What will the New Year bring for Canadians? By Betty Krawczyk

newyear4canadians

What will the New Year bring for Canadians?

By Betty Krawczyk

betty-k-photo

What will the New Year bring for Canadians? I think the western world lead by the US, and including Canada, is losing its collective mind. It’s as if the US is telling itself fairy tales and getting very angry when any collection of individuals or even one individual, who says, by way of resistance “but wait…I personally do not believe the bull excrement you are shoveling onto my doorstep (and into my airways)”. Not that any important media, or important person, for that matter, at least recognized by Canada, is trying to do this. But I personally rebel when the Canadian press and media, following the US story line, tries to persuade me, and millions of others, that Hillary Clinton lost the election because Putin personally elected Trump as US president by hacking into the American voting machines. I have to say they are lying through their expensive implanted teeth.

screen-shot-2016-12-30-at-11-32-32-pm

The US accusers can’t offer any proof of their accusations of Putin hacking because there isn’t any. I ask, did Putin also hack the machines that put Republicans back into the Senate? And also hack into the House of Representatives voting machines? The cabal of international interests that push austerity onto the people of the world while sucking the economy itself dry says it does. With the help of the Russia Today TV programs of course. The cabal claims that Putin, through RT, plays evil, insidious propaganda lies that are also very powerful and causes strange things to happen in America. Many US lawmakers are calling for the US to outright ban RT being broadcast in and into America. So much for freedom of speech. So do I watch RT?

I do, and I don’t even have television. I get RT through my computer. I also tune in to other alternate news casts but none have the constantly growing ratings of RT. I recommend RT to everyone. Of course they are presenting the Russian point of view which the Russians say is the purpose of the news shows. Why would the Russians have a television show of Russia Today if not to present the Russian point of view? How can Canadians and Americans make up their minds about anything if they only hear one side? That’s all we hear in most of the news programs that service the cabal (the side that CNN and 90 per cent of the other US broadcasting and our very own CBC) wants us to hear. Shouldn’t we also hear the other side? Shouldn’t we all hear honest debate on how “the liberation of Aleppo” in The Russian media becomes the “the downfall of Aleppo” in the American media? Even the government of British Columbia seems to think so.

20-russia-today

The province of BC is now advertising on the Russian channel. The BC provincial government has been running a large, chatty video showing and explaining how wonderful British Columbia is to countries everywhere through the RT channel. Christy Clark knows how many people worldwide watch RT. Other Canadian businesses are beginning to catch on, too. I think it is too late to shut RT up. The cabal is trying to distract the people who are slipping out of the middle class, and even out of the working class, into abject poverty by blaming their economic and physic woes on the bogyman Putin instead of their own blood sucking policies which will eventually fail. However, I think a “hard rain has to fall” before the US and Canada comes up with economic programs that allow all in our countries to prosper, not just the banks, and without prosperity being based on war. But war with Russia is exactly what the US is conditioning the western world to accept by constantly presenting Putin as being beneath the consideration of civilized nations; of being inhuman. The US headed cabal wants war with Russia in the New Year. And apparently, listening to the CBC, Canada is willing to tag along.

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.)
 

Tenure’s End: Foreign Israeli Lobby B’nai Brith Attacks Canada’s Longstanding Academic Tradition to Safeguard Freedom of Speech

Tenure’s End: Foreign Israeli lobby B’nai Brith Attacks Canada’s

Longstanding Academic Tradition to Safeguard Freedom of Speech

By Arthur Topham

The foreign, Jew’s-only, secret Masonic lobby organization B’nai Brith Canada and its ADL-ed component the League for ‘Human Rights’ of B’nai Brith are on a rampage through Cyberspace in their ongoing attempts to destroy Canadian’s constitutionally guaranteed Charter right to freedom of expression.

One of the most recent, egregious examples by this traitorous, Israel-sponsored, Fifth Columnist organization is their  despicable attempt to destroy Canada’s longstanding tradition of academic Tenureship via their relentless, underhanded attacks upon tenured Professor Anthony Hall of the University of Lethbridge, Alberta.

Using every dirty trick in their bag of lies, this traitorous “benevolent society” of Zionist Jew, duel-citizens  have been falsely maligning Professor Hall both in their Zionist-controlled mainstream media and via Canada’s legal system through their misuse of provincial “Human Rights” organizations.

The usual plethora of slander, lies, vilification, ugly epithets and guilt by association, coupled with copious amounts of arrogant innuendo, are their standard psycho-weapons of destruction and in the case of Professor Hall they’ve pulled out all the stops.

I have been covering Professor Hall’s plight for some time and observing how this Public Enemy #1 of Canadian sovereignty, B’nai Brith Canada, has been viciously libeling Hall in their Jewish publications both here in Canada and in the foreign state of Israel’s  media outlets as well as in the mainstream media.

It’s well beyond time that Canadians WAKE UP and smell the kosher coffee that’s been brewing beneath their noses for decades and realize that this subversive agent of the foreign state of Israel is quickly destroying the underpinnings of Canadian culture through their blatant attempts to dismantle and subvert every level of the nation’s government, media, judiciary and, now, academia.

Watch the above video and listen carefully to the words of Professor Anthony Hall and TAKE HEED! If this apocalyptic beast hidden with the Trojan Horse called “B’nai Brith Canada” isn’t collared and put on a leash soon all hell will be breaking loose as our rights and freedoms dissolve and we shift into either a state of anarchy or totalitarian dictatorship.

Please share this article with your friends and associates and if you can, write to those persons listed below and tell them how you feel about this deplorable affront to Canada’s freedom.

Those concerned about the B’nai Brith’s assault on Professor Anthony Hall can contact Lethbridge University President Mike Mahon. Email: mike.mahon@uleth.ca and cc contactmeliorist@gmail.com  program@ckxu.com  antoniusjameshall@gmail.com

Write, fax, or phone: Mike Mahon President & Vice-Chancellor A762 University Hall, University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada  T1K 3M4. Phone: (403) 329 -2201. Fax: (403) 329-2097.

There is also a Petition that’s been started where you can help support Professor Hall and our rights and freedoms. Here’s the link:

https://www.change.org/p/kurt-e-schlachter-kurt-e-schlachter-step-down-as-chair-of-the-board-university-of-lethbridge

As the old saying goes, “JUST DO IT!” The time for hesitation is long past. Let’s put our country’s freedoms ahead of our own petty and personal agendas for a change and start standing up for CANADA instead of kowtowing to the interests of a foreign, racist nation!

—–

Canadian professor libelously targeted as “anti-semite” in coordinated attack by RAFIQ for the American Herald Tribune

amhertribune

http://ahtribune.com/world/americas/1225-canadian-professor-anti-semite.html

 

halllibelhdr

In his Now Magazine article “Facebook Removes Anti-Semitic Post after Online Blowback,” Bernie Farber explains that “the Facebook ravings on the social media site of Anthony Hall,” a tenured professor at the University of Lethbridge in Alberta, have been identified as anti-Semitic. This statement might lead readers to believe that there were anti-Semitic ravings by Dr. Hall on his Facebook page, but as the article makes clear, there are no examples of such ravings by Dr. Hall, only by “one Glen Davidson,” who we are told posted these ravings on Dr. Hall’s page.

Farber goes on to state that Dr. Hall “has publicly embraced the ridiculous and obnoxious notions of Gerard Menuhin, who has purported to have proof that the Holocaust is a myth.”

Farber does not attempt to dismiss any of this proof, as one might expect an objective journalist to do, but instead takes the position that such proof can be dismissed out of hand as false without any investigation.

By comparison, Dr. Hall sounds like the more reasonable person for having actually looked at Menuhin’s book Tell the Truth and Shame the Devil. Note, too, that when Hall says “I’m reading that text and having to reassess a lot of ideas,” he does not say that he has changed his ideas, only that he is reassessing his ideas. Again, Hall sounds like the more courageous thinker for his willingness to reassess his thinking on a narrative as seemingly sacrosanct as the Jewish holocaust.

Having not yet said anything that convinces me Dr. Hall is an anti-Semite, Farber adds, “Hall reportedly linked Israel’s intelligence service, Mossad, with 9/11.” The role of Mossad, along with the CIA, in the 9/11 attacks is a fact well documented by credible journalists and scholars and widely disseminated online and in books. It is public knowledge and in the public domain. To admit the role of Mossad and the CIA in 9/11 is to admit the villainy of national governments and their foreign policies. Jewish identity and anti-Semitism have nothing to do with it.

Regarding  the anti-Semitic Facebook post that did not even originate with Dr. Hall, Farber writes, “To the best of my knowledge, Hall was never moved to delete this post himself.” An unbiased journalist would have contacted Dr. Hall and asked him about this matter. Well, I did contact Dr. Hall, and he informed me that he didn’t even know that the post was up on the “wall” of his Facebook page until after it had been taken down and after he had learned of the resulting controversy. So, here again, Farber offers no proof that Dr. Hall is even remotely anti-Semitic.

Not only that, but Dr. Hall’s award-winning two-volume book The Bowl with One Spoon, published by respected arbiter of scholarly history McGill-Queen’s University Press, gives every indication that Dr. Hall is the opposite of a racist, particularly in light of his deep commitment to exposing the plight of Indigenous peoples. Indeed, renowned Canadian scholar Naomi Klein, who happens to be Jewish, doesn’t seem to think that Dr. Hall is a racist either. On the cover of Dr. Hall’s book, she writes, “I cannot overstate the importance of this book. If used properly, it could change the world.”

Nonetheless, Farber goes on to bemoan that “the combined efforts of B’nai B’rith Canada and the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs were unable to move the University of Lethbridge to take action against Hall.” I would like to believe that this unwillingness on the part of the University of Lethbridge to help B’nai B’rith destroy Dr. Hall’s career is due to the university’s professed commitment to liberal education and liberal values, even if Farber does portray Lethbridge as a racist backwater in conservative Alberta, where Hall is said to have “found a comfortable home amongst Holocaust deniers.”

I would like to believe that the unwillingness of the University of Lethbridge to help B’nai B’rith destroy Dr. Hall’s career is due to the fact that, as a nation, Canada has shown itself willing to reconsider history when there is good cause. Notably, Canadians have recently begun the hard process of re-evaluating our own history with respect to our nation’s cultural and physical genocide against our Indigenous peoples. Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission on Indian Residential Schools has just published a six-volume final report on its findings, and in the tradition of scholars like Dr. Hall, this report shows fearlessness in confronting past lies so that history can better reflect the truth, however uncomfortable that truth may be.

I would like to believe that the unwillingness of the University of Lethbridge to help B’nai B’rith destroy Dr. Hall’s career is due to the university’s high ideals and Canadian bearing, but when I contacted Dr. Hall, he informed me that the University of Lethbridge has indeed asked him to step down from his tenured position after twenty-six years as a professor. It seems that the university is ready to bow to outside pressure and to sacrifice Dr. Hall. I’m sure that Farber’s biased account of the anti-Semitic posting on Dr. Hall’s Facebook page did little to help Dr. Hall’s chances of staving off B’nai B’rith’s attack.

Farber’s misrepresentation of Dr. Hall is no less offensive than the crime of which Dr. Hall is accused, namely misrepresentation of the Jewish holocaust. The difference between the two is that, in the case of Farber, his accusation that Dr. Hall is an anti-Semite is clearly baseless, whereas Dr. Hall’s willingness “to reassess a lot of ideas” about the history of the Second World War seems to be well thought out given his reputation as a respected historian.


rafiq

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”

HELP ARTHUR TOPHAM CHALLENGE CANADA’S REPRESSIVE SEC. 319(2) “HATE PROPAGANDA” LAWS AND DEFEND FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN CANADA

SUPPORTFREEDOMOFSPEECHNew

A&STophamQuesCrthse

RPEdNew400-copy-3

Dear Supporters of Freedom of Speech,

The time quickly draws nigh when I will be attending Supreme Court in Quesnel once again to challenge the federal government’s “Hate Propaganda” legislation contained in Sec. 319(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada.

The Constitutional Challenge will take place during the week of October 3 to 7, 2016 and will mark the final effort by myself to have this specious law shown to be unconstitutional and eventually removed from Canada’s statutes.

Should my efforts fail then I will be facing Sentencing on October 31st, 2016 for the Guilty verdict in Count 1 of the alleged offence that I 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.”

In order to meet this challenge I need to appeal once again to supporters for additional funding in order to pay the additional costs incurred by this Charter challenge. Please read the information contained in the GoGetFunding page shown below for further details.

This may be my last opportunity to accomplish what I set out to do, i.e. get rid of this censorship legislation once and for all so that ALL Canadians will be free to express their opinions and views and thoughts without fear of the Zionist Jew lobbyists filing these nefarious Sec. 319(2) criminal charges against everyone who stands up for Canada and their Constitutionally guaranteed rights and freedoms.

Please go to my GoGetFunding webpage to make a donation if you can. If you can’t please pass this message to those who may be able to help out. Do what you can while we still have the ability to make changes to our legal system.

