Jasper, Alberta by Al Romanchuk

From: “Al Romanchuk” <romanesq@shaw.ca>
AlRomanchukPic300
Subject: Your ill-advised condemnation of Monika Schaefer of Jasper, Alberta
Date: July 29, 2016
To: <Elizabeth.May@parl.gc.ca>, “Dan \(Green Party\) Palmer” <dan.palmer@greenparty.ca>, “Emily \(Green Party\) McMillan” <emily.mcmillan@greenparty.ca>
Sir & women,

I’m an 80 year old now living in Kelowna but I have been in politics since the age of 15. Growing up in Alberta was an honour and pleasure and practicing law in Alberta and BC gave me untold pleasurable moments. I’ve belonged to many political parties over the years but today they offer me nothing but corruption, secrecy and fraud served on a silver platter! I would just as soon abolish all political parties and the rebates that they receive from the federal government following a federal election or by-election. My indisputable rights to FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND OF THE PRESS have been eroded to the point where I no longer feel patriotic to my country. The federal government, and now BC and I’m sure other provinces will follow, has passed what I believe to be the EQUITY ACT granting special privileges and PROTECTIONS to all the GD queers and perverts in our society (especially the alphabet queers who don’t know whether they are male or female) but there is NOTHING in our laws PROTECTING ME FROM THESE KINDS OF HUMANOIDS!

Which brings me to the subject at hand. All of you have condemned PUBLICLY, in the harshest words possible, Miss Schaefer for publicizing her video regarding her QUESTIONING of the Jewish holocaust during WW2, where questioning in our country should be and was the essence of democracy. Your statements are ill-advised and it is obvious to anyone of native intelligence that none of you have done ANY research into the subject of the alleged holocaust. Like MOST Canadians, and others, you have fallen for the BIG LIE because you were taught that it was the truth. I am surprised at Miss May who, as a lawyer and so-called educated person, would not have done her research before castigating Miss Schaefer and I condemn you, Miss May, in the strongest possible terms. You have voiced your concerns in the past of not being included in certain debates citing that it was a matter of FREEDOM OF SPEECH and yet you malevolently condemn Miss Schaefer for simply EXERCISING HER RIGHT IN CANADA TO SUCH FREEDOM. The remarks of Palmer and McMillan against Miss Schaefer are entirely false and it is obvious that they have not done their homework as well.

As Miss May knows it is an essential element of jurisprudence that HE WHO ASSERTS THE POSITIVE HAS THE ONUS OF PROVING IT. The Jews have ASSERTED POSITIVELY THAT SINCE THE END OF WW2 THAT EXACTLY 6 MILLION JEWS WERE KILLED BY THE GERMANS IN THAT CAMPAIGN. But NO ONE from the Jewish community has come forward to present WRITTEN PROOF of such assertion and thus, over the years, it has been believed to be the truth when there is NO evidence thereof. I have written to two Jewish organizations, one in Ontario and one in Edmonton, and asked them the above simple question: PLEASE PROVIDE ME WITH WRITTEN PROOF OF YOUR ASSERTION THAT THE GERMANS KILLED EXACTLY 6 MILLION JEWS IN WW2. I have NO replies to date and the emails were sent about 2 weeks ago. One should remember, if I can jog your memories if you have them, that absolutely no written evidence of such mass killing was produced at the Nuremburg trials in 1945-46.

“If I was rich I would finance Miss Schaefer’s lawsuit against all of you for besmirching (libeling) her reputation and denying her right to earn a living. I cannot for the life of me see WHY Canadians would support your party given your totally unfounded, scurrilous and profoundly LYING statements about Miss Schaefer.”

So, where do YOU stand on the question, the vitally important question, of FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND OF THE PRESS? Do you or do you not believe that such freedoms INCLUDE the right to offend? Do you or do you not believe that people have a CHOICE on whether or not to listen to someone speak or read what someone has written? Your bitterly cold and deliberate attacks on Miss Schaefer for expressing her OWN OPINION are, to me, despicable and totally unwarranted having regard to the circumstances. If I was rich I would finance Miss Schaefer’s lawsuit against all of you for besmirching (libeling) her reputation and denying her right to earn a living. I cannot for the life of me see WHY Canadians would support your party given your totally unfounded, scurrilous and profoundly LYING statements about Miss Schaefer.

In this context I believe that all three of you should publish a public apology to Miss Schaefer. The apology should be couched in such terms that makes it abundantly clear that you did not mean to defame or otherwise condemn Miss Schaefer and that you sincerely believe that unfettered FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND OF THE PRESS SHOULD BE ALLOWED AND NEVER DENIED TO ANYONE IN CANADA. I would expect that such an apology would be published in the Jasper Fitzhugh, Edmonton Journal, Toronto Sun and Vancouver Sun within 15 days from the date of this email. The apology need not be lengthy but should be sincere. If you do NOT publish such an apology I can only presume that all of you DO NOT believe in these essential freedoms and that you have bought into the BIG LIE hook, line and sinker!

AL ROMANCHUK
Kelowna
Email: romanesq@shaw.ca

When You Write a Letter on Monika Schaefer’s Behalf

Letters4MonikaHdr

PLEASE ALSO CC IT TO THE MAYOR OF JASPER, ALBERTA & MONIKA & RADICALPRESS.COM

Mayor, Jasper, Alberta, Canada
Richard Ireland
Please also send Monika a copy as well:  
If you can please include a copy to Radical Press:
 
Again, this is her crime:  

Escape From The Holocaust Lie by Arthur Topham

EscapeHoloHdr

Escape From The Holocaust Lie

By
Arthur Topham

“The first and most important value is the freedom to debate, the freedom to think, the freedom to speak and the freedom to disagree. This prosecution, has already had a very serious effect on those freedoms. If it were to result in a conviction, I suggest to you that a process of witch-hunting would begin in our society where everyone who had a grievance against anyone else would say “Uh-huh, you are false, and I’ll take you or pressure somebody else to take you to court and force you to defend yourself.”
~ Douglas Christie, Barrister & Solicitor from his Summation to the Jury
in the Ernst Zundel Trial, February 25, 1985

I chose the above quote from Douglas Christie, the greatest defender of freedom of speech Canada has ever produced. Doug, more than any other person I know (and I knew him personally for seven years right up to the time of his death in March of 2013), epitomized the spirit of Truth, intelligence of Heart, the noble Grace and indefatigable Courage and Integrity of a free man all combined with an adamantine faith in God.

DouglasHChristiecopy_zps43b1b5c0

It was due in great part to the efforts of Doug Christie during the trial of Ernst Zundel that he, like the biblical Moses of old, was able to lead the captured consciousness of Truth Seekers of the 20th Century out of their mentally-induced prisons into the fertile lands of freedom of speech and expression.

tazebook_dees-1-copy

Ernst Zundel had been charged under Section 177 of the Criminal Code for having knowingly “published false news that was likely to be injurious to the public good” when he began dispensing a small booklet titled Did Six Million Really Die? – one which he hadn’t written himself but felt expressed his views on the alleged Jewish Holocaust. It was Zundel’s trial that finally brought to a head the (then) forty years of Canadians wondering aimlessly through a cognitive “6 Million” wilderness of deception not knowing that all the while they were being psychically manipulated and conditioned to believe the greatest LIE ever told to humanity.

Awhile ago I typed out and digitally recorded on RadicalPress.com Doug Christie’s Summation to the Jury which first appeared in booklet form not too long after the trial ended and I highly recommend that anyone in the least concerned about this massive experiment in mind control read it. If nothing else it will vividly show you the brilliance and logic (and levity) of the lawyer who honestly earned his handle “The Battling Barrister”.

ZundelTrialFreeSpeechDC800 copy

Doug Christie put the issue of Ernst Zundel’s concerns before the jury in the following manner:

“The booklet Did Six Million Really Die? is more important for German people than it is maybe for others, because there is a real guilt daily inculcated against German people in the media every time they look at the war.

The German people have been portrayed for forty years in the role of the butchers of six million.”

In Christie’s Summation to the Jury at the culmination of the trial he recapped much of what was revealed to the court through weeks of mind-bending cross-examination, regarding this one fundamental LIE that has superseded all other interpretations of what took place during WW 2 in German occupied territories in Eastern Europe.

During the Zundel Trial Christie literally demolished the illusions of the “gas chambers” and the “6 Million Jews” myth that the Crown and its Expert Witness Raul Hilberg had attempted to foist upon the Jury and, by extension, the nation and the world as a whole. The final results showed that the much-touted, world renowned “holocaust expert” Raul Hilberg’s testimony (the Jews considered Hilberg to be their No. 1 man) ultimately proved to be nothing more than unsubstantiated bluff.

