ANOTHER HOLOCOST DENIER (ERIC HUNT) BITES THE DUST By Jim Rizoli & Diane King

ANOTHER HOLOCOST DENIER (Eric Hunt) BITES THE DUST

By Jim Rizoli & Diane King

FIRST EMAIL:

From: Diane King <dianekayking@hotmail.com>
Subject: ANOTHER HOLOCOST DENIER (Eric Hunt) BITES THE DUST
Date: February 15, 2017 at 10:41:59 AM PST

Jim and I have received a response from Eric Hunt about my inquiry: “Did Eric Hunt Write This” and we responded to it. (These letters are in a separate email.) Below are OUR responses to the news of Eric Hunt’s capitulation. Diane

“ERIC HUNT: For over a decade I have devoted a great deal of my life to investigating what is known as “The Holocaust.” I’ve endured 18 months imprisonment, overwhelming hardships, and live life as an outcast due to my activism as a Holocaust skeptic. All along, I claimed I was looking for the truth and out to tell the truth. I have determined I have reached “the end of the line” in the extent relevant research in the central issue of the “Holocaust denial” debate is able to go.”

JIM RIZOLI: Another HoloHoax truther bites the dust….Why are these people retreating from the revisionist camp? Are they being threatened? No matter…..I still will stick to my hardcore revisionist views until I can be proven wrong with FACTS and not just what ifs, and maybes. I notice that this article supposedly by Eric Hunt seems like it came off the skeptics site….maybe they are his new friends.

DIANE KING: I would like to thank Joe Rizoli for finding and sharing this ‘reversal’ and Germar Rudolf for confirming this unexpected issue. (My letter response to Germar Rudolf):

HISTORICAL REVISIONISM

WE ARE A FACT-BASED not a FAITH-BASED movement. Now, I’m a dyed-in-the-wool, 100%, BORN AGAIN BELIEVER – Christian. I wouldn’t say my belief system is based exclusively on faith … OR facts. I believe there are plenty of FACTS to support my faith. There are so many things we CAN’T PROVE in our ‘faith,’ but having come to understand the Lord’s character, I have no problem with my inability to prove everything about GOD.

Having said that, THAT isn’t the way it is in the revisionist world. We springboard FROM the facts and nearly EVERYTHING can be proven. So, I’m appalled at this “bailing” mindset. How can you turn your back on the facts!!!!

It’s like NO ONE has suffered but him. (Not to minimize what he’s been through). MANY soldiers of truth – Germar, Leuchter, Faurisson, Fredrick, Deckert, Fromm – a number of us in lesser AND greater degrees — have suffered too. We haven’t ‘bailed’ on the truth. But bottom line is the facts addressing the specific points concerning the claims of the holohoax are nearly indisputable. So because of this, isn’t this PC-incorrect issue worth fighting for????!!! It’s like he’s been tortured (as it seemed were David Cole and David Irving) until he RECANTED. So once he does, instead of the peace he seeks, he will continue to be hounded to keep him in line.

So what’s he going to do now? More articles denouncing what HE KNOWS is the truth??? Go on the road and try to ingratiate himself back into his tormentor’s good graces? If nothing else, what is going on with Ingrid and Ernst Zundel should prove THERE IS NOT ENOUGH GROVELING you can do – when you resist them, YOU ARE MARKED FOR LIFE.

Jim and I will be pursuing this further (stay tuned for further correspondence).

Eric Hunt’s Kapitulation

Jim and Diane’s Response to Eric Hunt

Dear Eric:

Diane and I collaborated with our response, as this was a big discussion point with us, to make sure the wording and sentiment were precise. This may be long, but we took the time to read yours. You can do us the courtesy of reading ours.

I appreciate your response but you still haven’t proven anything … you sound like you’re coming from the Skeptics (forum) crowd who continue to uphold the Holohoax theories 100?, where not only do they just emote on certain points, but they ridicule and punish counter arguments by censorship. I’m not saying that the National Socialist Germans were angels. I don’t maintain that – it was wartime – but had they wanted to exterminate ANYONE, you KNOW they’d have come up with extremely MORE EFFICIENT means than drafty/questionable facilities using a less than effective agent — Zyklon B. or whatever silly method they say. (By the way, your using the term ‘gassing’ for the means of extermination suggests you’ve bailed on scientific proof.) Have you even considered the other ridiculous methods that were said to have been used? Have you heard about these? Eric do you really believe this below? Have you even read revisionist literature?