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

Sincerely,

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


HELP ARTHUR TOPHAM CHALLENGE CANADA’S REPRESSIVE SEC. 319(2) “HATE PROPAGANDA” LAWS AND DEFEND FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN CANADA
CANADIAN PUBLISHER FACING JAIL FOR POLITICAL WRITINGS NOW PURSUING A CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE SCHEDULED FOR OCTOBER 3RD, 2016
Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms under Sec. 2b of the Charter states:
Fundamental Freedoms
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
Dear Free Speech Supporters,
My name is Arthur Topham and I am the owner, publisher and editor of the online alternative News site RadicalPress.com which has been operating in Canada since 1998. Since 2007 I have been involved in legal battles with the Canadian government – first the Canadian Human Rights Commission (2007) and now the federal legal system (2012) over alleged offences that purportedly violate Canada’s “Hate Propaganda” laws (Sections 318 – 320) of the Canadian Criminal Code (CCC).
On May 16th, 2012 I was charged with a Sec. 319(2) ccc “Hate Propaganda” violation. I was arrested and jailed and my home was entered illegally by the RCMP’s “Hate Crime Team” who proceeded to steal all of my computers and electronic files. Since that date I have been involved in a protracted and onerous legal battle, first with the British Columbia provincial court and now with the British Columbia Supreme Court.
My trial, known as R v Roy Arthur Topham, finally got underway Monday, October 26, 2015 in Quesnel, B.C., twelve hundred and fifty-eight days (1258) after my arrest on May 16, 2012. The Indictment stated that I, Arthur Topham, 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.” The trial was presided over by Supreme Court Justice, Mr. Bruce Butler and consisting of a 12-member jury of my peers (8 women and 4 men).
Of primary importance in understanding the nature and outcome of the trial is the fact that I was charged TWICE with the same Sec. 319(2) criminal offence. The first time was the day of my arrest on May 16, 2012 and the second time was January 14, 2014. The wording of the second Indictment was identical to that of the first. The reason for the second charge, like that of the first, was so that Crown might try again to have my bail conditions altered in order to prevent me from publishing. These additional attempts (there were three in all) to increase the severity of the bail conditions were buttressed upon the questionable pretext by Crown that the police investigation was “ongoing” and therefore the second Indictment (Count 2) was merely a result of additional evidence gleaned from posts I had added to my website after my initial bail conditions ended on October 9, 2012.
Throughout the whole of the 14-day trial what stood out most for the defence (as well as many observers in the gallery) was the overwhelming volume of documentary evidence (all taken from the RadicalPress.com website) which the Crown downloaded on to the jury. Coupled with that fact was the additionally onerous presence of two bulky Binders which were of such poor quality they were virtually unreadable, thus making the task of comprehending the details of the evidence not only formidable but in all likelihood an impossibility for the jury to comprehend. In fact it wasn’t until the morning of Friday, November 6th, ten days into the trial, that new exhibits of Binders 3 & 4 were finally made available to jury members.
On the afternoon of Tuesday, November 10th, 2015 Supreme Court Justice Bruce Butler read out his Charge to the jury. On top of the other thousands of pages of online books and articles the jury was now given an additional 62-page document instructing them on how to go about deliberating on all of the evidence presented over the previous 12 days of the trial. After reading out the document to the jury Justice Butler then instructed them to retire and seek a decision on the two counts.
The decision was rendered on the morning of Thursday, November 12, 2015 at 11:27 a.m.
Count 1: Guilty
Count 2: Not Guilty
Once the initial shock of the guilty verdict in Count 1 had subsided and time allowed for a reconsideration of all of the events surrounding the trial it became apparent that the verdict of “Guilty” in Count 1 was, in reality, the key to opening the door for my (the Defence’s) ultimate objective which was to challenge the Constitutional legitimacy of the actual section of the Canadian Criminal Code (Sec. 319(2) now containing the infamous “Hate Propaganda” legislation which threatens freedom of expression for all Canadians.
After numerous delays on July 11th, 2016 a date was finally fixed for the hearing to be heard in Quesnel Supreme Court beginning the week of October 3rd to October 7th, 2016. As well, at that time the date of October 31st, 2016 was set by Crown for Sentencing should my challenge to this specious legislation fail to be overturned during the upcoming hearing.
As of this update (September 6th, 2016) there remains less than a month before the Charter challenge is set to begin and there is still a dire need to raise additional funding in order to cover the costs of having three Expert Witnesses appear via video during the hearing. Also, it is necessary for me to procure funding to provide airfare and hotel accommodations for my assistant legal counsel (Mr. Jeremy Maddock) to be present in court during the week of the hearing. Mr. Maddock lives in Victoria, B.C. and has played a vital role in my court case over the past four years of ongoing litigation. The estimated additional costs will be approximately $3000.00 to $4000.00 in total.
Should the challenge to Sec. 319(2) fail then my next and final option will take place during Sentencing on October 31st, 2016 when I will have to decide whether or not to appeal the guilty verdict in Count 1 or accept my fate.
—-
To read the full text of the Transcript of the trial please go to the following url? http://www.radicalpress.com/?page_id=9133
For the full text of the Memorandum of Argument please go here and read it in pdf format.
The future of Sec. 319(2) of Canada’s Criminal Code will depend in part on the outcome of the planned Constitutional challenge now scheduled to take place during the week of October 3 – 7, 2016. Please try to assist me in making this challenge a success for the future of freedom of speech in Canada. It’s vital that we win this battle to protect Canada’s Constitutional Right to Freedom of Speech.
I continue to have the support of the Ontario Civil Liberties Association. Please see here Ontario Civil Liberties Association and here http://ocla.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/2014-09-… and here OCLA writes to Attorney General Anton on September 24, 2014
Please try to donate online using my GoGetFunding site but if you are unable to do so then try helping out by sending either cash, a cheque or a Money Order to the following postal address. Please make sure that all cheques or Money Orders are made out to – Arthur Topham – and sent to:
Arthur Topham
4633 Barkerville Highway
Quesnel, B.C.
V2J 6T8
Thank You so much!

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.

______

My Love Affair with Justin Trudeau et al. is Over By Betty Krawczyk

trudeau

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau shaking hands with Latvian President Raimonds Rejoins. Trudeau is “pleased”  Canada will send troops to Latvia as part of a NATO force to threaten aggression against Russia. 

My Love Affair with Justin Trudeau et al. is Over

By Betty Krawczyk

Betty-K-Photo-copy

Okay, so my love affair with Justin Trudeau et al. is over. I voted for him but I wouldn’t do it again even though he has already fulfilled some of the election promises he made. Why? I turned away from the NDP in the last election because of their “balanced budget” that seemed more of the “same ole”. I did worry about Trudeau’s youth and inexperience in international matters, but I felt comforted that he had Jean Chretien to advise him. Remember Jean Chretien? When Prime Minster, how he was under enormous pressure from the Bush administration to join the US and Britain to help invade Iraq? And how he refused and kept us out of the horrible, disgusting illegal mess of invading Iraq?

Well, I don’t know where Chretien was when Justin just caved to US pressure and decided to imitate the role UK’s Tony Blair played in the murderous invasions and bombings of Iraq. Trudeau has become the new lap-dog on the block by sending Canadian troops and military equipment to Latvia. Blair will forever be remembered as the lap dog of the US. And I think Trudeau seems to be taking on this role although a damming report has just been released in the UK on Blair’s role in the deaths of so many people in Iraq. Yes, our lovely young handsome prime minister has caved to Obama’s pressure and agreed to send troops and military equipment to Latvia.

Does Trudeau know that Latvia is smack on Russian’s borders? And that he has just dedicated Canadians to join in a war mongering that could very well bring on World War Three? This at a time when countries like France, Italy and Greece are reducing their own NATO spending? They see the senselessness of threatening Russia who has few military bases outside its own country (in previous Soviet Union countries) while Republican Ron Paul in the US presidential debate (2011) said that the US military was in 130 countries and has 900 bases around the world. How did Justin Trudeau come to the decision to send Canadian troops to Latvia? Has he fallen in love with his own Hollywood image? Does he want to help play John Wayne with nuclear weapons? My God, I am disappointed in him.

CANADA: The New Sodom and Gomorrah? By Arthur Topham

 

CANADASODOM?

CANADA: The New Sodom and Gomorrah?

By
Arthur Topham

On May 17th, 2016, a day recognized by the federal government as “International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia, and Biphobia”, an edict emanated forth from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s office (PMO) stating that the Liberal government was planning to make additional changes to the “Hate Propaganda” laws (Sections 318 to 320) of the Criminal Code of Canada in order to “protect” the nation’s sexually deviant members.

UpYoursTrudeauJr

The unabashed and strident manner in which the federal government is pushing forward with its controversial agenda of planned perversion and subversion of Canadian society (under the guise of supposed “human rights” for sexual aberrants) is an issue fraught with deep and troubling concern, not only those Canadians of the Christian faith who prefer to rely upon the eternal wisdom of God and Nature but also for millions of other citizens whose moral standards won’t permit them to accept the subversive and sinister hidden aim within the government’s mandate to criminalize public dissent and discussion on moral, ethical and health standards affecting the nation as a whole.

In the words of the PM, “To do its part, the Government of Canada today will introduce legislation that will help ensure transgender and other gender-diverse people can live according to their gender identity, free from discrimination, and protected from hate propaganda and hate crimes.”

FREEXPRESSIONLOCKUP copy 4

The reality that the federal government intends to expand rather than repeal Section 318 – 320 of the Canadian Criminal Code is disconcerting  in itself given the excessively subjective nature of this draconian section of the Code. The concept of “Hate Propaganda” as a “criminal offence” is nothing less than a blatant example of government mind control; one that, here in Canada, has proven itself over the last half century of contentious litigation, to be extremely controversial, provocative and unjust and a clear and present danger to freedom of expression or “free speech” as defined by Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The alarm bells ought to be ringing across the country at the thought of this new “Liberal” government of Justin Trudeau pulling the Orwellian zipper of censorship even tighter over the mouths of Canada’s citizens than his predecessor Harper. It appears to be a new day but still the same old shit – of increasingly repressive laws and greater restrictions on individual freedoms theoretically guaranteed by our Charter.

5FeetFury copy

In fact the threat of expanding Canada’s “hate” laws to include ‘Tranny’(i.e. transvestite) protection has already angered and incensed Canadian bloggers as we see in the following reaction by Kathy Shaidle, one of the veterans of the previous “Section 13” wars that were ongoing during Harper’s reign.

As I’ve stated numerous times and especially in my essay Bad Moon Rising: How the Jewish Lobbies Created Canada’s “Hate Propaganda” Laws, these Communist-inspired laws were surreptitiously and deliberately put in place through the mendacious actions of various Jewish lobby organizations such as the Canadian Jewish Congress, B’nai Brith Canada and, more recently, the newly-formed Centre for Israel & Jewish Affairs, all of whom have worked in tandem for decades to ensure that issues to do with Israel and its Zionist ideological political system would ultimately fall within this section of the Code and therefore make any truthful and factual statements about important civil and national issues indictable offences.

What must be clearly understood from the start when discussing the issue of  “Hate Propaganda” laws is that the notion of elevating the natural emotional feeling of hatred into a pseudo-legal category wherein it becomes an indictable offence is purely an invention of the Zionist Jews and in certain respects an historical concomitant of the Bolshevik era’s Leninist/Stalinist totalitarian terror regimes. One could rightly state that its essential character is embodied in such classics of “hate” literature as Germany Must Perish!, a book written back in 1941 by the Jewish author Theodore N. Kaufman with the sole purpose of inciting America to hate Germany and then translate that hatred into the USA joining the Allies in their unjust war against the National Socialist government of Germany.

EyeOnFreeSpeech600

In a previous article entitled Canada: Hypocrite Nation Ruled by Zionist Deception & anti-Free Speech Laws I had the following to say about these despicable, sham legal subterfuges disguised as legitimate jurisprudence:

“The war to silence Canadians and stymie any public speech that the Jewish lobby felt might negatively impact them or Israel in any way (either on or off the internet), gained its foothold back in 1977 when the federal government first implemented the so-called Canadian Human Rights Act and created its attendant enforcement agencies, the Canadian Human Rights Commission and the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (CHRT). Both the commission and the tribunal were quasi-judicial, i.e. “crazy” judicial in that they basically set their own rules and guidelines and consistently changed the “legal” goal posts depending upon whatever case they were dealing with, in order to ensure a conviction. If fact, of the hundreds of Canadians dragged before these Stalinist style “Show Trial” tribunals, EVERYONE was found guilty for the simple reason that all it took was for someone to register a complain against them and that, in itself, sealed their fate. When I describe Section 13 as a “Bolshevik” type law I do so with the full knowledge that under the former Soviet system, Lenin, in one of the regime’s very first acts upon gaining absolute power, was to make “anti-Semitism” a crime punishable by death. Death, that is, without so much as a trial even. All it would take, (just as with the Section 13 “complaints”) was for someone to accuse another of said crime and the Cheka (soviet secret police) had the excuse to liquidate the victim.”

Reporting on this issue in Christian News Heather Clark remarks that apart from the criminal aspects of this proposed legislation there are those like Charles McVety, president of the Institute for Canadian Values and others who consider the bill to be “nebulous and reckless.”

Clark’s article goes on, “Bill C-16 is so vague, it is unenforceable,” he [McVety] said in a statement. “The fluid nature of gender identity is so nebulous that people can change their gender identity moment by moment. In that the bill seeks to change the Criminal Code of Canada, people may be sent to prison for two years over something that is ill-defined, and indeterminable.”