As Doug Christie put it in his summation:

“Who denies Dr. Hilberg the right to publish his views? Who denies that he should be free to say there was a Hitler order to exterminate Jews? Not my client; not me; nobody in society denies him that right. Who denies anyone the right to publish their views? Well, it’s the position of my client that he’s obliged to justify his publication. And I suggest he has….”

“Has Dr. Hilberg proved a single thing here to be false? No, he hasn’t. He says he had documents. He produces none. He talks about the train tickets and schedules. What train tickets and schedules? If we’re talking about a criminal case we should have evidence. There isn’t enough evidence here today to convict one person for murdering one other person. But they want you to believe that six million died, or millions died, and that this question mark is false. Where is the evidence to support one murder by one person? There is no Hitler order; there is an alleged order somewhere by somebody alleged to have heard it from somebody else. There’s no evidence.”

RaulHilbergPic

And the Beat(ing) Goes On

Now, seventy-one years later (thirty-one years after Doug’s summation) we’re still witnessing the relentless, malicious efforts of the Zionist Jews (and their sycophant zombie clones) to brow-beat, bludgeon, bedazzle and intimidate Canadians into accepting as FACT everything that the Ernst Zundel trial legally established as mere FICTION.

I am specifically referring to the current mainstream media uproar of feigned sound and fury that’s overtaken not only the local media in Jasper, Alberta The Jasper Local, and the Canadian Edmonton, Alberta media but has even extended itself to the state of Israel’s Haaretz newspaper since one of Jasper’s better known residents and peace activists, Monika Schaefer, published a short video denouncing the alleged “6 Million Jewish Holocaust”. The video in question was titled, Sorry Mom, I was wrong about the Holocaust.

MonikaSchaeferSorryMomHdr copy

No ifs ands or buts, it’s intentional mind-control on the same level as that of MKULTRA.

No ifs and or buts, it’s intentional mind-control on the same level as that of MKULTRA. Canadians, like people everywhere, have been unwittingly under the hypnotic, sorcerer’s spell of Jewish controlled “mainstream media” since the end of World War 2. They have surreptitiously endured a lifetime of brainwashing and mendaciously motivated mind control and for many today they still have little or no clue that the alleged “6 Million Jewish Holocaust” was and is the BIGGEST and most pervasive LIE ever foisted upon the world.

Of course that’s how it was intentionally designed to be when the perpetrators of this fantastic fiction first formulated, then forecast for use on such a massive scale, their serpentine “6 Million” siren song purposely meant to entrap the masses into subconsciously entering a Zionist-induced cognitive gulag or concentration camp strikingly similar to their own Talmudic Rabbi’s historically induced ghetto consciousness that forms the superstructure upon which Zionism’s atheistic ideological edifice rests.

Back in 2009 I wrote an article titled Israel’s Wall: For Palestinians or Jews? where I try to show the similitude between the wall that the Israeli government constructed on stolen Palestinian land and the mental/emotional wall that the Talmudic Rabbis built around their own tribe in order to control the minds of each successive generation of Jews and keep them trapped in the Talmudic oral “law”; an alleged law that purported made them especially chosen by God to rule over the world and because of that exclusiveness therefore separate and a step above the rest of humanity. It was a thesis first put forward by the British author and journalist Douglas Reed in his monumental classic, The Controversy of Zion.

The final point thought that needs to be restated again and again is the fact that down through history and right up until the 20th Century the most astute observers of civilized development in the West continually questioned and criticized the actions and motives of the Babylonian Talmudic tribe of Pharisees whenever they began to meddle too deeply in the affairs of other nation states but beginning with the take-over of the majority of the media in the West around the turn of the 20th century this practise began to cease and in its place there began renewed efforts on the part of the Zionist Jews to attack any and all critics of their ideology and their actions with the endless epithets of “anti-Semite” and “racist” and “Jew Hater”, an enterprise that has today reached such epidemic proportions that critics of present day Zionism lay wasting away in dungeons and website owners, university professors, researchers and writers everywhere are being accused of “hate crimes” throughout most, if not all, western nations.

Monika Schaefer’s case is the latest in that long and disgusting list of Truth Revealers who Jewish lobby organizations like B’nai Brith Canada and the new viper on the holohoax block The Centre for Israel & Jewish Affairs (CIJA) along with all their trance-induced toady followers are attempting to smear and degrade and destroy in order to keep the BIG LIE from being questioned.

CanadaBBLOBBY3 copy 5

What to do?

The longer this travesty of injustice goes on the more insanely vile and blood-thirsty the Zionists are becoming. Their desperation has grown almost exponentially over the past decade as they wend their way through the corridors of Canada’s justice system plying their rag-tag “hate crime” laws in order to safeguard the collusion they’ve made with the Devil.

No better example of just how demented it’s becoming was the latest attack upon Monika Schaefer that occurred but a day or so ago in Jasper. When Monika Schaefer moved to Jasper, Alberta busking (i.e. the playing of an instrument on the public streets) was illegal. Bearing that in mind, in communication with Monika over this matter  she told me the following:

“The irony of the fact is that it was me who brought the issue of busking to town council already a few years ago, made a presentation (at least on one occasion, and have raised it a few times since…) to support busking in town. You see, it has always been illegal to busk in Jasper. Yes, you read correctly Arthur. Anyway, so you see the irony – I have been pushing for busking for a long time. This summer is the first time it is legal. So when I went yesterday to get my busking license, my senses already went up. Dave wasn’t there, but the woman who was there (whom I have also known for decades – it’s a small town) was behaving very cagy. Then I left a phone message, text message, and email message with the person who was supposedly in charge (someone else, not even Dave). Today my gut feeling of yesterday was proven correct when I received Dave’s message.”

And here’s the rub for those who haven’t read the article. Dave’s message read: “We have considered your application for a busking permit in Jasper. In light of your recently publicly proclaimed non-inclusive beliefs we have decided to decline a permit to you at this time.”

“publicly proclaimed non-inclusive beliefs” !!!???

As one commenter on RadicalPress. com wrote in reply to the article, Surely you guys are making this up! because no one can possibly be dumb enough to actually write and publish that sentence – NOT, in Canada, no f’n way!”

Unfortunately for Canada someone in an official position with the municipal government of Jasper, Alberta DID write that sentence and sent it to Monika Schaefer.

Since my own arrest, incarceration and criminal case began back in May of 2012 after I was charged with “communicating statements” that did “willfully promote hatred against an identifiable group, people of the Jewish religion or ethnic origin, contrary to Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code” I’ve been doing my damnedest to warn Canadians of the extreme danger of these so-called “Hate Propaganda” laws that the Zionist Jew lobbyists created and are using with increasing fervour and zeal to censor any and all criticism of their deeds both here at home and abroad in the state of Israel. And of course the kicker is the fact that they used the “6 Million” holocaust lie in order to justify the inclusion of these Orwellian anti-free speech laws into Canadian jurisprudence.

Given the current Prime Minister of Canada, Justin Trudeau’s, longstanding indoctrination on the holocaust deception and his unabashed public display of obeisance to the perpetrators of this hoax there’s little chance that we will see him do what Conservative PM Stephen Harper did with the equally nefarious Sec. 13(1) legislation formerly contained in the Canadian Human Rights Act; that is, repeal the law. But that is the only and final solution to this “hate speech” madness that’s slithered like a snake from out of that den of vipers known as the Canadian “Jewish Lobby”.

RepealHateLaws-1000 copy 2

The issue must be taken from Cybespace’s Facebook and the Alternative media and transposed down onto the streets and turned into a public spectacle that the mainstream media cannot refuse to cover. Instead of focussing their attention on Gay Pride festivities it’s time that the Jewish-controlled media was forced to recognize that the fundamental rights of ALL Canadians are being jeopardized by these draconian “hate speech” laws and the only way this is going to happen is if normal, law-abiding citizens of Canada get their act together and begin to openly PROTEST this blatant act of sedition by these foreign lobbyists against Canadians’ lawful right to freedom of expression both on and off the Internet.

The time to organize this is NOW. Their game plan is so in our face obvious and the people know it. All that remains is for concerned Canadians to stand up, take to the streets and say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!

If we want our basic freedoms we’re going to have to fight to hang on to them one way or another.

______

Authoritarian Jasper Violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom by Attempting to Silence Monika Schaefer’s Violin in Canada’s Jasper National Park by Prof. Tony Hall

BIGOTSVILLE

Authoritarian Jasper Violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom by Attempting to Silence Monika Schaefer’s Violin in Canada’s Jasper National Park 

by Prof. Tony Hall

Screen Shot 2015-11-17 at 10.17.57 AM

To Dave Baker,

I am dumbfounded by the decision you delivered on behalf of some unnamed authority. To Ms. Monika Schaefer you write, “We have considered your application for a busking permit in Jasper. In light of your recently publicly proclaimed non-inclusive beliefs we have decided to decline a permit to you at this time.”