Killing methods
Holocaust or Hoax book Jurgen Graf. 55

If we trace the evolution of the Holocaust yarn over the years since 1942, we stumble across one surprise after the other. In particular, innumerable methods of mass killing of which there is not the slightest mention in the later literature, are described in the most graphic detail, particularly:

a) Pneumatic hammers
This method is described as follows in a report of the Polish resistance movement on Auschwitz (23): “When the Kommandos went to work, they led them into the courtyard in the penal company where the executions took place by means of a ‘pneumatic hammer’. They bound the prisoners’ hands together behind their backs and brought them in, one after the other, naked, into the courtyard. They placed them in front of the barrel of an air gun, which was discharged without a sound. The hammer crushed the skull, and the compressed air destroyed the entire brain.”

b) Electric baths
As reported by the Polish resistance movement, the following method was also commonly used in Auschwitz (24): “According to the report of an SS officer, the number of victims in the electrical chambers amounted, unofficially, to 2,500 per night. The executions took place in electrical baths…”

c) Electrical assembly line killing
Another variant was described by Pravda on 2 February, five days after the liberation of Auschwitz: “They (the Germans) opened up the so-called ‘old graves’ in the eastern part of the camp, removed the bodies, and wiped out the trace of the assembly linekilling installation where hundreds of people were killed simultaneously with electrical current.”

d) Atomic bombs
At the Nuremberg Trial, US prosecutor Robert Jackson made the following accusation (25): “A village, a small village was provisionally erected, with temporary structures, and in it approximately 20,000 Jews were put. By means of this newly invented weapon of destruction, these 20,000 people were eradicated almost instantaneously, and in such a way that there was no trace left of them; the explosive used developing temperatures of from four to five hundred degrees Centigrade.”

e) Burning alive
Elie Wiesel, honored with the Nobel Peace Prize in 1986, was interned at Auschwitz from the spring of 1944 until January 1945. In his memoirs of the camp, La Nuit, published in 1958, he never mentions the gas chambers — not once, not with one single word — even though 400,000 Hungarian Jews, among others, are said to have been gassed during his period of internment. (In the German translation, which appeared under the title of Die Nacht zu begraben, Elischa, the gas chambers nevertheless make a miraculous appearance, for the simple reason that, whenever the word “crématoire” appears in the original, the translator has mistranslated it as “Gaskammer”). According to Wiesel, the Jews were exterminated in the following manner (26): “Not far from us blazed flames from a pit, gigantic flames. They were burning something. A lorry drove up to the pit and dumped its load into the pit. They were small children. Babies! Yes, I had seen it, with my own eyes…Children in the flames (is it any wonder, that sleep shuns my eyes since that time?). We went there, too. Somewhat further along, was another, bigger pit, for adults. ‘Father’, I said, ‘if that is so, I wish to wait no longer. I shall throw myself against the electrified barbed wire fence. That is better than lying around in the flames for hours’.” How little Elie survived lying around in the flames for hours, by some miracle, will be revealed below.

f) Steam chambers
In December 1945, at the Nuremberg Trial the following accusation was made regarding the mass killings at Treblinka (27): “All victims had to strip off their clothes and shoes, which were collected afterwards, whereupon all victims, women and children first, were driven into the death chambers… After being filled to capacity, the chambers were hermetically closed and steam was let in. In a few minutes all was over… From reports received may be assumed that several hundred thousands of Jews have been exterminated in Treblinka.”

g) Suffocation by pumping all the air out of the death chambers
This method was described by the Soviet-Jewish writer Vassily Grossman at Treblinka.

h) Quicklime trains
At Belzec the Jews were killed according to eyewitness Jan Karski as follows (29): “The floors of the car had been covered with a thick, white powder. It was quicklime. Quicklime is simply unslaked lime or calcium oxide that has been dehydrated. Anyone who has seen cement being mixed knows what occurs when water is poured on lime. The mixture bubbles and steams as the powder combines with the water, generating a large amount of heat. Here the lime served a double purpose in the Nazi economy of brutality. The moist flesh coming in contact with the lime is rapidly dehydrated and burned. The occupants of the cars would be literally burned to death before long, the flesh eaten from their bones. Thus, the Jews would ‘die in agony'”, fulfilling the promise Himmler had issued “in accord with the will of the Fuehrer”, in Warsaw, in 1942. Secondly, the lime would prevent decomposing bodies from spreading disease. It was efficient and inexpensive – a perfectly chosen agent for their purposes.