“It is also reckless as the proposed law will establish universal protection for any man who wishes to access women’s bathrooms or girls’ showers with momentary gender fluidity,” McVety continued. “Every Member of Parliament should examine their conscience over the potential of their vote exposing women and girls to male genitalia.”

JewShitter

In the context of our Charter rights Clark says, “There is also uncertainty as to how the law will be applied to free speech. As previously reported, in 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada upheld the conviction of activist William Whatcott, who found himself in hot water after distributing flyers regarding the Bible’s prohibitions against homosexuality throughout the Saskatoon and Regina neighborhoods in 2001 and 2002.”

Bill-Whatcott-Image

As Charles McVety rightfully stated the proposed Bill C-16 is definitely “nebulous and reckless” but as past convictions in both the cases of Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act and Section 319(2) of the Canadian Criminal Code show, simply because it’s “vague” doesn’t mean that it isn’t “enforceable”. All it takes are judges and justices within the Canadian judicial system who will interpret and lend credence to subjective definitions of nebulous terms such as “hatred” so that they may then shapeshift into whatever meaning the Crown wishes in order to fit the charge. No better example currently exists than the latest and most severe case of Whatcott.

Conclusion: What’s coming next?

During the heated Sec. 13 Campaign here in Canada when the Canadian Human Rights Act was being wielded like a club by the Canadian Human Rights Commission and bloggers around the country were being bludgeoned and jailed, fined and nailed to the “hate crime” cross the Zionist element within the Conservative Right finally realized that the Sec. 13 legislation no longer was serving just their purposes but was being turned against them as well. As a result they garnered the support of Canada’s Zionist media monopoly and the lobbying to repeal the specious section of the Act was eventually accomplished back in June of 2012. Unfortunately they weren’t smart enough to realize that the “Hate Propaganda” laws within the Criminal Code were even more insidious than Sec. 13. They figured that as long as Sec. 319(2) of the ccc was there and could be used against critics of Israel and anyone else accused of “anti-Semitism” then that was just fine with them. To hell (or jail) with “freedom of speech” if it meant allowing bloggers to speak openly and frankly about the Jews or the Zionist empire builders.

But the tables appear to be turning once again as the new Liberal government of Justin Trudeau begins forcing their faggot philosophy down the throats of unwilling Canadians and then, on top of that monumental insult, threatens the nation with increased criminal penalties of up to two years in jail for anyone who doesn’t want to go happily and gayly along down the road to Sodom and Gomorrah carrying their little rainbow flag in hand.

Will they eventually start campaigning to repeal these anti-free speech laws contained in Sec. 318 to 320 of the Criminal Code and get rid of the last vestiges of Orwellian censorship in Canada?

Time will soon tell.

——

SUPPORTFREEDOMOFSPEECH

The upcoming challenge to this Zionist-created false flag legislation will determine once and for all whether or not Canada will adhere to the spirit and intent of its Charter of Rights and Freedoms or continue to bow down to foreign interests and sacrificing its citizen’s fundamental rights.
Please try to assist in this process by making a small donation to the cause. My GoGetFunding site can be found here: http://gogetfunding.com/canadian-publisher-faces-jail-for-political-writings/
Standing for Canada and our democratic ideals I remain,
Sincerely,
Arthur Topham
Pub/Ed
The Radical Press
Canada’s Radical News Network
“Digging to the root of the issues since 1998”

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Multicultural Revisionism and the Falsification of Canadian History by Ricardo Duchesne

Multicultural Revisionism and the Falsification of Canadian History
by Ricardo Duchesne

Official Coat of Arms of the Dominion of Canada

Official Coat of Arms of the Dominion of Canada

The falsification of the historical record for the purpose of creating a past that fits with the ideological goals of the present has been a common characteristic of revolutionary regimes seeking to legitimize themselves by portraying their actions and goals as if they were continuous with the aims of history or the venerable beliefs of the past.

Perhaps the most egregious example of “illegitimate historical revisionism”, as contrasted to the legitimate re-assessment of the past on the basis of improved evaluation of records, is the complete re-writing of the history of Russia by the Communist Party of the Soviet Union; particularly during the reign of Stalin in the mid-1920s to early 1950s; history was not only written according to the “correct” Marxist theory, but state officials commonly went about erasing major historical figures from documents, books, and even photographs (PDF) the moment they were deemed to be “enemies of the people”.

This illegitimate revision of the historical record is also happening in Canada, but in a way that is difficult to detect, for it does not involve any book burning, outright denials of certain events, or use of forged documents. It is taking place in a rather calmed, reasonable way; the protocols of “verifiability”, “peer review”, and “openness to criticism” appear to remain intact.

This reasonable falsification is particularly visible in regards to the books I have in mind, that is, general surveys of the history of Canada, which are intended to be summations of the existing state of knowledge, not polemical exegeses, but overviews for undergraduate courses, rather than books concentrating on specific topics, or openly about subjects that are inherently ideological such as women’s history, history of the head tax, or the history of Indian reservations. Still; these surveys cannot escape the dominant leftist culture, however neutral they may appear.

“Discourse Analysis”

Basically what has happened in the writing of general histories of Canada is that historians have been acculturated to view the older narrative in which Canada was seen as an Anglo-Saxon nation, or as a nation of two founding peoples, as an “imposed monolithic mythology”, to use the words of John Ralston Saul, the putative philosopher of Canada. “Monolithic” means that it is bad, and “mythology that it is not true. Portraying Canada as “richly diverse”, a “complex cultural mosaic” from its origins, means that one is a historian who can grasp complexities, one is “subtle” and “nuanced”. Academics love to use these words whenever they describe their ways of thinking. Writing that Canada was fundamentally a British nation is an indication of crudeness and rigidity.

What about the facts? Well, historians have further learned from the more ideologically oriented social scientists that the “old style of history”, which took for “granted” Canada’s Anglo identity, was a discourse “socially constructed” by the dominant Anglo men of Canada. The “facts” narrated by these dominant white male historians cannot be seen independently of their efforts to construct Canada’s history in a way that suited their racist inclinations. Now historians know better. They are more “sensitive” to the long suppressed diverse voices of Canada’s past, and, in this vein, they have constructed a new discourse that better captures the “complexity” of Canada as “multicultural nation” from its beginnings.

This concept of a “discourse”, with its notion that the way we think about history and social reality cannot be understood in the language of the natural sciences, because thinking is always a product of the “disciplinary structures of knowledge and power”, is quite ambivalent as to whether the new history of Canada, as a multicultural nation-in-the making, is really a more accurate portrayal of the past, or simply an effort to re-conceptualize the past, however fictional that past may be, for the purpose of bringing forth a new historical reality, a multicultural Canada, that will no longer be a fiction.

The methodology of “discourse analysis” (PDF), in the true spirit of postmodernist theorizing, really wants to have it both ways; on the one hand, it wants to portray the “old historical narratives” as mythological discourses expressing the power of certain elites, rather than the actual historical record, but, on the other, it is always ready to fall back on the notion that there are no facts outside a system of “disciplinary structures of power”, whenever someone points out that the facts don’t support the new discourse. If someone presses them about their own current “disciplinary power”, they will reply that their aim is to liberate former oppressed minorities from the structures of the past and create a better, more diverse, tolerant, and free Canada.

Nevertheless, while historians are operating within this matrix of postmodernist ideas about the discursive nature of reality, they themselves, particularly when writing surveys, tend to avoid the convoluted postmodernist discussions of their social science colleagues. The overall pro-multicultural atmosphere that pervades every institution and media has had a more straightforward impact upon them. They want to be good citizens working for, rather than against, a harmonious multicultural society in which, as the Government of Canada instructs us, “the value and dignity of all Canadian citizens regardless of their racial or ethnic origins, their language, or their religious affiliation” is affirmed in the historical experience of Canada. The thought of emphasizing the overwhelming influence of Anglo Canadians, or French Canadians in Quebec, strikes them as impolite, inconsistent with the goal of encouraging “all citizens” “regardless of race” to “take pride in their ancestry”.

Accordingly, Canada’s history has now been thoroughly redefined as a history of “diverse immigrants”, with the Anglo and the French portrayed as immigrants with the same historical status as other immigrants. The true founders are the “First Nations”, or, Aboriginals, English, French, “other Europeans”, West Indians, Asians, Africans, Sikhs, Chinese…all immigrants, since, after all, as Pierre Trudeau once said, we should not view Canada as a nation fixated in the past but as a fluid nation always in the making through the arrival of new peoples.

“Canada’s Diverse Peoples”

Canada's Diverse Peoples

J.M. Bumsted, Canada’s Diverse Peoples

I will offer two examples of this illegitimate revisionist writing. First, a book by the well-known historian, J. M. Bumsted, Canada’s Diverse Peoples (2003). Intended to help readers “better appreciate” diversity to enable “all of us to interact more effectively” with multiple races, Bumsted opens the book questioning the claim that Europeans “were the first to discover this land and the first to settle it”.

From the very beginning of human settlement of this continent…North America was sheer diversity. This land was a veritable quilt of peoples and tongues. The ultimate arrival of Europeans complicated, but did not really alter, this pattern.

He uses quotation marks in reference to “the French and the English as the ‘founding peoples’ of Canada” on the grounds that it “completely ignores the previous presence of the Aboriginals”. He bemoans the restrictive racial immigration policies, and then sets out to construct a new narrative of Canada as a nation progressively moving toward a multiracial society in which everyone is accorded full equality, concluding:

By the year 2000 it was abundantly clear that Canada had won its campaign to impose the concept of multiculturalism upon the nation.

This passage comes from the last chapter revealing titled “The Future”, which announces:

From the very beginning, the land that became Canada was a multiracial place, the destination of a constant flow of new immigrants of varying ethnicities.

Canada’s “Political Nationality”

A Brief History of Canada

Roger Riendeau, A Brief History of Canada

The next book is by Roger Riendeau, A Brief History of Canada (2007). Not so brief at 400 pages, Riendeau, Vice Principal of Canada’s historic Innis College at the University of Toronto, opens his book asking “What is Canada? What is a Canadian?” Amazingly, he cites a few words that George-Étienne Cartier, who played the key role in bringing French Canada into Confederation, expressed in 1865, in which he envisioned, apparently, Canada as a “political nationality” open to peoples from all religious backgrounds, races, and nations in the world. Riendeau cites Cartier’s statement that with Confederation Canada “would form a political community with which neither the national origin, nor religion of any individual, would interfere”.1

From this statement alone we are supposed to believe that Canada was always meant to look like Chinese-dominated-Richmond and South Asian-dominated-Brampton. This is a misinterpretation bordering on falsification. Cartier meant that Canada would be a confederation of provinces with their own local institutions, rather than a single legislative union like Britain or a British Dominion in which French Canadiens would be compelled to assimilate.

It is very anachronistic for Riendeau to say that “since 1867” Canada’s inhabitants, “whether they are descended from the Aboriginal, French, Anglo-Saxon, other European, Asian, African, or Latin American cultures” have shown an inclination to see themselves as members of a common “political nationality”, or have “survived as a distinct national community”, a nation based solely on political values regardless of race and culture. It is also quite fictional to describe the native landscape before Europeans arrived as “multicultural and multilingual”, as well as to say that the peoples of Canada have always felt that what made them Canadian was not their ethnicity or culture but the mere fact that they were “bound by a common experience” as inhabitants of the same country.2

By “common” he means that all the inhabitants were somehow forging a sense of political identity that transcended their ethnicity and culture. Yet, as is evident from his own narrative, the entire history of Canada prior to the 1970s goes against this notion of a common political nationality. Not only were the British well aware of their Britishness, and for this reason preferred Anglo-Saxon immigrants, which Riendeau otherwise knows disapprovingly, but the actual “common” experience of the nation was overwhelmingly British/European outside Quebec. This is what the statistics say. Riendeau’s own demographic and ethnic proportions cannot hide this reality. He observes, for example, that whereas prior to the late 1960s “almost 90 percent of immigrants were of European origins, by the early 1970s [suddenly] about half came from other regions including the West Indies, Africa, South America, and Asia”.3

This is not a historian who invents facts and alters photographs. His acts of manipulation are more “subtle”. What he wants students to believe is that Canada’s past already contained the seeds of its current multiracial trends. “Canada has always been a multicultural society”.4 He enjoys writing about the “changing racial composition of Canada” in relation to the influx of non-French and non-British European immigrants.5 He does not enjoy saying Canada was still 96 percent racially White as late as 1971, when multiculturalism was officially announced.

He would rather blame the government in the early 20th century for “inculcating British-Canadian beliefs in citizenship, democracy, and the Protestant ethic”. He thinks they should have started promoting multiculturalism from the beginning. Canada was “universally racist, inasmuch as the concept of a multicultural society still lay…in the future”.6 Canada became what it was always meant to be inasmuch as immigration restrictions against non-Europeans were abolished in the 1960s, the Multiculturalism Act of 1988 was legislated, and the ceiling on immigration was raised from 100,000 to 250,000 in the late 1980s.

It never occurs to Riendeau to ask why academics across the Western world are making exactly the same argument about how the “political nationality” of Britain, France, Belgium, Sweden, Italy, Greece, Ireland, Norway…was always meant to be about the creation of multiracial nations from the beginning? That Canada has always been uniquely diverse is not unique to Canadian historians; it is now a pervasive fabrication among historians across European-created nations. They want all European natives to believe that the current diversification is continuous with the very origins of their nations.