Please clarify who is included in this “we” on whose behalf you claim to speak? Who takes responsibility for the decision to violate core provision of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in the community of Canada’s Jasper National Park?

This unilateral decision extends the so-far-unaccountable decision of those in Jasper’s Canada Day Committee to silence Monika Schaefer’s violin playing last July 1st. Because some Jasperites apparently threatened to disrupt the event, presumably in response to Ms. Schaefer’s peaceful video expression, the precedent was set that Jasper is a place of censorship where freedom of expression and conscience can be subordinated when threats of violence arise.

Now comes this gross violation of fundamental principles of Canadian decency, not to mention the rule of law, as dictated by whatever authority it is on whose behalf you, Dave Baker, claim to be acting in handing down this truly reprehensible arbitration.

Canadians should know that because of the treatment by officialdom of Monika Schaefer, a very active and contributing 35-year citizen of the community you share with her, Jasper should not be considered a safe place suitable for hosting international visitors. From what I have been learning, Jasper seems to be a place where intolerance and arbitrary measures go forward founded on nothing more than the political opinion of unaccountable decision makers.

So far Monika has been dis-invited from her invited Canada Day performance. She has, as reported in The Fitzhugh, been banned from the Jasper Legion No. 31 seemingly on the unilateral say so of Ken Kuzminki. She has been refused by The Fitzhugh newspaper a right of a full response. Her censored full response to the original smear piece against her was considerably shorter than Paul Clarke’s report. Now you and those unnamed individuals for whom you claim to speak have decided to discriminate against Ms. Schaefer because of her beliefs. Characterizing her opinion as “non-inclusive” you have determined she is ineligible for a busking permits to play music in the Jasper town centre.

Your decision is exclusionary as well as discriminatory. The actions taken by you and others are thought to be “justified” on the basis of personal opinions about her video, a 6 minute item that some dislike and many more like. At last count of the 70,000 or so views, over 1400 individuals registered a “like” of the video while almost 600 voted thumbs down.

Given the way Jasper authorities are dealing with this controversy so far, should those that express “like” for the video be banned from Jasper National Park? Should entry into Jasper National Park be conditional on expressing dislike with Ms. Schaefer’s “Sorry Mom” video? Should entrants to the park have to go through screening for political correctness? Should all existing residents be subjected to a thought test like that to which Ms. Schaefer is currently being subjected?

Will the next step be to require Ms. Schaefer to wear some marker, say with a Germany-related symbol, to announce to visitors that she is the punished Jasper citizen whose ideas are so verboten that her violin playing in the streets of Jasper has been prohibited? Will all applicants for a busking permit be subjected to Internet checks to make sure everything they have published is consistent the Values and Principles Statement emanating from the Jasper Community Habitat for the Arts? To do any less would be discriminatory.

I await your indication of who is behind the decision to ban Monika’s beautiful violin playing from the streets of Jasper because she dared speak her mind on a controversial issue that should be treated with nuanced responses rather than with the authoritarian approach that you express in your terse statement to her. How many benefit events in Jasper have been graced by Monika’s legendary violin playing, now transformed into a political football to be thrown around for self-interested political advantage by Jasper’s self-appointed arbiters of community values and tastes.

Yours Sincerely,

Tony Hall
Professor of Liberal Education and Globalization Studies
University of Lethbridge

——————————————
From: Dave Baker <betabake@gmail.com>
Sent: July 23, 2016 11:55:28 AM
To: Monika Schaefer
Subject: RE: Busking Permit

 We have considered your application for a busking permit in Jasper. In light of your recently publicly proclaimed non-inclusive beliefs we have decided to decline a permit to you at this time.

 habitatvaluestatement2 (1)

Jasper’s Fitzhugh Newspaper Censors Monika Schaefer’s Reply to Editor’s Defamatory & Threatening News Article By Monika Schaefer

MonikaSchaeferTruth

“I have always been a peace activist, and I am still a peace activist. What we have now is a world of war and turmoil, structured by lies and deception. I am standing up for a better world.”

Monika Schaefer

From: Monika Schaefer monika_schaefer@hotmail.com

Sent: July 19, 2016 11:54 AM
To: Paul Clarke
Cc: rdoull@aberdeenpublishing.com; lbolton@aberdeenpublishing.com
Subject: Censorship of Monika Schaefer at Jasper’s Fitzhugh Newspaper

Paul Clarke, Editor of The Fitzhugh
Jasper Alberta
July 19th, 2016
editor@fitzhugh.ca

Dear Paul,

Upon careful consideration I have decided that either you publish my whole letter, or not at all. If you cannot publish my entire response to your article of July 14th, 2016 “Video denying holocaust causes uproar”, then I will find other channels to do so. You may have noticed that this story is gathering attention around the world. Your refusal to publish more-than-half of my response to your smear piece will become part of the international story. Word is getting out that Canada is becoming a repressive society, and the Fitzhugh’s unfair censorship encapsulates this repression.

Here is how my friend and colleague in England sees it:

“Paul Clarke’s article is exactly 800 words long, including propaganda-spreading photo caption (775 without). The full text of your letter is 680 words. That says it all. He can’t publish an 800-word article that makes youa de facto leper in your hometown of 35 years, and not give you at least equal space to respond as a means to defend yourself and your position. For him to limit you to 253 words is: 1) cowardly and 2) morally reprehensible.”

I agree with those words 100%.

Furthermore, the part of my letter you chose to cut provides evidence in support of my position. The part you were proposing to allow (the politically acceptable) is a lead-in to contextualize the evidence. You are demonstrating a technique of journalistic smear. You publish conclusions without allowing the supporting evidence to be presented.

This is not a game. Serious threats have been made against me. By censoring my response, you are contributing to the conditions that could make Jasper unsafe for me.

Sincerely,
Monika Schaefer

cc to: Robert Doull, President Aberdeen Publishing
Linda Bolton, Managing Director Aberdeen Publishing

Below is my unabridged letter to the editor. Clarke stated he would only run the first five paragraphs:
**********************************************

18 July 2016 noon Mountain Time

Paul Clarke’s hit piece on me in the July 14th 2016 edition of The Fitzhugh requires a response. First, what is the story? The Fitzhugh reports that the RCMP is not currently investigating the matter. It is also reported that the Alberta Human Rights Commission neither confirms nor denies receiving a complaint. What is the news?

It appears that the only real substance to Paul Clarke’s smear is his detailed account of Ken Kuzminski’s antagonism towards my video. On the basis of his political judgement, Kuzminski seeks to criminalize me and evict me from my home. He declared on social media that I am not welcome in Jasper. From my perspective, my peaceful expression of disagreement with official orthodoxy is being met with a publicized incitement to hatred against me. Who is most in danger here?

I invite my friend Ken to consider the authoritarian implications of his draconian interventions. Do we have freedom of speech in Canada or not? How far does Ken wish to go in criminalizing dissent?

Ken Kuzminski’s announcement that I am banned from the Jasper Legion, of which he is president, raises the most profound issues. We were always told that Canadian soldiers fought for our freedoms, including freedom of speech and association. Shutting me out of the Legion demeans the values that our veterans supposedly fought to protect.

Kuzminski contacted the German Embassy. Why? Is he trying to get Canada to follow Germany’s even more repressive police-state censorship on the issue of what actually happened in WW2?

[The remainder of the letter is the portion that The Fitzhugh refused to print – MS]

The truth does not fear investigation. Only lies need protection by law.

I will exercise my freedom of speech here. I insist on some reckoning with facts and evidence.

After the Toronto “Holocaust trials” of Ernst Zündel in 1985 and 1988, the curators of the Auschwitz State Museum in Poland reduced death statistics from 4 million to 1.5 million. Why did the 6 million number remain unchanged?

Evidence in those trials brought to light the fraud of the gas chamber story. The French Professor Robert Faurisson was a pioneer in this line of investigation. He has been repeatedly convicted in French courts and physically assaulted for persisting with his scientific inquiry. Faurisson was instrumental in bringing Fred Leuchter, America’s top gas chamber specialist, into the Toronto trials. Leuchter conducted a thorough scientific examination of the facilities at Auschwitz and concluded that there were no homicidal gas chambers.

Robert Faurisson’s trials and tribulations speak of the high stakes nature of genuine historical inquiry into the evidence of this subject. He has famously summarized, in a 60-word sentence, his conclusion from decades of research on the forbidden subject:

“The alleged Hitlerite gas chambers and the alleged genocide of the Jews constitute one and the same historical lie, which made possible a gigantic financial-political fraud, the principal beneficiaries of which are the state of Israel and international Zionism, whose principal victims are the German people — but not their leaders — and the entire Palestinian people.”