It took three hours to fill up the entire train by repetitions of this procedure. It was twilight when the forty six (I counted them) cars were packed. From one end to the other, the train, with its quivering cargo of flesh, seemed to throb, vibrate, rock, and jump as if bewitched. There would be a strangely uniform momentary lull and then, again, the train would begin to moan and sob, wail, and how. Inside the camp a few score dead bodies remained and a few in the final throes of death. German policemen walked around at leisure with smoking guns, pumping bullets into anything that by single motion betrayed an excess of vitality. Soon, not a single one was left alive. In the now quiet camp the only sounds were the inhuman screams that were echoes from the moving train. Then these, too, ceased. All that was now left was the stench of excrement and rotting straw and a queer, sickening, acidulous odour which, I thought, may have come from the quantities of blood that had been let, and with which the ground was stained. As I listened to the dwindling outcries from the train, I thought of the destination toward which it was speeding. My informants had minutes described the entire journey. The train would travel about eighty miles and finally come to a halt in an empty, barren field. Then nothing at all would happen. The train would stand stock-still, patiently waiting until death had penetrated into every corner of its interior. This would take from two to four days.” This Jan Karski was, by the way, appointed to chair a committee for “Scientific Research on the Holocaust” along with Elie Wiesel.

i) Chambers with submergible, electrified flooring. Stefan Szende, a Doctor of Philosophy, describes the extermination of the Jews at Belzec quite differently: “The death factory comprises an area approximately 7 km in diameter… The trains filled with Jews entered a tunnel into the underground rooms of the execution factory… The naked Jews were brought into gigantic halls. Several thousand people at one time could fit into these halls. The halls had no floor. The floor was of metal and was submergible. The floors of these halls, with their thousands of Jews, sank into a basin of water which lay beneath — but only far enough so that the people on the metal plate were not entirely under water. When all the Jews on the metal plate were in the water up to over their hips, electrical current was sent through the water. After a few moments, all the Jews, thousands at once, were dead. Then they raised the metal plate out of the water. On it lay the corpses of the murder victims. Another shock of electrical current was sent through, and the metal plate became a crematory oven, white hot, until all the bodies were burnt to ashes… Each individual train brought three to five thousand, sometimes more, Jews. There were days on which the lines to Belzec supplied twenty or more trains. Modern technology triumphed in the Nazi system. The problem of how to execute millions of people, was solved.”

j) Blood poisoning
This method, described on 7 February 1943 in the New York Times (“… gas chambers and blood poisoning stations which were erected in the rural regions…”), appears to have gone into oblivion as soon as it was invented.

k) Drowning
According to the Israeli Holocaust specialist Yehuda Bauer, the Romanians in Odessa murdered 144,000 Soviet Jews, mostly by drowning (31). The same method of extermination was testified to by the underground press agent for the Warsaw ghetto, as well as for Babi Yar (32): “Not a single Jew remains in Kiev, since the Germans have thrown the entire Jewish population of Kiev into the Dnieper.”

l) Chlorine gas, assembly-line shootings, boiling water, acids
Mass murders with chlorine gas, as well as assembly line shootings were reported for Treblinka (33). Reports of massacres with acids and boiling water round make a complete assortment of killing methods (34).

The exterminationists no longer wish to be reminded of all these stories today. At that time, however, they were considered to be “proven fact” — “proven” by the testimonies of “eyewitnesses” — just like the gas chambers, which have been placed a under legal protection order in several “free democracies”. Not to mention, that as the revisionists assert certain facts, the hoax changes to attempt to address the ‘new’ findings, not the least of which is the diesel to gas discussion (following) again, from Jurgen Graf:

Diesel or gas?