This is not your Stalinist form of falsification, but it is the biggest falsification of history ever promoted; the complete denial of nationality to all Europeans in their own homelands!


Footnotes:

[1] Roger Riendeau, A Brief History of Canada, 2007, p. xv
[2] p. 385
[3] p. 332
[4] p. 382
[5] p. 331
[6] p. 229

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau Stands with Racist, Zionist, Supremacist, Terrorist Israel from PMO office

ATEDITOR0216

[Editor’s Note: For the record. The ongoing statements emanating forth from the Prime Minister’s Office that promote and laud the barbarism and murder and terrorism and lies and deceit of the Zionist Jew ‘state’ of Israel are solid confirmation that the Liberal government of Canada under Trudeau Jr. is fully under the control of the Jew lobbyists here in Canada. 

Issuing this type of blatant bullshit propaganda on the Israeli state while at the same time refusing to allow French comedian Dieudonne to enter the country is the height of hypocrisy and bigotry and makes Canada a laughing stock of nations around the world who are well versed on the true, actual reality of what the ‘state’ of Israel is really about.

Canada is still another Zionist Occupied Government (ZOG) and the nation is being blacklisted around the globe because of these unabashed lies and propaganda that our government keeps sending out to the people here and around the world.

Justin Trudeau. You’re just another lying, two-faced, ignorant puppet/sycophant of the Jews and you’ll go down in real history as a traitor to Canada just as your Marxist, Communist father did.

Shalom my ass! There will never be peace until Israel is removed from the nations of the world and Zionism and Jewish power is destroyed just as Syphilis and other contagious diseases inimical to a healthy world.]

JustinIsraelPuppetStatement by the Prime Minister of Canada on Israel Independence Day

May 12, 2016
Ottawa, Ontario

The Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, today issued the following statement in celebration of Yom Ha’atzmaut:

“Today, we celebrate the 68th anniversary of the founding of the State of Israel with our Israeli friends and Jewish communities, both here in Canada, and around the world.

“The State of Israel is a thriving and vibrant country, which Canada is proud to call a close partner and steadfast ally.

“Canada and Israel unite in their people-to-people ties, shared values, respect for democracy, and growing trade relationship. I look forward to continuing to strengthen our strong friendship.

“Although today is a joyous day, let us also reflect on the threat that Israel and its people continue to face throughout the world in the form of terrorist attacks, acts of anti-Semitism, and religious intolerance. Canada stands with Israel and will continue to promote peace and stability in the region.

“On behalf of Sophie and our children, I wish everyone celebrating Israel’s Independence Day a Yom Ha’atzmaut Sameach. Shalom.”

—-

THE TRIAL: REGINA V ROY ARTHUR TOPHAM

TheTrialHEADERFINAL copy

ATEditorPic185 copy

Editor’s Note: With the exception of the final Charge to the Jury by B.C.S.C. Justice Butler the full transcript of the trial proceedings in the case of R V ROY ARTHUR TOPHAM from October 26, 2015 to November 12, 2015 are contained in the following pdf files.
It is suggested that these files be downloaded for future reference and in the interest of securing a permanent record of this important free speech trial in Canada.
Sincerely,

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

_________________________________

PROCEEDINGS AT TRIAL (Excerpt – Opening Remarks by Court and Crown and Testimony of Terry Wilson) (DAY 1)

DAY2-173249.Oct 27 15.Trial.Electronic copy 2

DAY3-173249.Oct 28 15.Trial.Electronic copy 2

DAY4-173249.Oct 29 15.Trial.Electronic copy 2

DAY-5173249.Oct 30 15.Trial.Electronic copy 2

DAY-6173249.Nov 2 15.Trial.Electronic copy 2

DAY7173249.Nov 3 15.Trial.Electronic copy 2

DAY8-173249.Nov 4 15.Trial.Electronic copy 2

DAY9-173249.Nov 5 15.Trial.Electronic copy 2

D10-173249.Nov 6 15.Trial.Electronic copy 2

DII-173249.Nov 9 15.Trial.Electronic copy 2

D12-173249.Nov 10 15.Trial.Excerpt.Electronic copy 2

D13-173249.Nov 11 15.Trial.Electronic copy 2

D14-173249.Nov 12 15.Trial.Electronic copy 2

Anti-BDS Motion – Why Does Canada Sanction Other Countries for Human Rights Violations but Not Israel? By Julie Lévesque Global Research

BDSCANADAVOTE

http://www.globalresearch.ca/anti-bds-motion-why-does-canada-sanction-other-countries-for-human-rights-violations-but-not-israel/5510386

Anti-BDS Motion – Why Does Canada Sanction Other Countries for Human Rights Violations but Not Israel?

By Julie Lévesque

Global Research, February 26, 2016

BDS-Logo-Israel-Boycott-400x242

 

The international community, speaking through the United Nations, has identified three regimes as inimical to human rights – colonialism, apartheid and foreign occupation… Israel’s occupation of the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem contains elements of all three of these regimes”. – John Dugard, UN’s former Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

This week, the Canadian Parliament overwhelmingly voted in favour of a motion condemning the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel.

The motion, passed on February 22 by a 229-51 vote, states:

“That, given Canada and Israel share a long history of friendship as well as economic and diplomatic relations, the House reject the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, which promotes the demonization and delegitimization of the State of Israel, and call upon the government to condemn any and all attempts by Canadian organizations, groups or individuals to promote the BDS movement, both here at home and abroad.”

First, there is no such thing as “friendship” between states. States have no friends, they have interests and nothing else.

Second, the BDS movement does not promote “the demonization and delegitimization of the State of Israel,” as the motion puts it, in a very unfactual and questionable manner. The BDS movement promotes international law and Palestinian rights and condemns Israel’s total lack of respect for both.

Despite its emotional and propagandist wording, the motion completely fails to hide the fact that it condemns criticism of human rights violations by Israel. This calls for some explanations.

By condemning a peaceful movement that tries to bring Israel to account, Canada expresses its total disregard for human rights and international law and its sheer hypocrisy when faced with human rights violations.

There are currently 22 states targeted by Canadian sanctions, several of them for human rights violations. And Israel, being Canada’s “friend”, is not one of them, even if the sanctioned countries’ misdeeds pale in comparison to the death and destruction Israel has imposed on Palestinians for decades.

While not one sanction has been imposed on Israel for its war crimes and crimes against humanity, some countries have been sanctioned by Canada simply for “misappropriating state funds.”

There are no words to describe the scale of this hypocrisy, but, we don’t need any since the facts speak for themselves. Before looking at the list of sanctioned countries and the reasons behind their sanctions, it is worth mentioning only a few facts about Israel.

As mentioned in the quote above, Israel’s policies and practices violate the most fundamental human rights of the Palestinians. The Hebrew state has been the subject of at least 77 UN resolutions since 1955, and has been criticized in at least 26 resolutions for its violations of U.N. Security Council resolutions.

In July 2015, a report by Amnesty International found “compelling evidence of serious violations of international humanitarian law by Israeli forces” as well as “strong evidence of war crimes and possible crimes against humanity” during Israel’s 2014 assault on Gaza.” Evidence of war crimes and crimes against humanity were also found during Operation Cast Lead in 2008.

Of course, most reports from the U.N. as well as the ones from human rights organizations mentioned below pretend to be “balanced” by equally blaming both sides, the Israeli army as well as Palestinian militias. If opinions can be “balanced”, facts, however, cannot, and the scale of death and destruction doesn’t lie. Most, if not all the damage and loss of life occurs on the Palestinian side. Every single time.

These few facts about Operations Cast Lead in 2008 and Protective Edge in 2014 prove it:

Cast Lead:

[B]etween 1,385 and 1,419 Palestinians were killed during Cast Lead, a majority of them civilians, including at least 308 minors under the age of 18. More than 5000 more were wounded. Thirteen Israelis were also killed, including 3 civilians.

According to the UN, 3,540 housing units were completely destroyed, with another 2,870 sustaining severe damage.

More than 20,000 people – many of them already refugees, some two or three times over – were made homeless.

Protective Edge:

At least 2,100 Palestinians were killed, of whom the United Nations identified more than 1,500 as civilians, and approximately 11,000 people, mostly civilians, were injured. The tens of thousands of Israeli attacks caused the vast majority of destruction during the fighting, which left uninhabitable 22,000 homes, displacing 108,000 people, and left hundreds of thousands without adequate water or electricity.

Attacks by Palestinian civilians injured 61 Israeli settlers in the West Bank as of October 31, the UN reported. In addition to the three Israeli teenagers who were killed in June, nine Israeli civilians were killed by Palestinians.

How many dead Israeli civilians compared to Palestinian civilians? How many housing units destroyed in Israel? How many homeless Israelis? Let’s be honest. A truly balanced report would reflect the facts and not try to equally blame both sides. The forces in this conflict as well as the damage done are anything but equal. They are completely disproportionate.

That being said, Israel’s contempt for international law is legend and with this motion, Canadian Parliamentarians have just proven one more time they are bought and sold.

It is now worth taking a look at the countries against which Canada has placed sanctions and why, since all of them, without exception, pale in comparison to Israel’s bloody record.

The list clearly shows how Canada has no credibility whatsoever when it comes to condemning states for their lack of respect for human rights or people who protest against criminal states, for that matter.

Here is the list of the countries sanctioned for human rights reasons. It should be noted that several, if not all, background explanations provided on the Canadian Government web site (in brackets) are totally biased and simplistic, when not pure propaganda.

Belarus: “[D]eteriorating human rights situation.”

This includes “widespread harassment and detention of opposition party campaign workers, the physical assault of senior opposition figures, arbitrary use of state powers to support the incumbent president, pressure on state workers and students to support the President, restrictions on the ability of opposition campaigns to communicate with the electorate, and control of the state media to severely restrict access by opposition candidates.”

What happens it the Occupied Territories is much worse, yet no sanctions against Israel.

Burma: “[G]ravity of the human rights and humanitarian situation…, which threatened peace and security in the entire region.”

Libya: “[V]iolence and the use of force against civilians.”

Day-to-day in the Occupied Territories.

Russia: “Activists were beaten, kidnapped and tortured [in Ukraine]. The Russian government encouraged, and supported, these measures.”

Meanwhile, more and more “Palestinian children [are] beaten and tortured by Israeli security forces while in detention.” Read also Israeli NGO B’Tselem’s report Backed by the System: Abuse and Torture at the Shikma Interrogation Facility.

Sudan: “[H]umanitarian crisis and widespread human rights violations resulting from the conflict in Darfur region”

Syria: “The Syrian Government’s violent crackdown on peaceful protesters led to many civilian deaths and injuries. Thousands of civilians were detained arbitrarily and there were credible reports of summary executions and torture.”

Israel arbitrarily detains Palestinians on a regular basis, including children, and summary executions and torture and common.

According to B’Tselem: “At the end of Dec. 2015, 422 Palestinian minors were held in Israeli prisons as security detainees and prisoners, including 6 administrative detainees.”

According to Human Rights Watch:

“Israeli security forces continued to arrest children suspected of criminal offenses, usually stone-throwing, in their homes at night, at gunpoint; question them without a family member or lawyer present; and coerce them to sign confessions in Hebrew, which they do not understand… As of October 31, Israel held 457 Palestinian administrative detainees without charge or trial, based on secret evidence. Israeli prison authorities shackled hospitalized Palestinians to their hospital beds after they went on long-term hunger strikes to protest their administrative detention.”

Last year, Amnesty International has condemned “what it called a ‘clear pattern’ of… summary killings… as the number of Palestinians killed by Israeli forces this month [October 2015] rose to at least 61. )

Ukraine: “Activists were beaten, kidnapped and tortured.”

Zimbabwe: “marked escalation in human rights violations and violence directed at the political opposition, a stolen election, the denial of a peaceful democratic transition and a worsening humanitarian situation.”

Other reasons for which Canada has sanctioned countries include:

– “political crisis and conflict” (Yemen, Somalia);

– “violations of ceasefire and hostilities” (Ivory Coast, Democratic Republic of the Congo);

– “misappropriated state funds” (Egypt, Tunisia);

– “heavy loss of human life and widespread material damage resulting from a conflict” (Eritrea, Somalia);

– “nuclear program” (Sanctions on Iran, which has a nonexistent nuclear program, but none on Israel, which is known to possess between 200 and 400 nuclear warheads.)

– “invasion” (Sanctions on Iraq for the invasion of Kuwait… but no sanctions for the U.S. which has illegally invaded Iraq, among other countries, and of course, no sanctions on Israel for decades of occupation);

– “continued escalation of hostilities” (Lebanon)

– “support for the Revolutionary United Front in Sierra Leone” (Liberia)

– “violation of the constitution and international law” (Ukraine).

– “conducting a test of a nuclear weapon” (North Korea)

– “acts of violence and the increase in acts of piracy and armed robbery at sea against vessels” (Somalia)

– “engaging in violent conflict, much of it along ethnic lines” (South Sudan)

As you probably noticed, none of these countries has been accused of war crimes or crimes against humanity.

Canada imposes sanctions on countries for misappropriated state funds, but regards war criminal state Israel as a “friend” which deserves that it condemns its own citizens for protesting against its supreme crime.

Parliamentarians need to explain this nonsense.

As a member of the United Nations, Canada should, as stated in the U.N. Preamble, “reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and… establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained.”