Many people, including Jews, died in WW2. Most of the concentration camp deaths occurred in the final months of war because food was not reaching the camps. The Allies carpet-bombed Germany, in particular transportation corridors. Camp inmates died of starvation and disease. The International Red Cross figure for total deaths in all the concentration camps was 271,301. Look it up.

According to Clarke’s article, Martin Sampson, director of the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, claims “it is the most well-documented genocide” and “the truth is the Holocaust was industrialized, state-sponsored murder committed by the Nazis against the Jewish people”. Yet, in the many thousands of government documents and archives that were seized by the Allies after the war, not a single item was found indicating a plan to exterminate the Jews. How could the mass murder of 6 million people take place without a plan?

I have always been a peace activist, and I am still a peace activist. What we have now is a world of war and turmoil, structured by lies and deception. I am standing up for a better world.

Monika Schaefer

Monika Schaefer’s Holohoax Video Causes “Uproar” in Jasper, Alberta By The Jasper fitzHUGH

MonikaJasperfitzhughstory

JASPER, ALBERTA:- A video shot by a local resident denying the Holocaust has been widely condemned by the community and at least one resident has filed a formal complaint with the Alberta Human Rights Commission.

On June 17, Monika Schaefer, a well-known Jasper resident and former Green Party candidate, appeared in a video on Youtube denying the Holocaust. The video was subsequently posted on her Facebook page.

MonikaSchaeferTruth

“This is the most persistent and pernicious lie in all of history,” said Schaefer, about the Holocaust.

In the video she described the Holocaust as the “the six-million lie” in reference to the six million Jews who lost their lives at the hands of the Nazis during the Second World War.

The six-minute video quickly went viral and garnered more than 30,000 views at the time of publishing.

At the end of the video Schaefer invited viewers to read several books published by Holocaust deniers, including Ernst Zündel, who lived in Canada for four decades before being deported to his native Germany where he was imprisoned for five years for denying the Holocaust.

ErnstZVictim copyKen Kuzminski, president of the Jasper Royal Canadian Legion, described the video as hate speech.

“Monika has a right to say whatever she wants to say, but once she’s published it I feel that’s moved on to hate speech,” said Kuzminski.

“She can stand up and say whatever she wants, but she has to accept the consequences of doing that.”

He said he has written a formal complaint to the Alberta Human Rights Commission, contacted the local RCMP detachment and the German embassy.

“By her denying that this ever happened it perpetuates hatred, racism and discrimination,” said Kuzminski, adding he’s heard from several young people in town that they no longer feel safe.

“This is not the community we are and what we believe in.”

The Alberta Human Rights Commission neither confirmed nor denied it had received a formal complaint.

“All of the information that comes into the human rights commission with regards to complaints is confidential,” said Susan Coombes, with the Alberta Human Rights Commission.

With that said, she said any complaint involving hate would fall under section three of the Alberta Human Rights Act.

“It’s really difficult to prove,” said Coombes, about whether someone is in violation of the act. “What you have to do is say that there was intent to incite hate.”

The Jasper RCMP confirmed it was aware of the video, but said no formal investigation has been launched.

“At this time what I can say is that I’m aware the video exists and it was brought to my attention,” said RCMP Sgt. Rick Bidaisee. “Discussions are ongoing.”

Schaefer said she stood by her comments in the video during a telephone interview July 11.

“Right now the issue for me is freedom of speech,” said Schaefer. “Last I checked I thought we had freedom of speech in Canada and suddenly I’m the criminal.”

She confirmed she shot the video in Germany, where it is illegal to deny the Holocaust.

“If we don’t have the right to question a historical event then we don’t have freedom of speech,” said Schaefer.

Schaefer was slated to perform during Canada Day, but was pulled from the schedule after the Canada Day committee learned a group of residents were going to protest her performance.

“We had really reliable information that there was going to be a protest and in the interests of public safety and her safety for that matter, we decided it would just be in everybody’s best interests if she stood down for this year,” said Pattie Pavlov, general manager for the Jasper Park Chamber of Commerce.

Kuzminski confirmed she is also banned from the legion.

The Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) quickly condemned the video after learning of its existence.

CIJABomb copy 2

“As a Holocaust denier, Ms. Schaefer, who appears in this absurd video, has earned her place on the very margins of society,” wrote Martin Sampson, director of communications for CIJA.

“Her comments would be laughable but for the intense pain they cause the survivor community and their descendants. Denying the Holocaust exposes her as an anti-Semitic ignoramus.”

“The truth is the Holocaust was industrialized, state-sponsored murder committed by the Nazis against the Jewish people. It is the most well documented genocide—by both perpetrator and victim—in history. To deny this fact is to spit in the face of truth.”

News that a formal complaint was lodged with the Alberta Human Rights Commission, comes after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau visited the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp, on July 10 in Poland, where one million people, mostly Jews, were killed in the Second World War.
——
Source Article

Paul Clarke
editor@fitzhugh.ca

Conrad Black’s Zionist Newspaper chain (Lethbridge Herald) Accuses Professor Anthony Hall of “Hate Speech”

 

Conspiracy theories
By Lethbridge Herald
June 19, 2016

Screen Shot 2016-06-24 at 11.13.41 PM

J.W. Schnarr
Lethbridge Herald
jwschnarr@lethbridgeherald.com

The University of Lethbridge is defending a professor’s right to use his position to promote conspiracy theories online, including the idea that the 2014 Parliament Hill shooting in Ottawa was a scheme to keep Stephen Harper in power; the Sandy Hook massacre was staged to promote gun control; and Jewish Zionists are waging a secret war to demonize Muslims around the world through control of western media.  Anthony Hall is a tenured member within the U of L’s Faculty of Arts and Science. He has a history of activism that includes being arrested during protests at the Summit of the Americas in Quebec City in 2001, protesting wars in the Middle East, and battling for the rights of First Nations people.


Since late December, Hall has been a co-host on a weekly YouTube program called “False Flag Weekly News” with fellow conspiracy theorists Kevin Barrett, an Arabist-Islamologist, and James Fetzer, a professor of Philosophy Emeritus.

FFWN promotes the idea of a global Zionist conspiracy to create hatred against Muslims by promoting an alternative narrative of Muslim extremism through global “false flag” terror events. These events include just about every large-scale terror attack and mass shooting since the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center, which is seen as a sort of “Ground Zero” for this secret war.

Both Barrett and Fetzer are noted Holocaust deniers, and Hall has questioned established facts which happened during the Second World War.

In a prepared statement, Craig Cooper, Dean of Arts and Science, stated the U of L does not dictate research areas to faculty members and supports Hall’s right to “pursue the research topics of his choosing.”

“The university doesn’t always agree with the opinions expressed by faculty members but recognizes their rights to express them,” the statement read.
Hall could not be reached for comment, despite multiple attempts by The Herald, but there are more than six months of weekly broadcasts on YouTube where he spoke freely on a number of topics.

There was a discussion about a Twitter A.I. chatbot named “Tay” developed by Microsoft, which started randomly posting anti-Semitic tweets such as “Hitler was right I hate the Jews” after it was bombarded by internet trolls was supported on FFWN.

Hall referenced the book “Tell the Truth, Shame the Devil” by Gerard Menuhin, which claims to show proof the Holocaust is a myth. He stated the book causes a “very dramatic re-looking at what happened in Europe in World War 2.”

“So I’m reading that text and having to reassess a lot of ideas,” Hall said. “So maybe Tay is actually on to something here.”

During a discussion on the March 2016 Lahore, Pakistan, terror attack that left 75 dead and hundreds injured, Barrett discussed how more Muslims than Christians were killed, but CNN was reporting it as a Muslim attack on Christians.

He went on to say CNN is run by Jewish Zionists like all other major media. Hall then accused CNN political anchor Wolf Blitzer of being a leader in this conspiracy.

“Let’s face it. The media is dominated by ethnically Jewish Zionists, and some of them may not be completely on board with the neo-con agenda, but it sure looks like a lot of them are,” said Barrett.

“And Wolf Blitzer, of course, is one of the chief Zionists in the whole U.S. media,” said Hall. “He is one of the point people.”

During a discussion of the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, where 20 young children and six adults were killed by shooter Adam Lanza, Fetzer said the school had been shut down since 2008 and that the shooting never actually happened. He accused the families of faking the story and collecting between $27 million and $130 million collectively.

Hall stated his impression was that Sandy Hook was not the usual type of false flag event designed to instil hatred of Muslims.

“My understanding is that it was about gun control,” he said on the show.