A marvelous metamorphosis is already taking place in the holocaust story. Several leading Holocaust proponents are now taking great pains to drop the Diesel claim and replace it with the view that the engines were not Diesels but conventional gasoline engines which simply burned Diesel fuel, presumably to make the engines more deadly than if they had only burned regular gasoline. This amazing transformation has appeared in a recent book in Germany entitled Nationalsozialistiche Massentötungen durch Giftgas. (fn. 34) The book was a joint project of 24 of the most eminent scholars on the subject, including such notables as Eugen Kogon, Hermann Langbein, Adalbert Rueckerl, Gideon Hausner, Germaine Tillion and Georges Wellers. The book represents the current state of the art of holocaust mythomania and has already been recommended by the World Jewish Congress in London. (fn. 35) The new, “revised” version of the holocaust says, in effect, that Gerstein and others were mistaken when they had claimed that Diesels were used to kill Jews at reblinka, Belzec and Sobibor. The claim now is that gasoline engines were used.

The clumsy juggling of evidence which characterizes this book is exemplified by the fact that although the Gerstein statement refers to Diesel engines four times, the portion of the Gerstein statement which is quoted in this supposedly definitive rebuttal of the revisionists does not mention Diesels at all, nor does it even describe the alleged killing process. (fn. 36) For a description of the killing process that Gerstein supposedly witnessed, the book gives a piece of postwar testimony by Dr. Pfannenstiel in which there is also no mention of the use of Diesels, but only of the use of Diesel fuel in the engine. How one could possibly have operated a gasoline engine with Diesel fuel is, of course, left to the imagination. The fact is that any gasoline engine simply would not operate with Diesel fuel (and vice-versa).

A fatal flaw in the new, non-Diesel, version is the retention of the recurrent claim that the corpses were “blue.” Although any possible death from Diesel exhaust would have been due to lack of oxygen, which would in turn have caused a bluish appearance of the corpse, death from gasoline engine exhaust would “only” have been due to carbon monoxide and could “only” have caused a distinctive “cherry red” or “pink” appearance. Although Pfannenstiel’s postwar testimony is generally less wild than the Gerstein statement, nonetheless he and other “eyewitnesses” also repeated the claim that the corpses were “blue.” (fn. 37)

That the Gerstein statement, although in a severely abbreviated form, is included at all in such a scholarly work, despite the problems for the “revised” version of the holocaust story which should be obvious to anyone looking at the complete text of that statement, only shows how desperate the holocaust scholars are to scrape together everything they have in support of their monstrous fantasy. They have precious little, and the Gerstein statement is still the best evidence they can present.

The new “revised” version of the holocaust story is actually more absurd than the old version. Although it might be remotely possible for an engineer to have mistaken a gasoline engine for a Diesel engine, how could anyone possibly have mistaken “red” for “blue”? Perhaps they were all color blind-we will just have to wait and see. No doubt, we will see many more attempts by desperate men to hold together a crumbling patchwork of lies.

The Diesel gas chamber claim is rubbish-apparently some of the exterminationists themselves recognize that now. However, the alternate claim that gasoline engine exhaust was used instead is rubbish also.

Holohoax museum
https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/mobile/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005220

Snippet…
Belzec, Sobibor, and Treblinka

In 1942, systematic mass killing in stationary gas chambers (with carbon monoxide gas generated by diesel engines) began at Belzec, Sobibor, and Treblinka, all in Poland. As victims were “unloaded” from cattle cars, they were told that they had to be disinfected in “showers.” The Nazi and Ukrainian guards sometimes shouted at and beat the victims, who were ordered to enter the “showers” with raised arms to allow as many people as possible to fit into the gas chambers. The tighter the gas chambers were packed, the faster the victims suffocated.

I hope all that was educational for you for future discussions.

Lets get back to the gassings.