By voting in favour of this motion, Canadian Parliamentarians have failed to honor their obligations.Miserably.

—–

The original source of this article is Global Research

Copyright © Julie Lévesque, Global Research, 2016

TO FIND OUT HOW YOUR MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT VOTED PLEASE GO TO THIS LINK

Canadian Roundtable – The Trial of Arthur Topham & The Jewish Lobby in Canada by Red Ice Radio

http://www.redicecreations.com/radio/2016/02/RIR-160210.php

CanRound Final

 

911, TPP & THE NDP: OPEN LETTER TO TOM MULCAIR – LEADER By Monika Schaefer

HDR4MS1000

911, TPP & THE NDP: OPEN LETTER TO TOM MULCAIR – LEADER

By Monika Schaefer

MONIKA300 copy

“911 is the litmus test… You cannot plead ignorance, almost 15 years later, as a politician. “

~ Monika Schaefer

Dear Tom Mulcair,

It is right and good that you are opposing the TPP. I agree, it is a terribly undemocratic, secretive, and harmful so-called trade deal and it seems insane that any government serving its own people would sign on.

Here is the key – who is really in charge, and to whom do our MPs have allegiance?

I have learned that all of the MPs in the government of Canada serve an alien power. How do I know that? None of you are willing to talk about what really happened on 9/11 and who really did it. It is practically common knowledge now that the official story is patently false, and yet, none of our representatives will address this false flag, the seminal event which triggered the “War on Terror”. This proves to me that the perpetrators of 9/11 carry the power, and our MPs are merely their puppets.

 NDPBldg7?

There have been many false flag events since 9/11, and the frequency of these provocative deceptions is increasing. I realize it is not a good career move to talk about 9/11, but when we are on the brink of World War 3, how can you, in good conscience, still be complicit by maintaining your silence on the seminal event of our century?

9/11 is the litmus test. History will judge us by how we responded when we learned that 9/11 was not what it was made out to be. You cannot plead ignorance, almost 15 years later, as a politician.

The same Zionist cabal that brought us 9/11 are bringing us the TPP. This is the New World Order, and we the people are not interested in this One World Government which seeks to enslave us.

It is time to stop this insanity!

Sincerely,

Monika Schaefer
Jasper, Alberta

——————

To: monika_schaefer@hotmail.com
Subject: Liberals sign job-killing TPP
From: thomas.mulcair@parl.gc.ca
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016
While the Trudeau government has gone ahead and signed the controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal, there remains many uncertainties about what’s in store for Canada.
 
The Harper government first negotiated this deal in secret. Now we have the Liberals agreeing to a deal that can’t be renegotiated! Any concerns or changes raised in futureconsultations won’t matter.
 
We do know that the TPP will:
 
– put thousands of good paying jobs at risk
– add hundreds of millions of dollars to already soaring drug costs in Canada
– handcuff Canadian innovators and creators by giving the United States the upper hand on intellectual property
– weaken family farms
– accelerate foreign control of our businesses
– hamper Canada’s ability to legislate in the public interest due to Investor-State Dispute Settlement mechanisms
 
New Democrats will not stand still while the Trudeau government fast-tracks massive changes leading to pink slips for our workers. Please join us in stopping the TPP:http://www.ndp.ca/tpp 
 
Let’s work together to protect our shared interests and values.
 
All the best,
 
 
Tom Mulcair
Leader, Canada’s New Democrats
——- 

PLEASE DONATE TO THE RADICALPRESS.COM LEGAL DEFENCE FUND

NewRPFundingAd

Donations can be made online via my GoGetFunding site located at http://gogetfunding.com/canadian-publisher-faces-jail-for-political-writings/ or else by sending cash, cheques or Money Orders to the following postal address. Please make sure that any cheques or Money Orders are made out to – Arthur Topham – and sent to:

Arthur Topham
4633 Barkerville Highway
Quesnel, B.C.
V2J 6T8
THANK YOU!

Today’s Free Speech Rant: Advocating for Brad Love and Arthur Topham by Alberta Al

ALBERTAALNEWHDR copy 3

Today’s Free Speech Rant: Advocating for Brad Love and Arthur Topham

by Alberta Al

ATEditorPic185 copy

Editor’s Note: The following rant by 79 year old Alberta Al is in response to an article by Paul Fromm on political prisoner Brad Love who has been in and out of jail here in Canada for the past 14 years for the horrendous crime of . . . . writing non-theatening letters of criticism to politicians and bureaucrats on controversial topics! Freedom of expression for Love has turned into hatred by the alien forces of repressive censorship who now rule the Canadian state. Alberta Al’s remarks are poignant and worthy of serious consideration.

________

If thousands of us across this once great nation were to publish CRITICAL comments about Zionist Israeli policies and programs and deny that the holocaust occurred, and those comments were applied to all Jewish lobby groups in Canada; and if all of us were charged under section 319(2) of the CRIMINAL CODE; and if ALL of us pled GUILTY to the charges there would NOT be enough rooms in our jails and loonie bins to house us all.  So what would the Crown do with us?  If I were charged and pled guilty I wouldn’t mind the comfort of a private cell where I receive 3 meals a day without having to prepare one morsel, free medical and dental care, free library facilities, free TV and internet and (because some perverts have taken advantage of it) a free make-over making one a woman from a man.

True red-blooded Canadians who have any substance to them have slid into almost nothingness along with the rest of our complacent, uncaring and unfriendly society.  We have lost our ability to communicate with each other orally to debate issues or express our opinions without fear of retribution.  Instead, we have become robotically engineered by those IN POWER to dance tunes on our bee-bop-a lulus, our gadgets and devices, from which we can HIDE and call anyone any blasphemous name or expletive they can think of.  Just look at the comments after particular articles and you will see what I mean.  You will also notice that by and large the commentators don’t know the English language which proves to me that FUNCTIONAL ILLITERACY is alive and well in Canada even though we spend BILLIONS on trying to educate our children to………THINK ANALYTICALLY!

In the last 40 odd years our politicians have learned very well NOT to communicate with us peons, not to be accountable and transparent to us.  They sit back in their GD comfortable office pews with their feet on their desks and fall asleep while the ship of state is floundering.  Governments of all stripes have learned that the best way to be reelected is to GIVE money to every Tom, Dick and Mary and corporation and increase the public debt…………………seemingly without batting an eye!  What do they care?  It’s not their money?  And anyway they get 1/3 of their salaries TAX FREE!  When was the last time YOU got tax-free wages or salaries?

One cannot advocate for Brad Love – and Arthur Topham – strong enough.  Our rights to FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND OF THE PRESS guaranteed under the CHARTER are being washed away by the shifting, whispering sands.  We no long respect and love each other because it is much easier to………………………….HATE!  We have become cowering cowards, afraid of our own shadows, afraid to speak out except when we hold a gun to someone’s head!  Amen and hallelujah!  Al has completed his rant for the day.

Contact Alberta Al: Al Romanchuk romanesq@shaw.ca

OCLA Intervenes in R v. Topham Constitutional Challenge to Sec. 319(2) of Criminal Code of Canada

RPEdNew400-copy-3

Editor’s Note: It’s with a continuing sense of gratification and appreciation that I post the following letter by the Ontario Civil Liberties Association (OCLA) sent out today, January 13th, 2016 in support of my Constitutional challenge to Sec. 319(2) of Canada’s Criminal Code

The OCLA has been the only civil liberties association at the forefront in Canada in their determined efforts to bring a sense of clarity, fairness, honesty and responsibility to the nation’s legal jurisprudence insofar as it applies to Charter issues and in particular the fundamental issue of freedom of expression as guaranteed under Sec. 2b of said Charter.

All their efforts toward ridding this nation of these draconian, anti-democratic “hate crime” laws that only serve vested interests and serve to silence the vast majority of decent, thoughtful citizens are extremely important and should be supported. 
 
There are very strong arguments for defeating this legislation and I would hope to see similar actions by the Canadian Civil Liberties Association and the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association and every other civil minded organization in Canada that has the nation’s best interests at heart. Now that we have a new and more liberal government in power the opportunity is there for our leaders to do what the previous governments never had the integrity to do – given the people their voice back!

Please try to share this post with as many others as you can.

Sincerely,

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

Screen Shot 2016-01-13 at 1.08.46 PM

Screen Shot 2016-01-13 at 1.20.02 PM

January 13, 2016                                                                                                    By Mail and Fax

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 Freedom, 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.

–––––––––––––––––––
[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.

 

2/

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. 31 9(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

––––––––––––––––––––
[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).

3/

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.

lf 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,

Screen Shot 2016-01-13 at 3.54.11 PM
Joseph Hickey
Executive Director
Ontario Civil Liberties Association (OCLA) http://ocla.ca
613-252-6148 (c)
joseph.hickey@ocla.ca

To:

The Honourable Mr. Justice Butler
Judge’s Chambers
Supreme Court of British Columbia
800 Smithe Street
Vancouver, BC
V6Z 2E1
Fax: 604-660-2418

And copy to:

The Honourable Mr. Justice Butler
Judge’s Chambers
Supreme Court of British Columbia
305-350 Barlow Avenue
Quesnel, BC
V2J 2C1
Fax: 250-992-4171
––––––––––––––––––

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 (CanLll); and see Committee for the Commonwealth of Canada v. Canada, [1991] 1 SCR 139, 1991 CanLll 119 (SCC), p. 210 (i).

 

4/

And to:

Barclay W. Johnson
Barrister, Solicitor & Notary
Counsel for the Defendant
1027 Pandora Avenue,
Victoria, BC
Fax: 250-413-3110

Rodney G. Garson
Prosecution Support Unit
Crown Law Division
Ministry of Justice
3rd Floor – 940 Blanshard Street
Victoria, BC
Fax: 250-387-4262

The Honourable Suzanne Anton
Attorney General of BC
JAG.Minister@gov.bc.ca
suzanne.anton.MLA@leg.bc.ca

The Honourable Jody Wilson-Raybould
Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
mcu@justice.gc.ca
Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.ca

——–

VIEW SOURCE PDF HERE: 2016-01-13-Letter-OCLA-re-R-v-Topham

Kenneth L. Marcus: King Canard and the Lie of Anti-Semitism By Arthur Topham

MarcusKingCanardHdr

Kenneth L. Marcus: King Canard and the Lie of Anti-Semitism

A response to the Marcus Interview in the Canadian Jewish News

By

Arthur Topham

UPDATE: DEC. 23/15

Editor’s Note: In the interest of dialogue I posted the following comment on the Canadian Jewish News website where Kenneth L. Marcus’s interview was published. When I clicked “send” the following window appeared:

CJNHoldOn!

Four hours later when I checked to see if my comment had appeared on the site I found this:

CJCRemoved

So I suppose it proves the point that I’ve been trying to make when it comes to dialoguing with the Zionist Jews:

FBHeaderNew copy

A dear friend recently alerted me to a Jonathan Dick email interview in the Canadian Jewish News with Kenneth L. Marcus, self-chosen founder, president and legal beagle for his Zionist propaganda organization titled the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law. The reason for doing so was because Marcus had mentioned my trial here in Canada in response to a question from Dick regarding whether he could provide readers with any specific examples of anti-Semitism “in a Canadian context”.

Marcus’s interview was mainly focused on the Zionist’s ongoing attempts at equating “anti-Semitism” with criticism of Israel and its Zionist ideology within the context of what the Zionists perceive as a growing resurgence of “anti-Semitism” on U.S. campuses. My response is as follows:

In his interview with the Canadian Jewish News Kenneth L. Marcus tells us that he “sadly discovered that anti-Semitism was surging on university campuses” but of course fails to address the reasons why he perceives such a phenomenon occurring today.

In response to the question, “How do you feel about the EU’s recent ruling in the labelling of products originating from Israeli settlements? Could this type of legislation bolster anti-Semitism globally?” Marcus replies that “The European Union’s labelling policy is classically discriminatory in that it subjects products produced in Jewish-owned businesses to adverse treatment. It is no mere response to occupation.” and then goes on to state that “Other countries are engaged in occupations, but Europe does not treat them in this way.” This of course is pure, outright hypocrisy and bigotry veiled behind a lame, undocumented accusation that other nations are doing it so why can’t Israel.

Marcus then attempts to suggest that the reason for Israel being singled out is simply because it is a “Jewish state” as if that, in itself, was something warranting a positive response. Merely making such a confession is proof enough that Israel is a RACIST, Jews-only state that treats its own non-Jewish, Arab and Christian citizens as second class, thus refusing them equality under state laws.

To then further his sophistry Marcus has the unmitigated gall to state that “The EU’s actions make sense only as an example of anti-Jewish hate. The EU may protest that they are not anti-Semitic. But their actions speak for themselves.”

It didn’t take Marcus too long to get to the “hate” factor which is the essence of his groundless accusations against the EU, “hate” of course being the semantic oil that the Zionist Jew applies liberally to every aspect of Jewish misfeasance and crime against humanity in order to make their “anti-Semitism” canard run smoothly throughout their global network of lies, deception, and brainwashing.