In a discussion about noted white nationalist and former Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard David Duke, Hall referred to the need for Duke to have an audience to be able to air his views.

“Thinking people, as David Duke is, intelligent people, some of their theories are good, and some of them not-so-good. (Duke) deserves an audience. He has some very astute analysis of things going on. And some of his ideas are objectionable.”

Barrett and Hall’s discussion on the 2014 Parliament Hill shooting described a False Flag event designed to push an anti-Islam agenda to win the election for Stephen Harper. They said that attempt failed and Trudeau took power.

A discussion about swaying public opinion through mass media involved the Ottawa shooting and how convenient that there were photos of shooter Michael Zehaf-Bibeau at the Canadian National War Memorial during the event.

“Supposedly, the image shows him with a gun at the place where he was supposed to have killed Nathan Cirillo. Where did the picture come from?” Hall asked.
He went on to describe the images and footage released during the first hours of the events as “low level productions,” with dummies being blown up and “ketchup being sprayed here and there.”

“They really didn’t have a good budget for their stage management of the whole thing,” Hall said.

The Herald reached out to the Lethbridge Jewish community, for a response, and was provided with the following statement:

“Mr. Hall’s statements and theories are so outlandish, venomous, and without substance, that we cannot even begin to dignify them with a response.”

In defending Hall, Cooper noted the role of universities in “ensuring our societies are free and improve through the critical analysis undertaken through research and the tenet of academic freedom. Academic freedom is necessary so that all topics can be fully explored in the absence of external influence, popular opinion or conventional wisdom.”
———

Sorry Mom, I was wrong about the Holocaust by Monika Schaefer

MonikaSorryHDR

Sorry Mom, I was wrong about the Holocaust

 

ATEditorRedCap200

[Editor’s Note: Bravo to Monika Schaefer for displaying the courage and will to expose the “6 Million” Holohoax lie for what it truly was – the prime deception of the 20th century and one that has been the cause of endless war and censorship and repressive “hate crime” legislation throughout western nations. 

If only more German-Canadians would speak out THE TRUTH will set us free!]

 

911 Brainwashing End of the Lies (English only) by Alfred Schaefer

911SCHAEFERVIDHDR

911 Brainwashing End of the Lies English only
by Alfred Schaefer

https://youtu.be/cV3Qkq–VUk

The Rizoli rebellion by John Kaminski

RizoliRebellionHdr

The Rizoli rebellion

Tenacious brothers battle immigration epidemic
and Holocaust hoax

Their motto: Exercise the courage of your convictions

By John Kaminski

pseudoskylax@gmail.com
http://therebel.is/kaminski

I know a lot of keyboard warriors. Heck, I’m one myself, trying to convince people of the dangers we face without actually confronting them in the real world. Though my advice might be authentic, my actions are not, because I’m not out there in public battling the tyrants and swindlers who are busy ripping us off and killing those who oppose them.

Am I afraid of suffering the harsh penalties incurred by so many who have challenged the powers that be? You bet I am. Do I know the day will come when I will be forced into open warfare with the people who run our country and have turned it into a giant prison system? Absolutely I do. It could happen any day now. And each day this unpleasant but vital task inevitably draws closer.

Though I am definitely a member of an exclusive club that has tried for decades to alert my fellow citizens to the lethal danger we face living in a society governed by ruthless Jew bankers who have no real point to their lives other than stealing from others and murdering those who stand in their way, my admiration really goes out to my compatriots who step out from behind their keyboards and wade out into the public chaos to defend the courage of their convictions and expose the constant and profound crimes that are being perpetrated by our owners against ordinary people who don’t ever quite seem to grasp the danger of their own predicament and how near they are to losing everything, including their own lives.

I’ve observed Jim Rizoli stepping out into the public spotlight for ten years now, first as a courageous protester of this strange and mysterious epidemic of foreign born illegal aliens being inserted into towns all across America, seriously diminishing the lives of native-born Americans who have worked all their lives for their modest piece of the pie. They have been constantly betrayed by their own leaders.

Some might consider what Rizoli is doing as tilting at windmills, but others of a more intelligent nature realize he is a 21st century patriot running at top speed to try and prevent the descent of the United States into a thoughtless prison camp dominated by aliens from the Third World and the Warsaw ghetto.

This surreptitious sabotage of American culture has grown to epidemic proportions with a deliberate but secret program of importing Third World aliens into the U.S. that has wracked big cities and small towns with ungrateful non-English speaking migrants who overload social systems and steal jobs from unemployed locals who need them.

And more lately, Rizoli has become the chronicler of one of the great hoaxes of the 20th century, a lucrative scam that has persisted into the 21st century as disingenuous Jews continue to swindle governments around the world with their heinous heist known as Holocaust reparations.

He has done this by undertaking a series of YouTube videos aptly titled the League of Extraordinary Revisionists, introducing to the public those heroic truth tellers who have been savaged by the poisoned mainstream media yet have persevered to correct the damaging Jewish lies that not only caused the destruction of Germany back in World War II, but are now wrecking America and Europe with their Jewcentric political correctness that encourages perversion, anarchy and dependence on government to destroy a thousands of years old family structure that has been the bulwark of civilization and now teeters on the brink of ruin.

“The Holocaust is like a wheel with spokes that extend out from the center and poison all areas of human activity,” Rizoli likes to say.

He, like so many of us, has seen far too much of it. But he, like so few of us, has been slugging away at the corrupt basis of it for more than a decade, going nose to nose with the Jews who control the political cobwebs of every town in America.

Oddly, it was his resistance to the sudden appearance of hundreds of Brazilian immigrants in his hometown of Framingham, Mass. that eventually led him to correlate this social disease to Jewish power and more specifically to the lies that have been told about the Holocaust.

“It all goes back to immigration,” Jim says. “My brother Joe got into it first.” Joe still writes commentaries and passes on links to his brother, but it is Jim, accompanied by his new sidekick Diane King, who are constantly updating a remarkably thorough website (ccfiile.com — note the extra “i”, standing for Concerned Citizens and Friends of Illegal Immigration Law Enforcement) that contains both the story of their immigration battles with the corrupt town fathers as well as a unique and thorough set of files about the Jewish manipulation of reality.

“We held a meeting at the library, and right off the bat they jumped on us,” Jim explained. “They pegged us as racists and wouldn’t let us even talk about it.

“It made us more determined to go at it.”

It was the Rizolis’ stand against the barrage of immigrants overwhelming Framingham that initially got them in trouble with their community, repeatedly banned from their local cable TV channel, and on the Jewish Anti Defamation League’s target list as Holocaust denying anti-Semites. Its description of the Rizolis’ activities is absolutely heroic. http://archive.adl.org/nr/exeres/7f918ae0-1eeb-4037-b83a-46c92344a4a7,db7611a2-02cd-43af-8147-649e26813571,frameless.html

• During an October 2009 segment of his public access television show, which was aired during a primetime slot, Jim delivered a lengthy diatribe promoting Holocaust denial. He defended Holocaust denier and Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, instructed viewers to conduct their own research on the Holocaust to discover the “truth,” and directed people to visit Web sites that advance Holocaust denial.

• Jim Rizoli has attempted to defend his statements about the Holocaust to the Boston Globe, which reported in November 2009 that he “believes…only around 300,000 people died, not six million, and that the majority were not killed but ‘died of sickness and disease.'”

• During the same segment of his public access television show, Jim Rizoli alleged the existence of a “Zionist controlled government,” implying that Jews manipulate national and global institutions.

• Rizoli also claimed during the show that “a lot of the Jewish people are not going to be happy to hear this [referring to his recommendation to view videos that advance Holocaust denial] because this whole thing all stems upon Judaism [sic] and what happened with them.” This is an anti-Semitic implication that Jews fabricate the Holocaust to advance their own agenda.

• Joe Rizoli has questioned the severity of the Holocaust on the Jews. During an interview with the MetroWest Daily News in February 2004, he argued, “What happened to the Jews was atrocious, but you know what? Nine million people in Germany died in Dresden and related incidents. They say 13 to 20 million people died in Russia.” Rizoli went on to question, “Did the Holocaust happen? You define to me what the Holocaust is. I don’t know. There’s no letter or whatever that pinpoints Hitler saying it.”

• In 2004, Joe Rizoli signed an Internet petition supporting Ernst Zundel, who was fighting deportation to his home in Canada from the U.S., which he entered illegally. Reportedly, Rizoli became interested in Zundel after receiving a “ZGram,” an E-mail that Zundel’s wife, also a Holocaust denier, sent to subscribers. Ironically for a xenophobe, Rizoli spoke out against Zundel’s deportation, which was the result of Zundel’s illegal entry into the U.S.