FRED LEUCHTER: Not withstanding the evidence that Irving and Weber, have relative to “Limited Gassings”, The fact remains that Mass Gas Executions are impossible from a hardware standpoint. The evidence cited by both Weber and Irving is circumstantial. I have great respect for circumstantial evidence. It indicates an need for further investigation. This evidence will convince some and not others, and I can respect everyone’s opinion. However, the fact that is impossible from an engineering standpoint to effect Mass Executions with gas is not circumstantial. It is Scientific/Engineering Fact. This should override any doubts created in anyone’s mind about the matter. If anyone is willing to believe “Leuchter” and “Rudolf” some of the time, they should believe all the time. There is not middle ground in Science (Rudolf) and Leuchter (Engineering) …. I have left no room for doubt nor has Germar. (Fred Leuchter).

In complete agreement, the claimed mass extermination could NOT have occurred in ANY venue – because the facts for such are just not there like the solid facts of mass killings in the Reinhardt camps like Treblinka. (On this topic, Both Jim and Diane on separate occasions asked Mark Weber, “How did they do it, how were the killings done in the Reinhardt camps?” To which he responded, “I don’t know.” We learned that David Irving was asked the same thing and he answered, “I don’t know and I don’t care!”) THAT’S A PROBLEM! What kind of answer is “I don’t know?” How about “results are pending” (.LOL) Even some Jews admit there are some issues here.

“Most of the memoirs and reports of Holocaust survivors are full of preposterous verbosity, graphomanic exaggeration, dramatic effects, overestimated self-inflation, dilettante philosophizing, would-be lyricism, unchecked rumors, bias, partisan attacks…” –Samuel Gringauz, “Jewish Social Studies” (New York), January 1950, Vol. 12, p6.

Now, I’m all for open debate but honestly, the stupidity or believing things that are just totally impossible to have occurred, which you seem to now believe …. !!!! You’re a smart guy. But sadly You seem to just parrot the mainstream, PC-driven, mind-numbing, brain dead drivel who make statements without any facts to back up the claims: Saying “it” happened because (all hinging on the trumped-up question) “Where did these people go?” Really now we have to prove that to make our points valid? We don’t have to prove ANYTHING (the accuser must make his case) We just have to show that the official narrative is wrong which I think I’ve done with above comments.

What this is really about?

The Holohoax narrative is operated and controlled by a high-powered CULT, one that wants to USE the Holohoax narrative to control and suppress ALL thought and expression. THEY will decide what WE are to think and express. THEY will determine the parameters of what is acceptable to speak about – their game, their terms – typical CULT behavior and if you question ANY of their tenets, YOU will be dealt with as an apostate, as you have been, as Germar has, Leuchter, Deckart, Faurisson, Toben, Zundel have, to name a few of the many high-profile targets of this cult. And then there are also the low-profile ‘deviants’ (in their mind) like ourselves. So if you think you’re going to get on the fast track and be welcomed again by these people that hate you and what you believe, you better think again.

You think that by taking on this new PC-version of truth, you’re going to be accepted in the Holohoax community? That by ingratiating yourself to THEIR narrative (at least partially) that they will welcome you with open arms or leave you alone? Do you really honestly think that the Holohucksters are going to appreciate you in your back pedaling when you don’t subscribe 100% to THEIR version of the narrative, that you don’t believe in the Six Million!!!??? They still will look at you as a HOLOCAUST DENIER largely because you KNOW that 6 million did NOT die (even with those deaths you claim at Treblinka).

Sorry Eric – ain’t gonna happen. You’re a marked man now just like David Cole, Mark Weber and David Irving? You have joined THEIR dishonorable and even cowardly ranks? The only problem now is people are going to look at you as a sell-out – someone who couldn’t “take the heat,” who sold his soul to the PC devil, if you will. The only good news is your videos have been state of the art and MOST desired and respected and largely, THAT’s how you will be remembered. It’s easy to give in. It’s difficult to HANG TOUGH, which you have done for quite some time. Know this, though, that by caving, whatever you do from now on will be tainted and discounted. We draw the line on your work up to this date, as we have with Weber, Cole and Irving. Are you now going to recant what you have already done and call it wrong, misguided, and not in harmony with the facts?

I just think you’ve been sold a bill of goods and cannot accept the truth that the entire narrative of the Holohoax is a farse because it has cost you to maintain that stance. Why would you capitulate after so many years of ‘hanging tough’!!!! They wear you down? You waved the WHITE FLAG OF SURRENDER/CAPITULATION. You didn’t have to. You now have the option to hang tough or place yourself as a doormat where the HoloHoax Cultmasters can wipe their feet on and claim victory. Is that what you want? Because that is exactly what you will get from them.