Marcus adds, “Whether consciously or unconsciously, Europe’s leaders are treating Israel as the collective Jew, assailing its legitimacy in the same way that their ancestors challenged the legitimacy of the Jewish people.” It begs the question as to whether or not Marcus actually expects readers to fall for such simplistic, transparent jingoism given that during the last genocide of the Palestinian people of Gaza by the Israeli state the Israeli people were 95% in favour of the wanton bombing and killing of thousands of innocent men, women and children. No Marcus you’re wrong. Israel IS the collective Jew in that its Jewish population, as a collective, whole-heartedly endorses mass genocide of innocent Palestinian citizens and the theft of their legitimate territory and it therefore begs the question as to why it’s that difficult for Marcus to understand such a simple and truthful concept?

Then, to add further injury to his already pretentious, self-righteous accusations, Marcus has the chutzpah to reference the charlatan of all modern-day charlatans, Elie Wiesel and allude to his fictional, propagandist novel, Night, as a “classic”. Yes, Kenneth it truly is a classic alright; a classic example of pure, fictional lies and hate propaganda designed to promote endless Germanophobia and prop up the Zionist 6 Million “holocaust” lie that the Jew media has been inculcating into gentile minds since the end of WW II. It’s lies and bigotry are only surpassed by that other hideous “classic” Jewish “hate” novel, Germany Must Perish! penned by the American Jewish writer Theodore N. Kaufman back in 1941.

Of closer note though are references to your traitorous Canadian Jew associates/advisers like Irwin Cotler who has been working tirelessly for decades to undermine Canada’s Constitution and Charter of Rights and Freedoms by conspiring with like-minded dual-citizen Israeli/Canadian Jews and gentile sycophants to promote his brain-scheme the “Ottawa Protocols” along with infesting Canada’s judicial system with Talmudic-driven “Hate Propaganda” legislation such as Sec. 319(2) under which I was recently falsely accused, tried and (thus far) found guilty on one count out of two of “promoting hatred” toward “people of the Jewish religion or ethnic origin”.

Your remark that, “Part of the problem is that anti-Semitism is not widely enough understood.” is a classic statement in itself Kenneth. Most intelligent observers of the actions of the state of Israel are quite aware of the discrepancies that exist within that government’s policies toward non-Jews, be they the second-class citizens within Israel or the Arab people of Palestine, and it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that Israel’s actions are legally and morally reprehensible and most worthy of condemnation by any normal, civilized nation or individual. No, Kenneth, we don’t need any more “education” from the Zionists about what Jewish hatred toward non-Jews is all about. We see it enacted daily around the world in both the open and hidden actions of the Zionists everywhere. The only “problem” is you and your ilk who cannot seem to grasp the obvious truth that it’s your actions against others that call forth the indignation and displeasure of decent people around the world; healthy, natural reactions which you refuse to acknowledge because of your own grotesquely perverse mindset that sees any attempt to dissuade you from your killing and destructive behaviour as merely “anti-Semitism”.

As for young people today on campuses reacting with horror and revulsion upon witnessing the actions of Israel against the defenceless Palestinian people of Gaza and the West Bank this is no different than the reactions of young people on campuses back in the 1960s when the Viet Nam war was being enacted before the world. Judging from your age you were likely still in diapers at the time or else unborn but I clearly recall the temper of those times. The only difference now is that it’s not the US military doing the slaughtering but the IDF and so for students to be able to recognize who the guilty culprits are is as simple as going online and watching the devastation. But not only have you got this wrong Kenneth you’re also out to lunch as well in stating that “North American campuses often harbour radical left-wing movements that are hostile to Israel, Zionism, and the Jewish people.” If you knew your “left-wingers” you’d know that most of them support the actions of Israel for the “left” is but another category of the Zionist conspiracy. It’s the truth-revealers and those on the right who condemn Israel’s heinous actions not the “left”.

Your attempt to lay blame on the German people (again) for being the original instigators of boycotts like the BDS movement is another futile gesture which others have exposed in the comments section below your CJN article. Again, it all boils down to your refusal to look into the mirror and see yourself for what you are – a pretentious fool so entangled in your own convoluted, Talmudic “logic” and sophistry that you cannot extricate yourself from an identity that’s leading you and your Zionist cohorts to the edge of that same self-created abyss you’ve always arrived at throughout history.

Your advice to college students again illustrates the degree to which you misinterpret what’s happening to Jewish people everywhere due to the actions of the Zionist element which is apparently now beyond redemption. To suggest that people should “maintain the moral high ground” and not “use the vicious tactics of Jewry’s enemies” has got to be another gross example of Zion’s fatuous, deluded mentality given the incredibly immoral actions on the part of the state of Israel which you are attempting to legitimize in your interview. The same goes for your advice to “Stay safe”, “Stand tall”, “Organize”, “Collaborate”, “Educate”, “Cooperate”, “Laugh” and “Fight”. These are actions for individuals who are ethical and moral beings; people who understand what truth and freedom and justice mean. It’s obvious from the stance that you take in this interview that none of those qualities could ever apply to people who condone what the state of Israel is doing to the Palestinian people and others around the world.

In a further question form Dick “Could you provide specific examples of recent anti-Semitism in a Canadian context?” you replied, “More recently, one thinks about the trial of Arthur Topham [emphasis added. A.T.]”

It’s good that you should think about the trial of Arthur Topham Kenneth Marcus. You and all the rest of the Zionist Jews across Canada, the USA, the EU and elsewhere in the world. That trial is far from over and there will be additional lessons to be learned by studying its unfoldment. It’s not, as you would suggest, a case involving “anti-Semitism” but rather a case revealing to the world the TRUTH about the extent of Zionist Jew collusion and conspiracy, not only in Canada, but in every democratic nation around the planet. It’s a case of wilful collusion designed to destroy the civil and legal rights of individuals and prevent people from expressing on the internet their opinions and thoughts on political matters relevant to their own lives, the lives of their families and friends and their respective nations. What’s really on trial in the Arthur Topham case Kenneth is whether Truth or Deception will reign supreme in the future of free and democratic countries around the world. Your “anti-Semitism” canard is but an old, worn-out, transparently duplicitous epithet whose time is long past and will never serve to cover up the crimes of the Zionists as it once did when you controlled all the major media sources.

Dick’s final question to Marcus: “Where do you see Israel in ten years? Where do you see the state of global anti-Semitism/anti-Zionism in ten years?”

Your final comment Kenneth that the future of Israel and of the Jewish people is “in our hands” couldn’t be closer to the truth although you obviously cannot envision what that truth is or how it might unfold for the “Jewish people”.

The “truth” is unfolding before your eyes and before the eyes of all Zionists today, be they Jewish or gentile, yet you are unable to recognize it for what it is because of your own lack of prejudicial understanding and the age-old handicap known as the Talmudic mindset that has formed the foundational basis of your religious/political ideology over the past two thousand years.

Seeing as how Christmas and Hannukah are currently underway it might be a fitting time to draw some analogies from these two historic events.

Just as Jesus Christ attempted to convince the Jewish Pharisees and Sanhedrin of old that their stifling, dead letter approach to divine Law was no longer relevant in a world evolving toward love, peace, universal brotherhood and freedom of the individual, so too now, as the world at large is attempting to tell you once again that your actions and Israel’s actions are no longer acceptable to the freedom-loving people of the world today, you are still doing your utmost to deny what’s happening and resorting to the only escape you feel is available which is to delude yourselves and others into thinking that the truth-revealers who are trying to help you avoid the ultimate pitfall actually “hate” you and wish to do you wrong. Nothing could be further from the truth Kenneth.

Your Pharisaic, Talmudic legacy was responsible for the murdering of the prophets of old in a vain attempt to co-opt the divinity of the heavenly Father and claim Providence as your own but that time has now passed away. As things stand today it’s inconceivable that Israel will still exist as a nation in ten years if it doesn’t break free from its Pharisiac-imposed, ghetto consciousness (psychosis) wherein it sees every action designed to enlighten it and bring it back into the family of man as mere “anti-Semitism”. The global truth movement Kenneth will not be stopped. It’s unstoppable as the rising sun is unstoppable. The Zionist’s licence to indiscriminately kill has been revoked. The light of truth is increasing at an exponential rate and cannot be resisted without having major detrimental effects upon those who fight against it. You do have the power to change Kenneth but that power will only come from recognizing the error of your ways and returning to a path of peace and love for all of humanity not just your own tribe. Only then will you and the rest of humanity achieve what you term “justice for all”.

Open Letter from Dr. James Sears: Financial support for Arthur Topham’s legal battle for Freedom of Speech in Canada

Open Letter from Dr. James Sears: Financial support for Arthur Topham’s legal battle for Freedom of Speech in Canada

Dec. 10th, 2015

Dr. James SearsPic

Dec. 10/15

Arthur:

Firstly, thank you for having the courage to stand up to the powerful ZioMarxist lobby.  If you ever lose faith in your ultimate victory, please keep in mind that Jesus survived it, and so will you!  Secondly, thank you for publishing my satirical story on your court case.  I will be writing more stories on your saga very soon.

I am writing you today because I understand from a mutual acquaintance that you are about to incur substantial legal costs, including over $4,000 to order trial transcripts, and that these costs may be prohibitive, potentially jeopardizing your appeal.  I love Canada, so I refuse to allow ZioFascists to take down a good man, because for all I know, any one of us could be next!

Therefore, I have email transferred you a token $5,000 to relieve some of your immediate financial stress.  I have set aside a substantial sum of money that you may tap into at any time, with just one call or email to me.  However, further donations are contingent upon the freedom-loving, patriotic internet community matching my initial donation. In other words, as I give you each tranche of money, I expect the community to match what I have given you before my next tranche comes in. In essence, I will pre-match every dollar you collect.

All I ask in return is that you fight these parasites to the bitter end.  Do not give up until you have achieved victory or you have taken your dying breath.

EXPEL THE PARASITE!

Dr. James Sears
Founder and Leader
New Constitution Party of Canada

 

 

Report on first week of Supreme Court Trial R v Roy Arthur Topham by Arthur Topham

Screen Shot 2015-11-01 at 12.18.21 PM

ATEditorPic185

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[EDITOR’S NOTE: Please feel free to use whatever information is contained in this Report in order to spread the word further afield. Now that the first week of the trial has ended and there’s been no mention of it in Canada’s mainstream media, other than the local Quesnel Cariboo Observer, I believe it’s fair to assume that the mainstream news outlets in this country have collectively decided to censor the case in order that the Canadian public remains unaware of the importance of what’s occurring in British Columbia.

Given the importance of this trial to every citizen of the nation who values their constitutional right to freedom of expression and also considering the wide-spread media coverage over the years leading up to the final repeal of the Sec. 13(1) legislation as contained in the Canadian Human Rights Act in June of 2012, it’s highly unlikely that the msm is unaware of the fact that this trial is happening.

It’s therefore up to the alternative news media to do its best to cover this important historic event in Canadian jurisprudence and bring it to the attention of internet readers.

Because of the nature of the case and for obvious reasons of strategy I’ve kept the details of the proceedings to a bare minimum. Rest assured though that at the trial’s end which could be at the end of the coming week (November 6th) a more thorough analysis of the trial will be forthcoming.

Thank you.]

——–

 

To Alternative Media Sources 

Report on first week of 

Supreme Court Trial R v Roy Arthur Topham 

 by 

Arthur Topham

The Supreme Court “Hate Speech” trial of Arthur Topham and his website RadicalPress.com concluded its first week of deliberations on Friday, October 30th, 2015 in the small, central interior city of Quesnel, British Columbia.

Having elected to be tried by a jury of his peers rather than gamble on the Attorney General’s office selecting a potentially biased justice to oversee the proceedings and decide his fate the first order of business was to select twelve individuals from around the local community to sit on the jury. This process of selection meant that well over a hundred individuals were called to appear at the provincial government office on the morning of Monday, October 26th.

As well, and contrary to its normal behaviour over the past three and a half years, it was also at this time that Crown decided to initiate a rather Orwellian practise of setting up a RCMP screening process within the building which required every individual entering to have to go through a security check prior to gaining access to the courts. This entailed the removal of all of one’s personal possessions such as wallets, purses, cell phones, etc from their pockets and placing them in little plastic baskets and then walking through a scanner and having an RCMP officer go over your whole body with a hand-held wand to determine whether you might have a concealed weapon or possibly explosives(?) strapped to your body with the intent of committing an act of “terrorism”. Given the undue inconvenience of this intimidating process one can only imagine that it may have been designed by Crown to discourage the local citizenry from attending the trial and observing its proceedings.

Len Rudner copy

In addition, considering the fact that Crown’s star Expert witness was Len Rudner, former Director of the Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC), it was highly likely that the additional security measures were part of the conditions upon which Mr. Rudner consented to appear. This was further corroborated by the fact that while Mr. Rudner was in attendance he was constantly accompanied by a police bodyguard.

Meanwhile the crowd of potential jurors were forced to line up outside and wait in the snow and sleet as each one of them went through the onerous security process.

The Show Begins

Crown’s first witness was now retired Det. Cst. Terry Wilson who, at the time of my arrest and incarceration on May 16th, 2012, was the lead investigator for the BC Hate Crime Unit located in Surrey, B.C., a suburb of Vancouver. Wilson, along with his partner Cst. Normandie Levas and a team of other police officers, had, after investigating complaints from two individuals back in 2011 that I and my website RadicalPress.com were contravening Sec. 319(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada by “communicating statements, other than in private conversation, willfully promote hatred against an identifiable group, people of the Jewish religion or ethnic origin” decided to charge and arrest me for the promotion of “hate propaganda”.