As they say, one man’s meat is another man’s poison. To those onto the Jewish scam of the Holocaust, these are all admirable achievements. But to Jews, ever the promoters of lies and false stories, Rizoli’s unflinching achievements are anathema.

“We had a good following,” Jim remembers. “We became like celebrities because we had the balls enough to talk about illegal immigrants. It opened up the door to talk about it in the whole state. Even the governor came and talked to us. And a Brazilian station put us on down there.”

“Then I started getting into the Holocaust and even the immigration people were scared off,” he remembers.

“We took the most heat from then on. In 2010 we were banned by our cable station for a year for false allegations. We came back in 2011 with four shows. We were on 12 times a week.

“We were pounding away at the Jews. It’s a wonder that they didn’t kill us.”

The cable company shut them down again in 2014.

“Nobody would dare come on a show dealing with the Holocaust issue.”

Good fortune came Rizoli’s way about this time when he hooked up with Diane on Facebook and the pair have become teammates in a game most Americans are afraid to play — Holocaust revisionism.

What has gained Rizoli new found attention after years of battling the Jews in a beat up suburb of Boston now dominated by Brazilians is a series of YouTubes sketching the lives of famous historians who can tell the real story of World War II, which is not the one told in movies and on TV by paid shills who spout the bogus Jewish version of reality.

League of Extraordinary Revisionists
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkhr7Ooo_lnt0NLW83Q2ovw

Be sure and check out the real heroes of the revisionist movement captured on film by JIm Rizoli.

These include, among many other luminaries, Fred Leuchter, author of the Leuchter Report that proved there were no gas chambers at Auschwitz; Robert Faurisson, the dean of Holocaust Revisionists who for more than a half century has been challenging the Jewish liars “to show me or draw me a picture of the gas chamber at Auschwitz”; Germar Rudolf, the German chemist jailed for his efforts at refining and reinforcing the evidence for the Holocaust hoax; and the late Bradley Smith, interviewed in the final months of his life after selfless decades of preaching historical sanity on college campuses with his Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust.

In addition, there are many other controversial topics covered in ccfiile.com — Holocaust Liars and Holocaust Truthers, Auschwitz and Treblinka, AIPAC and the Slave Trade, witch trials and Rizoli Uncensored.

Among the many highlights are a riveting account of the fake Boston Marathon bombing and a Police file that explains how public officials are allowed to commit crimes and get away with them.

“We’re not letting up,” says Joe, then making this writer not mention an event they’re in the process of unleashing on the public.

“It’s going to be a struggle forever,” says JIm. “I don’t know how we’re going to do it (“it” being to get the public to accept the real story of what happened in World War II in Germany).

“We just have to hang in there. We’re not looking to convert the world we’re just trying to get the word out.”

Rizoli is constantly emphasizing that “the Holocaust is the hub of what has gone wrong with the world.

“But I love the fight. I’m not going down on my knees. If I go down I’m going to be standing up. You have to do what you know is right.”


Support JIm Rizoli’s important work by mail at
Jim Rizoli (LOER), 94 Pond St., Framingham MA 01702, 508-872-7292.

John Kaminski is a writer who lives on the Gulf Coast of Florida, constantly trying to figure out why we are destroying ourselves, and pinpointing a corrupt belief system as the engine of our demise. Solely dependent on contributions from readers, please support his work by mail: 6871 Willow Creek Circle #103, North Port FL 34287 USA.
http://therebel.is/kaminski
http://johnkaminski.info/
http://www.rudemacedon.ca/kaminski/kam-index.html
http://www.serendipity.li/john_kaminski_articles.htm
http://web.archive.org/web/20040323232319/http://johnkaminski.com/

Hypocrites in High Places by David Cole from Taki Magazine

HypocritesHighPlacesHdr

http://takimag.com/article/hypocrites_in_high_places_david_cole#axzz410V1v215

HUMAN RIGHTS
Hypocrites in High Places
by David Cole
February 18, 2016

You know you’re getting old when you can remember a time when Canadians were funny on purpose. John Candy, Harold Ramis, Eugene Levy, the entire SCTV crew. Back then, Canadians invited the world to laugh with their nation, not at it.

How things have changed. These days, Canadians are still providing top-notch laughs, but, sadly, it’s usually at their own expense. Smart and savvy Canuckian commentators can do little else but sit back and gawk along with the rest of us at the train wreck that is present-day Canadian politics. There’s no need for me (or any similarly ugly American) to retread the territory covered so ably by sites like The Rebel and expats like Mark Steyn (wait, I mean “immigrants” like Mark Stein. It’s now genocidal racist white supremacy to call a white man an expat. Haven’t you heard?). However, I had a good belly laugh at Canada’s expense last week, and it might just involve a potato (Yukon Gold, I’d assume) that’s too hot even for some of Canada’s most politically incorrect pundits.

Apparently, Canada’s political and media bleeding-heart elites have their panties in a bunch over a new campaign by the Chinese government to round up and “bring home” Chinese dissidents who have sought refuge in other countries. Over the past few months, the Chinese have been putting pressure on foreign governments to deport dissidents who have been convicted in China (sometimes in absentia) of “crimes against the state,” which always translates to crimes involving speech.

Last month, two Chinese dissidents living in Thailand who had been granted safe haven in Canada were deported back to China by Thai officials. The dissidents, political cartoonist Jiang Yefei and anticorruption activist Dong Guangping, were whisked back to their homeland against the wishes of Canada’s new Liberal government, which had planned to resettle the two men and their families as government-sponsored refugees. Needless to say, Canadian officials are very worked up “aboot” this travesty. The gist of Canada’s beef is that China has no right to demand the return of dissidents whose crimes consist solely of speech.

Global Affairs Canada spokesperson François Lasalle told the Toronto Star that Ottawa has “serious concerns” regarding the “human rights” and “dignity” of the deported Chinese dissidents. Amnesty International Canada has condemned the fact that the Thais deported “peaceful critics” of Beijing. For its part, Thailand has repeatedly stated that Jiang and Dong were deported because of “immigration violations,” to which Ottawa has responded that “immigration violations” are not a legitimate reason to deport someone facing prosecution for “speech crimes.”

“That’s some nifty hypocrisy there, Canada, eh? ”

Canada’s government officials and self-righteous journalists are lucky that the rest of the world is too damn chickenshit to bring up the case of Ernst Zundel. Zundel is a Holocaust denier who was prosecuted throughout the 1980s by the Canadian government for the crime of publishing a pamphlet. After being convicted twice, and after having his conviction overturned twice, Zundel finally picked up and left for the U.S., joining his wife (an American citizen) in Tennessee. In 2003, Zundel was scooped up by the U.S. feds for a supposed immigration violation. Deported back to Canada, Zundel, whose landed immigrant status had by then been revoked, was slapped with what the Canucks call a “security certificate.” Under Canadian law, a security certificate essentially means “We can do whatever the hell we want to you without charge or trial.” For two years, Zundel languished in a 6-by-8 cell, the lights always on, no hot food, no desk or table for writing, no charge, no trial.

dd395-free (site) copy 2

I’ll remind you at this point that his initial “crime” was publishing a pamphlet denying the Holocaust. I’ve known Ernst Zundel for 25 years, and there’s no question the man’s loopy as hell. But that’s completely, one-hundred-percent beside the point. His crime was publishing a pamphlet containing dissident views. He was imprisoned for speech. Nothing should matter beyond that.

Even though Zundel hadn’t lived in Germany for 45 years, the Germans wanted him back to prosecute him under that country’s anti-Holocaust revisionism and denial laws. And how exactly do you prosecute a guy for breaking the laws of a nation in which he doesn’t live? Germany’s fascinating legal theory was that since the content Zundel legally posted on his website while in the U.S. was “brought” into Germany by the Internet, he therefore violated Germany’s speech prohibitions no less than if he’d physically entered the country to give a speech.

As Zundel was wasting away in his Toronto cell, an interesting development occurred back in Knoxville, where District Court Senior Judge James Jarvis, ruling on the legality of Zundel’s deportation from the U.S., came to the troubling conclusion that although he had serious problems with the way the feds treated Zundel, there was little he could do now that Zundel was in Canada.

Little, that is, except politely ask the Canadians to allow Zundel to have a fair hearing. Addressing the Canadian authorities directly, Jarvis stated, “[Zundel’s] wife, she’s a citizen, and she has rights, and she’s hurt by this. Surely, the Canadian courts will listen to her as a United States citizen, perhaps give her some relief.”

zundd_deesP1 copy 3

In the words of Knoxville News Sentinel reporter Jamie Satterfield, “Judge Jarvis found himself in a troubling position. He wanted to help but could not.”