I guess there is not much more to say to you….As a final note, and hopefully you will entertain this invitation we’d like to interview you so you can say exactly what your thoughts are so you won’t be misquoted… I’ve interviewed nearly all of the high-profile revisionists and many ‘unsung revisionist heroes’ who have consented to such an interview. We’ll give you your voice, your say and we’ll have a lively debate. Also note, I’m NOT like Ray Dawson, who would hang up on you if he doesn’t like what you say. We look forward to hearing from you about the interview.

ELISABETH CARTO: Eric H’s story can be totally disproved by Walter N. Sanning’s book “The Dissolution of Eastern European Jewry”. The breakdown of individual countries by their Jewish populations, who had a low birthrate in any case, shows that the disabled and children were absorbed into the nearby Jewish Ghettos as in Hungary. They certainly were not killed in gas chambers that did not exist. In 1990/91 Auschwitz had to remove the 6 mil figure from it’s stone monument and changed to 4 mill deaths. There was not ever any word of children being killed there. Actually, there were registered births of babies at the camp hospital. If the book is still in print, readers should buy it. Good luck, Elisabeth Carto

Keine Kapitulation (No Surrender),
(Capitulation is more than surrender, which may suggest ‘mere ceasing hostilities’. Capitulation is GOING OVER TO THEIR SIDE – a worse betrayal).

Jim Rizoli and Diane King
508-872-7292

Point of Light By Arthur Topham

Point of Light
By
Arthur Topham
January 1st, 2017
pointoflight-copy-4

“There is a point when you cannot walk away
When you have to stand up straight and tall and mean the words you say
There is a point you must decide, just to do it ’cause it’s right
That’s when you become a point of light.”
~ Randy Travis, Point of Light

As the year 2017 begins to unfold we find ourselves living in a time of extreme darkness and evil. Trailing years of wars, bloodshed and acts of terrorism on par with those of the French Revolution, 2016 inevitably culminated – on New Year’s Eve – with yet another act of satanic bloodletting as if to reassure the masses that any hope of peace is not part of the Devil’s equation.

And so it begs the question for those of us, the seekers of real Truth, Light, Justice and Peace who are now treading ever so lightly upon a world overshadowed by fear, insecurity, doubt and a deep and unnerving sense of suspended hope, what course we will and must follow in the days and months ahead.

The Trump card still remains a mystery to all but the 45th President and his close advisors as the American Republic inches closer and closer to their own reckoning with Fate. Will Donald actually “drain the swamp” of the elitist bottom feeders and their Talmudic taskmasters who have inexorably pursued the demise of that once great nation since 1913 as he unequivocally stated again and again throughout the US election campaign? No one outside the new insiders truly knows although speculation has been building to a deafening crescendo on blog sites around the world with each passing day.

So much is out of our direct control but regardless there still remains some fundamental truths that no fickleness on the part of mainstream media can alter. First off we know beyond certainty that the global mainstream media throughout the Western world is absolutely under the control of the Zionist Jew Rothschild criminal cartel and that ALL ZIONIST NEWS IS FAKE NEWS. Secondly, we know that more and more people throughout the Western world are turning to the Alternative News media in search of real news along with real interpretations of events and a whole host of broad-ranging opinions and perspectives that resonate with fundamental human values such as honesty, morality, authenticity, open-mindedness and plain-dealing. The third and still growing certitude is the revelation that the swamp is infested with #pizza-eating satanic, demonic entities who thrive upon the basest of human behaviours that span the gamut of grotesque to despicable in terms of pedophilia, beastiality, cannibalism and child sacrifice.

strike3-700

In other words those who now run the world have three strikes against them and the general consensus of the common people is that it’s game over and time for them to leave the playing field. The only problem is they don’t want to leave, nor do they want to play by the rules of the game but would rather institute their own rules as they go along depending upon whether or not they think they’re ahead and winning or losing ground.