Wilson&LevasPhoto copy 4

The focus of Crown’s evidence consisted of four large binders of which Binder #1 and #2 composed the complete texts of the following online books which are posted on RadicalPress.com:

1. Germany Must Perish! by Theodore N. Kaufmann

2. Israel Must Perish! (erroneously labeled by Wilson and Crown as a “book” rather than a satirical article)

3. The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion

4. The Biological Jew by Eustice Mullins

5. The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today by Elizabeth Dilling

Binder #2 was the complete text of Douglas Reed’s masterful historic analysis of political Zionism The Controversy of Zion.

The remaining two binders contained numerous posts and Editorial comments by Topham. The majority of material being that produced by authors other than the accused.

It wasn’t until the end of Wednesday, October 28th that Crown completed her testimony from former Det. Cst. Terry Wilson. The following morning, Thursday, October 29th at 10:26 a.m. Arthur Topham’s Defence Counsel, Barclay Johnson had the opportunity to cross-examine Wilson on his three day of testimony.

Court adjourned at 4:05 p.m. and Mr. Topham, his Attorney Barclay Johnson and a number of supporters, including Mr. Topham’s wife proceeded across the street from the Courthouse to the Billy Barker Hotel where all of the out-of-town visitors were staying to await the arrival of Topham’s Expert Witness Mr. Gilad Atzmon, who was due to arrive at the Quesnel airport at 4:00 p.m. that same day.

TophamLegalTeam

Mr. Atzmon is an Israeli-born writer, musician, and political commentator who has written extensively about global politics, and specifically the geopolitical role of the State of Israel. Atzmon is critical of the Israeli government and its approach to other countries in the Middle East. He moved to England in 1994 and became a British citizen in 2002.

AtzBkCov

Day five of the trial began Friday, October 30th, 2015. Crown’s Expert Witness Mr. Len Rudner testified throughout the whole of the day. Cross examination of Mr. Rudner will begin Monday, November 2nd.

•••0•••

Please help out with my upcoming Sec. 319(2) “Hate Propaganda” trial that commences in one week on October 26th by making a donation.

Donations can be made online via my GoGetFunding site located at http://gogetfunding.com/canadian-publisher-faces-jail-for-political-writings/ or else by sending cash, cheques or Money Orders to the following postal address.

Please make sure that any cheques or Money Orders are made out to – Arthur Topham – and sent to:

Arthur Topham
4633 Barkerville Highway
Quesnel, B.C.
V2J 6T8

Canada’s Illegal Government by Jeff Nielson (Bullion Bulls Canada)

http://www.abeldanger.net/2015/10/canadas-national-emergency-harper.html#more

Screen Shot 2015-10-11 at 1.00.15 PM

ConserHarperTraitorHdr

Canada’s Illegal Government

Published: 30 January 2015

by Jeff Nielson (Bullion Bulls Canada)

 

On December 4th, 2008, Canada ceased to have a legal, legitimate government. It was on that date that Stephen Harper (and his Conservative regime) demanded that Parliament be illegally suspended, on the (supposed) grounds of a “national emergency”. And on that date, Canada’s Governor General, Michaëlle Jean, rubber-stamped Harper’s demand.

What was the basis of the so-called “national emergency” which prompted Harper’s illegal act? Canada’s opposition parties had publicly stated their intention to hold a Parliamentary vote, for the purpose of voting Harper’s corrupt, minority government out of office. While undoubtedly the prospect of being thrown out on his ass was a personal “emergency” for Stephen Harper, there is no possible way in which any rational human being could consider a Parliamentary vote to be “a national emergency”.

There can be no equivocation here. Harper’s demand to illegally suspend Parliament (and thus illegally usurp political power) was an act of treason. Michaëlle Jean’s choice to rubber-stamp that demand was also an act of treason. While the position of Governor General is largely ceremonial, she had one duty/responsibility to uphold: ensuring that any/all procedural acts in which she participated were legal and constitutional.

No mentally competent adult could have construed Harper’s illegal demand to be a legitimate basis for suspending Parliament. Her decision to rubber-stamp Harper’s demand made her a simple, criminal accomplice to Harper’s overt act of treason.

Arguably, however, these original acts of treason were not the greatest outrages which occurred at that time. The greatest outrages came immediately afterward. Canada’s corrupt Corporate media began a massive campaign to brainwash the Canadian people.

These liars described the intention of Canada’s opposition parties to vote the Harper government out of power as “undemocratic”. Again, there can be no equivocation. Voting is THE fundamental act of democracy. Voting is as essential an act for democracy as breathing is for all mammals.

It is impossible for any mentally competent adult to believe voting to be “undemocratic”. While mere lying is not/cannot be the basis for a charge of treason, it was the weeks of saturation-lying by the Corporate media which successfully cemented Harper’s original act of treason. They were accomplices in fact, if not in law.

But there was even a greater outrage involved here. The pathetic drones masquerading as the “citizens” of Canada passively accepted those lies, with nary a whimper. In doing so, the residents of Canada conclusively demonstrated that they were no longer citizens at all, but merely serfs.

Being a citizen does not merely confer privileges; it carries responsibilities. While one could construct a fairly lengthy list of such responsibilities, paramount on any such list would be the duty of vigilance. When the government of a nation ceases to be legitimate (because of its own treasonous act) and refuses to surrender power, what then?

It is then the duty of all citizens to demonstrate the Power of the People. It begins with public protest. Prying their eyes away from their computer monitors/TV screens, lifting themselves off of their (comfortable) couches – and getting out into the streets. Public protest is the greatest fear of all criminals/tyrants, because (if maintained) it cannot be ignored by any sitting government, nor can it be covered up by any lying, complicit media.

However, there is one duty of being a citizen which is even more fundamental than the duty of vigilance (and protest). Citizens have a duty to think. It is the serf (and only the serf) who passively does whatever he/she is told to do, without thinking. The “citizen” who refuses to use his brain is no longer a citizen.

It is because of this series of outrages that Canada continues to be governed by a totally illegal/illegitimate regime. But wait, shout Harper’s apologists. On May 2, 2011, Harper’s Conservatives “won” a majority in that election, and so now it is a “legitimate” government.

No, it is not.

Apart from the fact that Harper’s previous act of treason personally disqualifies him from any public office (let alone the Prime Minister’s chair), no subsequent election can/could legitimize this illegal regime. The reasoning here is legally and logically irrefutable.

Because of Harper’s prior act of treason, the Conservatives entered that election as the illegal incumbent. Political incumbents win roughly 2/3rds of all elections. Thus, Harper’s original act of treason literally doubled his chance of winning the election, and therefore “winning” an election via this large, illegal advantage de-legitimized this Conservative regime – in perpetuity.

As the illegal incumbent, no subsequent election can/could ever remove the stain of Harper’s previous act of treason, and thus transform an illegal government into a legal government. The only way, in theory, that the Conservative Party could ever form a legitimate/legal government is by first surrendering the political power which they have illegally usurped, and then getting elected as a non-incumbent (i.e. as an opposition party).

Unless/until that happens, the government of Canada – this traitorous Conservative regime – will remain an illegal government. However, there is still one more essential piece to this narrative, which not only fully explains how and why the opposition parties were going to vote the Conservatives out of office; it fully defines Stephen Harper as the Canadian traitor that he is.

It is no secret that there is little goodwill between Canada’s opposition parties. Indeed, it was/is their disunity which allowed Harper’s illegal government to achieve its “majority” in the last election, despite only having the support of 4 out of 10 Canadians. So what united these squabbling politicians to the point where they intended to form an official coalition?

Stephen Harper (while still running a minority government) arrogantly attempted to ram through what he called “electoral reform”. What Harper was really doing was attempting to end all public financing for elections. While the Canadian people (i.e. 30+ million serfs) totally failed to grasp the significance of this monstrous (and traitorous) act, the politicians in Canada’s opposition parties immediately understood Harper’s plan.

With no more public financing for elections, this would allow Canada’s largest Corporations (and the ultra-wealthy people who own these Corporations) to simply buy the government of their choice, through drowning out any and all other candidates with their ability to finance unlimited/infinite “campaign advertising” (i.e. propaganda). Obviously, if the Corporate media can (and did) convince Canada’s serf-population that voting is “undemocratic”, that same propaganda machine can get these same serfs to vote for whoever they are told to vote for.

Which party do all of Canada’s large corporations (and the Corporate media) support, with unswerving loyalty? Harper’s corrupt Conservatives. The “electoral reform” which Harper tried to implement would have (effectively) permanently ended Canada’s democracy and guaranteed corrupt Conservative rule, forever.

More than any other act, this defines Stephen Harper as the irredeemable traitor that he is. Of course, any Canadians who have actually been paying attention during Harper’s reign of error would also be aware of several other treasonous acts:
1) Along with his hand-picked stooge Mark Carney, Harper has deliberately destroyed the value of the Canadian dollar. Put another way, the collapse of the loonie under Stephen Harper is roughly equal to the current collapse of the Russian ruble – which the entire world refers to as “a currency crisis”.

2) He signed a “military cooperation” deal with the U.S., which surrenders Canada’s sovereignty to the U.S. government. The U.S. military is now legally allowed to enter Canada to conduct military operations (i.e. wage war), without obtaining the consent of Canada’s government.

3) Harper is giving away our most precious natural resource (tar-sands oil) as fast as he can, as cheaply as he can. Canada is currently losing as much as $50 per barrel on every barrel of tar-sands oil it “sells” to the U.S.
Those are only Harper’s most obvious treasonous acts. He has also totally undermined the Canadian financial system, destroyed Canada’s trade surplus, destroyed Canada’s budget surplus, deliberately duplicated the U.S.’s housing bubble in Canada, and entrenched the “bail-in” (simple, naked stealing by the Big Banks) into our political/legal system.

Not only does Canada have an illegal government, it has a traitorous government intent on destroying Canada. Stephen Harper does not serve the Canadian people. Stephen Harper has never served the Canadian people. He has only one Master, and his name is “Uncle Sam”.

—–

Stephen Harper Is Dismantling Canadian Sovereignty for Globalism!

Draft Constitution of the Canadian People’s Party

Canadian Action Party

Canadian Council of Chief Executives (CCCE) [globalist corporate scum]

Oh Canada Movie – Private Banks Versus National Bank Money Creation – What Is Money? – Compound Interest = Exponential Legalized Theft

Canadians sued the Bank of Canada and won

Harper Zionists seek to boost Canada thought crime law

Stephen “Errand Boy” Harper and the Zionist Regime in Ottawa’s Bill C-51 – CSIS Working Covertly With ISIS™ – Al-Qaeda™ Franchises Supported With NATO and Israeli Airstrikes – The Gambit Has Collapsed, Their Hand Is Exposed: Western “Intelligence” Agencies (Rackets) Can’t Maintain the Bogus Narrative – Using False Flags to Hoodwink the Public Into Supporting Ludicrous, Lunatic Foreign Policies

Source article: http://bullionbullscanada.com/index.php/commentary/canadian-commentary/26589-canadas-illegal-government

Zionist Jew Lobby B’nai Brith Canada Attacks Buddhist Truth Revealer Brian Ruhe by Arthur Topham

BuddhaAttackHdr copy 2

 

BodhisattvaVow

Zionist Jew Lobby B’nai Brith Canada Attacks Buddhist Truth Revealer Brian Ruhe

by

Arthur Topham

They say that the Devil never rests and in the case of Canada’s rabid Zionist Jew lobby organization B’nai Brith Canada truer words were never spoken.

Not wishing to await the outcome of the upcoming trial of R v Roy Arthur Topham set to commence on October 26th, 2015 –  the result of which will play heavily into whether or not the pro-Israeli, Zionist lobbyist will have been successful in using their Sec. 319(2) “Hate Propaganda” legislation, which they successfully embedded into Canadian jurisprudence in order to censor and suppress any and all legitimate criticism of their nefarious political ideology and their detestable terrorist, racist supremacist actions in Palestine and around the world – the Zionists are continually combing the Internet here in Canada trolling with vehement and fanatical Simon Wiesenthal “Nazi-hunting” fervour for more truth seekers who are courageously revealing the plethora of lies that the Zionist controlled msm has been mind-controlling the masses with for the past century.

There are more victims of Zionist misfeasance in former democratic Canada than the recent case of Buddhist author and teacher Brian Ruhe of Vancouver, B.C., the foremost being that of Vancouver’s Chinese artist and writer Joe Canuck whose two websites www.joecanuck.net and www.joecanuck.wix.com/justiceforchinese were both surreptitiously and summarily silenced and removed from the net by the server www.wix.com without explanation to the owner, but for now I will focus on Ruhe as his woes are well documented.

What is rather unique about this latest provocation by the Zionist Jew control freaks from B’nai Brith Canada is that they usually spend their time and taxpayer’s money attacking Christians who they feel they can accuse of spreading “hate” toward their self-chosen tribe of spiritual delinquents in order to have their victim’s tossed in the slammer for a couple of years and their websites either taken down and/or, as in the recent case of Canada’s coffee and donut franchise Tim Hortons, if nothing else, at least have their sites blocked from access by the general public.