So here was awesome humanitarian Canada, holding a man whose deportation was being demanded by a country (Germany) that wanted to prosecute him for his dissident beliefs, while meanwhile, a judge in another country (the U.S.) was appealing to Canadian authorities to rethink their course of action. Canadian officials had a choice: listen to Judge Jarvis’ reasonable plea, or bow to Germany’s ironfisted demand. And what did the Canadians do? Take a guess. Ottawa ordered Zundel shipped to Germany to be imprisoned for his Holocaust views—views that had been posted online legally, in the U.S., while he was a U.S. resident. Zundel ended up serving five years in Germany, in addition to the two he’d already spent in his Toronto cell.

And now the Canadians have the hypocrisy to raise global holy hell over the fact that the Thais deported two dissidents on supposed immigration violations to a country that plans to imprison them for their political views. All of a sudden, the people who held Zundel in a 6-by-8 cell for two years with no charge or trial, the people who decreed that he should eat only cold food, sleep with bright lights on, shower under supervision, and go to the bathroom in front of guards, the people who sent Zundel to a foreign nation to rot in prison for violating speech laws in absentia, are now concerned about the “dignity” of dissidents and the “right” of Chinese expats to escape punishment for violating anti-free-speech laws in their homeland.

ErnstZVictim copy

That’s some nifty hypocrisy there, Canada, eh?

Mind you, the Canadians aren’t the only hypocrites braying over the deported Chinese dissidents. U.S. government officials and journalists have been up in arms about it as well. Time, Slate, CNN, and, of course, The New York Times have all weighed in this month on the plight of Dong and Jiang. Again and again, outraged protectors of human rights have pummeled the Thai government for its decision to deport the two men. “What kind of a nation would deport people to a country that plans to imprison them for merely stating politically unpopular opinions?”

Well, the U.S., for one.

At the exact same time that Canada was showing its love of human rights by throwing Zundel into a dungeon for two years, the U.S. government was considering what to do with Germar Rudolf. In the early 1990s, Rudolf, then a chemist at the world-renowned Max Planck Institute in Stuttgart, was asked by the defense team of a Holocaust denier on trial in Germany to prepare a forensic report about Auschwitz. Unfortunately for Rudolf, preparing a purely scientific report to aid in the defense of a denier on trial is itself a criminal act in Germany, and soon the young chemist found himself facing fourteen months in prison. Rudolf fled Germany and settled, legally, in the U.S. He married a U.S. citizen, and they had a child.

GermarRudolfPic

Naturally, Germany decided to—how did CNN phrase it in reference to the actions of the Chinese government?—“go global in its pursuit of dissidents.” Germany demanded that the U.S. hand Rudolf over for the crime of writing his forensic report, and, wouldn’t you know it, the U.S. complied, ripping Germar from his family and shipping him back to Germany, where he spent four years in prison for writing a booklet that is not only legal in the U.S. but readily available. To put a finer point on it, Rudolf was deported to Germany by the U.S. to be imprisoned for speech that is completely legal in the U.S.

As Rudolf attempted to fight deportation, I covered his case for a documentary film I was producing (the movie also included footage of Zundel from inside his Canadian maximum-security home). At the time, I received only scorn and criticism from the U.S. and Canadian “human rights” advocates I approached for comment. Oh, sure, I tried my best to explain that the Rudolf and Zundel cases had an importance beyond the fate of those two men, that a precedent was being set, and that other governments would take advantage of it and demand the return of other dissidents who had escaped prison sentences for other thought crimes, but my “Jewsplaining” fell on deaf ears.

Even now, as China is going to town on escaped dissidents, there is a reluctance by pretty much everyone in the North American “mainstream” (left, right, and center) to acknowledge the precedents set by the Zundel and Rudolf cases, or even to acknowledge that the cases existed. But the fact remains, all this bellyaching about “global dissident pursuits” is bunk. The U.S. and Canada have no problem at all with cross-border critic-grabbing and critic-deporting. And while the North American press may be deaf, dumb, and blind to the hypocrisy emanating from Ottawa and D.C., one suspects that the Chinese are all too keenly aware of it.

It’s hard to fault them for paying attention, especially when they seem to be the only ones.
——

Source Article

The Revisionists’ Total Victory on the Historical and Scientific Level By Robert Faurisson

TotalVictory copy

The Revisionists’ Total Victory on the Historical 

and Scientific Level

By Robert Faurisson

R.Faurisson

December 31, 2015

“The rising flood, particularly on the Internet, that is bringing to the world’s knowledge the spectacular achievements of historical revisionism is not suddenly going to halt its advance or return towards its source.”

~ Robert Faurisson

In France and in the rest of the world historians and specialists of “the Holocaust” no longer know what to answer to the revisionists’ arguments. And to speak only of my own case, which has been going on since 1978 (that is, for some thirty-seven years), never has my country’s justice system, despite the tireless requests by self-righteous associations to rule against me on the substance of my writings or statements, been able to note therein the least trace of any rashness, negligence, deliberate ignorance, falsehood, falsification or lying. My adversaries, rich and powerful though they may be, have never succeeded in getting our judges to convict me on the merits of the conclusions reached through my research work which, for over half a century, has focused on what is commonly called “the genocide of the Jews”, “the Nazi gas chambers” and “the six million (or nearly)” Jewish victims of the Third Reich. At most, at the end countless cases I have lost suits (whether as plaintiff or defendant) or been found guilty mainly 1) for a malevolence, supposed but not demonstrated, towards the Jews, 2) for breaking the gayssotine (the Fabius-Gayssot or Faurisson Act, legislation of convenience specifically targeting the findings of my research) or 3) by virtue of the “good faith” (sic) of individuals like Léon Poliakov or Robert Badinter, even though found to be at fault by the judges themselves.

For years Poliakov had well and truly manipulated the writings of SS officer Kurt Gerstein (who, having “repented” (?), then committed suicide (?)), when not fabricating outright fragments of text to attribute to him. But the judges granted the presumption of good faith to Poliakov. He had been, we were told, “animated by the passionate and legitimate desire to inform the public about a period and about facts of contemporary history that were particularly tragic”. It was therefore appropriate to forgive him for having “perhaps, on minor points [sic!!!], broken scientific standards of rigour without, however, it being permissible to state that he is a manipulator or fabricator of texts”. As for Badinter, in 2006 he claimed that in 1981, when he was still barrister for the LICRA and just before becoming Minister of Justice, he had got a court to rule against me “for being a falsifier of history”. A decision of 2007 restored the truth and held that Badinter had “failed in his evidence” to demonstrate my alleged dishonesty; but, the court hastened to add, he had been in good faith. For want of both money and a lawyer (Eric Delcroix having retired – not without being refused honorary membership of the bar), I did not appeal and was forced to pay the Socialist millionaire the sum of €5,000. But at least since then I have had the satisfaction of being able to speak of “Robert Badinter, my liar, my slanderer… in good faith”.

An astute observer will have noted that the more our opponents sense the game is getting away from them on the historical or scientific level, the more they feel the need to increase their propagandistic drum beating, and the repression as well. In France, at this very moment, they are putting all their hopes in having Parliament pass a supergayssotine. Good for them! A few weeks short of my 87th birthday, I have six cases pending, four against me and two others that I have had to instigate, albeit quite unwillingly. Will my judges finally decide, in 2016, to leave us, my wife and me, destitute? Or are they getting ready simply to throw me into a prison of the République? It is understood beforehand, is it not?, that if they were to carry things to such extremes it would only be on the grounds of the noblest républicain principles and in the name of human rights.

Let’s consider our current Prime Minister. One day, Manuel Valls, in full pomposity, his mouth, heart and left hand clenched, let fly: “I am, by my wife, eternally linked to the Jewish community and Israel”. He saw himself as “eternal”: a vast programme! But fervour was leading him astray. He ought to come back down to earth, reconnect with the ground, get treatment and stop deluding himself: the revisionists have, already as of now, won the match.

As early as in 1983-1985, Raul Hilberg, surrendering to the arguments of “Faurisson and others…” had to drop the pretension of explaining, on the basis of valid arguments and documents of his own, that the Third Reich had, with proper Germanic efficiency, designed, prepared, developed, organised and financed the killing of millions of European Jews. The eminent Jewish American historian ended up finding himself reduced to trying to have us believe that this gigantic massacre had come about by the operation of the Holy Spirit or, in his words, by “an incredible meeting of minds, a consensus-mind reading within a large bureaucracy” that had, on its own, spontaneously decided, it seemed, gradually to abandon written communication in favour of verbal or indeed telepathic exchange to such an extent that no written or material evidence bespoke the six million Jews’ (or, in Hilberg’s case, a bit fewer) had been systematically killed either on the Eastern Front or in the gas chambers, mainly at Auschwitz.