Now of course they’re finally coming to the realization that way too many people are on to their scams and they have to come up with a whole new ball game; one that will not only be a total game changer but also will prevent the masses from gaining further information about their nefarious schemes to destroy all semblance of the natural order of Man and substitute it with a hodgepodge of perverse, Nihilistic, satanic sexually-deviant behaviours designed to severe forever the heart and soul of humanity from its original transcendental Source. If it sounds diabolical that’s because it is. If it sounds incredibly dangerous that’s also because it is.

So the New World Order has finally struck out. They’ve been exposed through the Internet by the Truth Revealers and now stand stark-butt naked before a world fraught and fuming with anxiety, mistrust, disgust and a fiercely-felt form of universal outrage.

What to do?

That is the question for those who have, as the old saying goes, “seen the light”. One of American’s great Country & Western singers Randy Travis, has, I believe, offered us a clue to what we must do in his song from which the title of this article was taken:

“There is a point when you cannot walk away
When you have to stand up straight and tall and mean the words you say
There is a point you must decide, just to do it ’cause it’s right
That’s when you become a point of light.”

God, Truth, Love and Light are synonymous terms that identify the One source of not only Life per se but all Existence upon all planes from the most sub-atomic to the highest of the Divine. Put in layman’s terms by the Christian Bible in Genesis for all to See are the following words:

“And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.”

lightprotector-copy

The division or gulf between the Light and darkness is now reaching its zenith and as the darkness appears to be waxing in power and presence so does the resplendence of the Light workers continue to grow and glow against this background gestalt of blackness and evil that vainly would attempt to entrance and snuff out our individual candles of Light and turn heaven on Earth into a hell of perversity and hatred.

Those who, for myriad reasons, have already sold their souls to the Devil in a last-ditch, Mephistophelian attempt to acquire power over others and the planet Itself, are beyond the ken of redemption and their fate is sealed. In terms of brevity they’ve been labeled by the Truth Revealers as the “1%”. Juxtaposed with that 1% are the Light bringers whose numbers we still cannot pin-point. All we can say with any certainty is that they are the individual points of light that Randy Travis speaks of in his song and that their numbers, judging by internet stats, are legion and growing at an exponential rate. It is here that we find our greatest and most valuable weapon in the battle between Good and Evil; here that we realize we have within us the power of Understanding and, but for lack of courage and self-confidence, we can exercise our divinely given Free Will and SHARE that light of understanding with our fellow human beings who are still searching for the real news; the real Truth and not the endless litany of LIES and DECEPTION that the world has been consistently subjected to over the past century and longer. Again, I repeat Travis’s words:

“There is a point when you cannot walk away
When you have to stand up straight and tall and mean the words you say
There is a point you must decide, just to do it ’cause it’s right
That’s when you become a point of light.”

There are millions, if not billions, of people on Gaia, our Mother Ship who are still innocent of the evil that has taken over so much of our planet. They are, metaphorically speaking, the slumbering ones who for countless reasons have not yet been able to find enough of the missing pieces of the puzzle that they might see the bigger picture and realize what’s happening to them, their families, their friends and their communities and countries. Each of them is, as yet, a wick unlit; a candle awaiting the flame of Truth that will not only enlighten their inner sense of Self but will, in turn, motivate them, as Travis sang, “to stand up straight and tall and mean the words” they say. And they’ll do it “cause it’s right” and because they’ll finally understand that the power to change the world for the better lies within ourselves and not in some alien, surrogate political system outside themselves that allows for the grievous errors and darkness which now afflict the vast majority of Humanity.

themanwhofights

Let the Light continue to spread in 2017 and let it drive back the darkness and the suffering and the injustices that sorely oppress the bulk of Mankind. The time to stand up and speak out is NOW. Share the Truth and spread the Light and help dispel the NWO night!

Welcome to 2017! from Radical Press

ashall1500

HAPPY NEW YEAR!

Dear Radical Readers,

My wife Shasta and I spend New Year’s eve at our local community hall in Cottonwood, B.C. enjoying a wonderful pot-luck dinner and then playing country music with our friends and neighbours.

2017 is now here and it promises to be another exciting year of global turmoil and unexpected surprises both good and bad!

On behalf of Radical Press I want to wish all subscribers and readers the very best in the days and months ahead and thank everyone for their ongoing support throughout my own “trials” and tribulations in the Canadian justice system.