These Talmudic Marxist Bolshevik Communist inspired censors from B’nai Brith Canada are relentless and deeply disturbed individuals – their insecurity and paranoia being paramount and the transparency of their actions blatantly obvious in every act they perform. Rather than openly debating those who criticize aspects of their own ideological foundations and proving them wrong they prefer to use their “power of the purse” and their undue political, legal and media influence to simply vilify and slander their intellectual opponents and in the process do anything they can to discriminate against and harass them and destroy their financial means of survival.

In the case of Vancouver based Buddhist teacher Brian Ruhe, rather than attempt to have him charged with a Sec. 319(2) “Hate Propaganda” Criminal Code of Canada offence, they’ve decided to do everything in their power to both discredit his good name amongst his employers and destroy his livelihood at all costs. This is the first instance that I’ve heard of where they are working their vile black sorcery behind the scenes in order to destroy the reputation and good will of a recognized and practising Buddhist. Once again living proof that their Talmudic mindset has absolutely no regard for any other religions or beliefs besides its own supremacist, racist ideology.

Readers who have been following my own case in the courts over the past 9 years of litigation brought on by this same notorious group of self-deluded sycophants for the state of Israel will know that recently I was interviewed on video by Brian Ruhe while in Vancouver early this year while looking after my dying brother. The purpose of the interview was to assist me in raising awareness about Canada’s disgusting, unjust “Hate Crime” legislation (Sec. 318 to 320 CCC) which the Zionist Jew lobby was directly responsible for creating for their own self-serving purposes as well as helping me to raise funds for my upcoming trial this October.

Meeting Brian for the first time in the flesh it was easily discernible to me that here was another individual who had finally, through his own researching and seeking, come to the full realization that all we had been told and taught about world history over the past century was twisted and warped beyond comprehension by the Zionist Jew media acting in and through all of its shape-shifting aspects, be they academia, Hollywood movies, books, magazines, radio stations, tv news and the Zionist newspaper monopoly.

Brian Ruhe is the author of two well-known and loved books on Buddhism. His first work, Freeing the Buddha, pictured below was published in March of 1998.

FreeingtheBuddha copy

FreeingtheBuddha 1 copy

Brian’s second work, A Short Walk On An Ancient Path, came out in 2010 accompanied, as in his first work, with many positive reviews.

ShortWalkonÅncientPath copy

ShortWalkonÅncientPath 1 copy 6ShortWalkonÅncientPath 1 copy 4

ShortWalkonÅncientPath 1 copy 5

Upon reading the book reviews and accolades it was quite apparent that Brian Ruhe was/is a well loved and respected Buddhist meditation instructor. He had moved to Vancouver back in 1980 from Ontario where he’d studied business and philosophy at Brock University. Following a few years stint as a financial planner Brian’s inner quest for greater spiritual understanding finally moved him to begin his search for a deeper understanding of life. Like many of his generation he was drawn to Buddhism because of its focus upon the mind and the age-old practise of seeking within one’s own being for the truths that the soul eternally strives to attain.

Brian’s path led him to a Tibetan Buddhist centre in Vermont, USA that had been founded by the world reknowned Buddhist teacher Chögyam Trungpa. From there he traveled to Thailand where he continued his spiritual efforts for the next four years and was trained to be a meditation instructor. Brian eventually returned to Canada in order to begin sharing his teachings with others.

It wasn’t coincidental nor did it require any amount of foresight to realize that while in conversation with Brian at his Kitsilano apartment in Vancouver during the course of our interview we openly discussed the prospect that it was merely a matter of time before he would, in all likelihood, like myself, soon show up on B’nai Brith Canada’s radar screen and the attack upon his name and work would commence. In fact, it wasn’t long after doing the video with Brian I learned from him that he was being attacked front, left and center by the Zionist forces embedded throughout our pro-Israel, Jewish-influenced cultural institutions.

Of course, as per usual, it began with a Zionist Jew “Lama” (try wrapping your mind around that one!) by the name of “Tsewang” who phoned Brian at his home and threatened to call B’nai Brith Canada (BBC) and report him. Once he did that B’nai Brith’s Victoria based sayan operative* wrote to the Vancouver Parks Board and had Brian fired from teaching at (four) community centres.

On Sept. 14th Mr. Ruhe did get fired from the Roundhouse Community and Arts Centre. When this despicable act occurred Brian Ruhe phoned the sayan agent in Victoria, B.C. and spoke to him.  The BBC operative told Brian “I don’t think you’re qualified to teach.” He then threatened to contact the Vancouver Police force and register a complaint of harassment against Mr. Ruhe for actually having the chutzpah to call him on the telephone to discuss his rash and hateful behaviour!

Following word of his dismissal Brian also wrote a letter to Craig Giles – President of the Roundhouse Community and Arts Centre stating in part,

“As the president of the association you are in a leadership position in our community and it doesn’t make sense that someone in Victoria should tell you how to do your job. Were you under pressure from any quarters to fire me? Did City Manager Penny Ballem have anything to do with this?

I have taught meditation for 16 years at the Roundhouse since 1999 with over 1000 people taking my classes there in groups from 5 to 25. This has helped a lot of people and I have a good reputation with these students. I’ve always enjoyed working with the staff and have had a very good relationship with them all these years. I have booked Tuesday nights here and now it’s too late to work somewhere else for the fall term.

This is a larger issue of freedom of speech in Canada. I was fired for using my freedom of speech in my YouTube videos where I discuss truth search themes about geopolitical power in the world and 20th century history. I didn’t discuss these views in my meditation classes, I was not accused of doing so and there were no complaints from the students in my classes. I feel that I am showing a high moral standard by speaking out for the benefit of humanity. Our country was founded on the fundamental principle of freedom of speech and our forefathers fought for the freedoms that you and I have today. You are in a leadership position so I ask you to consider this and write back to me with your thoughts on this please.

Thank you kindly,

Brian Ruhe

brianruhe.ca

So that in a nutshell is what is now happening here in Canada when anyone decides to question the Zionist Jewish narrative whether it be their “Holocaust Hoax” of the 20th Century, their actions in Gaza against the indigenous true Semitic people of Palestine, their media control over Canada and the West,  or any number of other facets of the Zionist paradigm that the Jews subject their host societies to in order to maintain their power base throughout the Western world.

Brian Ruhe’s experience is not new. Je Suis Brian Ruhe! There have been dozens of other Canadians before him (including yours truly) who have suffered the slings and arrows of outrageous falsehood by the political machinations of this tribe of psychopathic deviants willing to go to any length to prevent the world from knowing the truth about their dark and sinister agenda for total global control of the world’s resources, both natural and human.

In a very real sense this is the essence of all that I have fought against over the past nine years of ongoing litigation brought on by this power-crazed Rothschild Freemasonic organization known as B’nai Brith Canada. It began on Valentine’s Day February 14th, 2007 when this same deluded maniacal sayan first sent me an unsolicited email using a phoney alias “Brian Esker” accusing me of being an “anti-Semite” and demanding that I stop publishing articles on the Zionist Jews and remove the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion from my website.

Come October 26th, 2015 here in Quesnel’s Supreme Court we will see whether or not these past nine years of harassment, intimidation, arrest, incarceration and theft of my personal computers, files and firearms will end with a victory for freedom of speech in Canada and a loss for the likes of this traitorous foreign lobby group B’nai Brith Canada and their sleazy serpentine zombie trolls. If it doesn’t then we will all be held hostage to these alien enemy interlopers who’ve been destroying our nation and culture for the past century and the country will be torn further and further apart as they once again destroy another gentile nation in their heinous game of power and control over humanity.

Justice must and Will prevail.

——-

* [Editors Note: I am restricted by a court order from publishing the name of this B’nai Brith agent.]

••••  ••••

Please help out with my upcoming Sec. 319(2) “Hate Propaganda” trial in October by making a donation.

Donations can be made online via my GoGetFunding site located at http://gogetfunding.com/canadian-publisher-faces-jail-for-political-writings/ or else by sending cash, cheques or Money Orders to the following postal address. Please make sure that any cheques or Money Orders are made out to – Arthur Topham – and sent to:

Arthur Topham
4633 Barkerville Highway
Quesnel, B.C.
V2J 6T8

No Room For Anti-Israeli Comment In Canadian Politics by Hadani Ditmars

No Room For Anti-Israeli Comment In Canadian Politics
by Hadani Ditmars, for RT
August 13, 2015
http://www.rt.com/op-edge/312334-canada-israel-wheeldon-politics/

Screen Shot 2015-08-15 at 9.26.51 PM

“When Harper needled him, NDP leader Thomas Mulcair responded that ‘Israel has no better friend than the NDP.’”

It would seem the height of Orwellian doublespeak to eliminate a political candidate for calling a war crime a war crime. And all the more so if you’re a leading member of Canada’s New Democratic Party.

And yet that’s exactly what happened this week when Nova Scotian Morgan Wheeldon, an NDP candidate for the riding of Kings-Hants, was forced to step down when a Conservative troll found a statement on his Facebook page from 2014 calling Israel’s bombardment of Gaza a “war crime.”

I suppose that party brass doesn’t read much Orwell, or UN reports on actual Israeli war crimes in Gaza – but perhaps it should become required reading. Especially if you set yourself up as the main ‘progressive’ opponent to the ruling Conservative Party, whose leader Stephen Harper carries on what is surely the creepiest political ‘bromance’ with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu bar none.

And yet in last week’s televised leaders debates it was clear that while the two parties differ on the controversial Harper backed C-51 ‘anti-terror legislation’ the NDP and the Conservatives were duking it out for the pro-Israel vote. When Harper needled him, NDP leader Thomas Mulcair responded that “Israel has no better friend than the NDP.” It seems he was correct.

The damning out-of-context statement on Wheeldon’s Facebook page in the wake of Israel’s 2014 bombing of Gaza that killed over 2,200 Palestinians was this:

“One could argue that Israel’s intention was always to ethnically cleanse the region — there are direct quotations proving this to be the case. Guess we just sweep that under the rug. A minority of Palestinians are bombing buses in response to what appears to be a calculated effort to commit a war crime.”

While the UN itself has accused Israel of war crimes during ‘Operation Protective Edge’, the NDP cried foul, stating: “Our position on the conflict in the Middle East is clear, as Tom Mulcair expressed clearly in the debate. Mr. Wheeldon’s comments are not in line with that policy and he is no longer our candidate.”

So that’s that then. Call a war crime a war crime on your personal Facebook page, and there’s no room for you in Canada’s ‘progressive’ party.

What has happened to Canada, and for that matter to the NDP? Their take-no-prisoners approach to criticism of Israeli actions in Gaza and the West Bank has recent precedents, and they all lead back to Thomas Mulcair.

In 2008, Mulcair led a caucus revolt against then leader Jack Layton when he criticized the Harper government’s decision not to participate in the United Nations Conference on Racism on the grounds that its mention of certain Israeli violations of international law was ‘anti-Semitic’.

Mulcair successfully muzzled NDP criticism of the January 2009 Israeli bombardment of Gaza, which killed 1,400 civilians, as well as the subsequent Israeli attack on the Gaza Flotilla, which killed nine.

And in 2010, Mulcair joined forces with the Conservatives and the Liberals in calling for the ouster of long time MP Libby Davies, (who has since resigned from politics) as NDP House Leader after her comments to a journalist that occupation of Palestine had begun in 1948.

While the NDP’s position is more than apparent to keen observers (as author Yves Engler notes, even NDP pioneer Tommy Douglas was an ardent Zionist), it’s odd that Israel has suddenly become an election issue in Canada in the midst of recessionary times.
Is freedom of speech completely dead in Canada? Can no one criticize Israeli war crimes without fear of repercussions?

It would seem that only Elizabeth May, leader of the tiny but scrappy Green Party, is free to speak her mind on foreign policy issues. Her candid comments have helped the Green Party usurp the NDP’s former role of ‘unofficial opposition’ to the ruling Conservatives. And indeed, after Paul Manly was barred from running for the NDP on the grounds that his comments about Israel incarcerating his aging father John Manly (captured with other crew members of a ship bearing aid to besieged Gaza) were of concern to the party executive, he joined the Green Party.

The general mood of muzzling any dissent against Israel would seem at odds with Canada’s allies. Comparing the situation here to say that of the UK – where Labour MP’s were asked to vote in favor of a Palestinian state, the prime minister was forced (via growing public opposition) to resign as patron of the Jewish National Fund and Senior Foreign Office Minister Baroness Sayeeda Warsi chose to resign over the government’s policy on Gaza – makes Canada look backward at best.

In an international context, it would now appear that Canada has the least control of any G7 country over its own foreign policy. Perhaps even less than in the US where tax dollars go more directly to maintaining the Israeli occupation of Palestine. Bizarrely, no matter who wins the upcoming election, Canada’s Middle East policy now seems to be firmly based on Likudist agendas.

—-
Hadani Ditmars, for RT
Hadani Ditmars has been reporting from Iraq since 1997 and is the author of Dancing in the No Fly Zone. Her next book Ancient Heart is a political travelogue of historical sites in Iraq.www.hadaniditmars.com

HARPER GOVERNMENT SUPPORT FOR ISRAEL: Ottawa threatens to use Sec. 319 “Hate Propaganda” laws against Canadians who support boycotting Israel PressTV

Screen Shot 2015-05-23 at 4.00.19 PM

CLICK HERE TO VIEW: https://youtu.be/tTOO5K4UhsM

Screen Shot 2015-05-23 at 4.05.15 PM

Screen Shot 2015-05-23 at 4.01.33 PM