Screen Shot 2016-01-14 at 11.16.23 AM

A number of historians or researchers, such as Arno Mayer, Jean-Claude Pressac and Robert Jan van Pelt, have also capitulated, in a more frank and direct manner. The first has had to admit, among other bitter observations, that “Sources for the study of the gas chambers are at once rare and unreliable”. The second, a protégé of the Klarsfeld couple, came to understand that the dossier of the official story of the Jews’ extermination, “rotten” with too many lies, was bound for “the rubbish bins of history”. The third has concluded that “Ninety-nine per cent of what we know [about Auschwitz] we do not actually have the physical evidence to prove”; despite this, millions of visitors there have been and continue to be shown a “gas chamber” said to be in its “original state”, as well as ruins of other alleged “gas chambers”. As for the figure of “six million”, never subjected to the least scientific verification, it is rooted in the most sordid of realities: an old American publicity slogan used already before 1900 and up to the end of the Second World War to collect a windfall of cash especially from the Jewish community. The searing words amounted to the cry “Six million of our brothers are dying in Europe [by the acts, according to circumstance, of Poland, the Balkan countries, Tsarist Russia, National-Socialist Germany…]; we await your money for the victims of this holocaust [sic already in 1919]!”

Manuel Valls, our Prime Minister, and François Hollande, President of our Republic, devote themselves to launching, in several foreign countries, warlike crusades of the kind that have backfired horribly for us French this year. To proceed as they do, contrary to the Constitution, they dispense with the approval of Parliament, either in advance or within forty days from the start of operations. On top of their foreign wars, conducted in the most cowardly as well as the most comfortable conditions, they instil an atmosphere of internecine war at home. They call “cowards” certain enemies who, after all, are inspired on a grand scale by the practices of our glorious Résistants: “Hey, killers with the bullet and the knife, kill quickly!” If François Hollande has the stature of a pedalo admiral, Mr Valls resembles Picrochole, that character in Rabelais whose Greek name means “bitter bile” and who regularly gets all excited at the prospect of going off to war. Mr Valls began with a crusade against the Saracens of today and against the real or supposed enemies of Israel but he is also on a campaign against the revisionists, against “Dieudonné in peace”, against Marine Le Pen – even though she has pushed her own father down the stairs – and even against his friends of the Socialist clan. A good suggestion for him would be to calm down, take care of himself, try to laugh with Dieudonné, reflect for a moment with the revisionists, allow historians or researchers to work as they wish and, at long last, spare us the flag-waving frenzy, the bugle-blowing, the verse and chorus of the Marseillaise on the “day of glory”, the “impure blood” and the “ferocious soldiers”. As we know, it is, unhappily, all too easy to take the French in with that sort of thing.

Such, today, are the modest New Year wishes for 2016 that I allow myself to make for that person, for his victims, for the French and for the rest of the world. But is it perhaps already asking too much?

For their part, the revisionists know what awaits them: the confirmation in the mainstream media, sooner or later, that they have already won a total victory on the historical and scientific level. The political and media powers will indeed have to resign themselves to the facts: persistence in gunboat policies abroad and in those of gagging and censorship at home will only dishonour them a bit more. For nothing.

The rising flood, particularly on the Internet, that is bringing to the world’s knowledge the spectacular achievements of historical revisionism is not suddenly going to halt its advance or return towards its source.

The lies of “the Holocaust” are modelled on those of the First World War. All those “Nazi death-works”, like the ones at Auschwitz, are but a reprise of the myth of German “corpse factories” of 1914-1918. They were merely modernised by the adding of gas (Jewish-American version of November 1944) and sometimes of electricity (Jewish-Soviet version of February 1945). The good people, already generally not well disposed towards the practice of cremating the dead, were led to believe that Germany, a nation considered modern and known for having an abundance of engineers and chemists, had built structures containing, in addition to a cremation space, others called “gas chambers” (in reality, the “depositories”, Leichenhalle or Leichenkeller, technically designed to hold bodies awaiting cremation). Thus a certain propaganda has managed to persuade us that those Germans devils were dumb enough to house under the same roof, on one side, spaces full of a highly inflammable and explosive gas (the hydrocyanic acid or hydrogen cyanide contained in the pesticide Zyklon B, created in the 1920s) and, on the other side, crematory ovens that had to be laboriously brought to a temperature of 900° C.

Germar Rudolf

In 1943 some of the men in charge of British war propaganda deplored “this gas chambers story”. For his part, the revisionist Germar Rudolf sums up the subject rather well in his Lectures on the Holocaust (Chicago, Theses & Dissertations Press, 2005, 566 p., p. 82-85). Even Victor Cavendish-Bentinck, a senior official of the Intelligence Service in London ready to believe just about any nonsense said against the Germans, was to write: “I feel certain that we are making a mistake in publicly giving credence to this gas chambers story” (p. 83). The trouble was that the British, undisputed champions of lying propaganda during the two world wars, needed those fables. On February 29, 1944 their Ministry of Information sent the BBC and the Church of England a circular letter of the greatest cynicism, requesting their respective cooperation for the spreading of propaganda on the basis of atrocity stories either already in circulation or currently being concocted. It was a matter of forestalling the disastrous effect that the Red Army, an ally, was inevitably to bring about in Central Europe by real atrocities (p. 84)! On these inventions, these fabrications and the wide-scale dissemination of enormous tall tales, two books remain of great interest: Edward J. Rozek’s Allied Wartime Diplomacy: A Pattern in Poland, New York, Wiley, 1958 and, especially, by Walter Laqueur (a Jew born in Breslau in 1921): The Terrible Secret, London, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1980, 262 p., wherein we see Cavendish-Bentinck, him again, “Chairman of the British Intelligence Committee”, writing in July 1943 that “The Poles and, to a far greater extent the Jews, tend to exaggerate German atrocities in order to stoke us up” (p. 83).

Fifteen months ago, referring to the crisis that the historians of “the Holocaust” were experiencing, I wrote that there was “more and more water in their gas, and slack in their knotted rope”. Since January 2015 and the anniversary of the “liberation” of Auschwitz I have noted a sudden acceleration of the phenomenon. I have a whole file and a whole demonstration on the subject but the continuing judicial repression has not yet left me time to publish this information. In any case, for the historian, it has become captivating to observe the never-ending agony of the “magical gas chamber” (Céline in 1950). This agony is accompanied, as we have seen, by a redoubling of the repression of revisionism and a turning up of the volume of holocaustic propaganda. May our Picrochole refrain, then, from going on the stage and into a trance! He would have a stroke. He might even be cruelly snatched away from us. Who knows? He could precede in death a man who will be 87 years of age on January 25, 2016 and whom some have, thus far in vain, so often sought to kill, not for his ideas (he has hardly any) but for having wanted to publish the result of his research, which is summed up in a phrase of about sixty words. I repeat it here for memory, and to have done with it:

The alleged Hitlerite gas chambers and the alleged genocide of the Jews form one and the same historical lie, which has permitted a gigantic political and financial swindle whose main beneficiaries are the state of Israel and international Zionism and whose main victims are the German people – but not their leaders – and the Palestinian people in their entirety.

Note: For sources or references especially regarding certain points of this text one may consult the indices of the seven volumes of my Ecrits révisionnistes thus far published. On the Internet, for “The Victories of Revisionism” (11 December 2006), see robertfaurisson.blogspot.com/2006/12/victories-of-revisionism.html and for “The Victories of Revisionism (continued)” (September 11, 2011), see robertfaurisson.blogspot.it/2011/09/victories-of-revisionism-continued.html.

Aficionados of court rulings by imbeciles are invited to refer to pages 152-155 of the first volume, where there are some titbits from a decision handed down in 1979 by Dame Baluze-Frachet, judge of a Lyon police court. The good lady decreed back then that simply asking the question of the existence of the gas chambers was an affront not only to “good morals” but also to “the moral order”. The amusing bit of it is that by invoking “the moral order” she was advocating – although probably unawares – a value dear to count MacMahon, Marshal of France, President of the French Republic and perennial model of reactionary conservatism. “The moral order” was to return seventy years later on with… Marshal Pétain. As for the aficionados of behavioural curiosities, there is fare for them in the following two videos featuring the current head of the French government: “The left hand of Manuel Valls” and “Rally of March 19, 2014 – speech by Manuel Valls, Minister of the Interior”.

In preparation: 1) an article about an embarrassing secret of Serge Klarsfeld; 2) a study of the highly inflammable and explosive nature of hydrogen cyanide.

—-

DAVID IRVING: Smear Campaigns to Stifle Truth in History – Video

DIrvingVidHdr

 CLICK HERE TO VIEW: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2ZzrYRRpHU