This coming March will see the results of my Charter challenge to the infamous “Hate Crime” legislation now contained in Sec. 318 to 320 of Canada’s Criminal Code. Until then it’s back to the waiting game and carrying on with publishing as much truth and real news as possible.

I’m still trying to raise money to cover legal expenses (what’s new!) so any help in defraying these costs is always appreciated. If you’re not already deep in debt to the Rothschilds after all the Christmas spending spree then you might want to check into my GoGetFunding site and add a bit more to it.

Most politically-minded folks around the world are now awaiting with baited breath the inauguration of Donald Trump as the 45th President of the United States of America and debating and wondering what his administration will do in order to improve the global situation which has been steadily growing darker and darker. Will it be the Zionist business as usual or something possibly dramatic and positive? Time will soon tell but the odds are not in the truth-lovers and peace-makers favour and so we must remain vigilant and strong and continue to sing the songs of freedom come what may.

God bless and keep us all.

 

Sincerely,

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

AND LEST WE FORGET

hatecrimelawbbccjc-copy

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.)
 

B’nai Brith attack on Canadian professor has roots in Zionist false flag tactics by RAFIQ for the American Herald Tribune

amhertribune

OCTOBER 13 ,2016

BY RAFIQ
B’nai Brith attack on Canadian professor has roots in Zionist false flag tactics
anthony_hall_bb_6208e
Anthony Hall

In late August a sensational anti-Jewish screed and graphic were posted on the Facebook page of University of Lethbridge professor Anthony Hall.

1113

As a result, B’nai Brith Canada launched a legal campaign against Dr. Hall for committing a “hate crime,” followed by an ongoing campaign to have him dismissed from his tenured position after twenty-six years.

fb_bb_22ad81111-1Although the racist, hate-mongering Facebook post was ostensibly put on Dr. Hall’s page by someone self-identified as “Glen Davidson,” B’nai Brith launched no legal campaign against this person. Instead, it succeeded in having the Lethbridge Police Service open an investigation of Dr. Hall. As reported by CTV News Calgary, B’nai Brith said that “by allowing” the anti-Semitic post “to remain on his Facebook page, Hall was committing a hate crime.” [1]

CTV News Calgary went on to falsely report that “Hall did eventually remove the offending post.” In fact Dr. Hall didn’t know about the post’s existence until after B’nai Brith had successfully lobbied Facebook to take it down. As reported by Now Magazine, Facebook removed the post after initially, and ludicrously, claiming that it didn’t violate the website’s standards. [2]

For its part, as reported by J.W. Schnarr at the Lethbridge Herald (Sept. 29, 2016), the Lethbridge Police Service has stated that the post, “while extremely offensive and inappropriate, does not meet the threshold for intent set out in the Criminal Code of Canada for advocating genocide or public incitement of hatred.’” [3] Although this finding fails to dissociate Dr. Hall from the anti-Semitic posting and thus does nothing to restore his reputation, the upshot is that no criminal charges are going to be laid against him for committing a “hate crime.”

lh_c389aSo if not a hate crime, what are the grounds for B’nai Brith’s ongoing campaign to destroy the career of a respected historian known for his moral courage in standing up for Indigenous rights both in Canada and around the world? And why has the University of Lethbridge decided to bow to the pressure of B’nai Brith and seek Dr. Hall’s dismissal, as reported in the American Herald Tribune? [4]

According to the Lethbridge Herald, at issue are claims against Dr. Hall that involve “the alleged spread of conspiracy theories and anti-Zionist propaganda.” The newspaper goes on to explain that Dr. Hall “promotes the idea of a global Zionist conspiracy to foster hatred of Muslims through ‘false flag’ terror events, beginning with the 9/11 terror attacks in New York City.” [5] CTV News Calgary adds that Dr. Hall is known for “condemning Israel and implying agents of that country were behind the 9/11 attacks in New York.” [6]

These statements make it clear that Dr. Hall has aligned himself against Zionism and against the political machinations of Israel. Nowhere is it suggested that Dr. Hall has aligned himself against the Jewish people. Yet B’nai Brith insists that Zionism and the Jewish people are synonymous and that to question Zionism is to be anti-Semitic. The two are conflated in its rhetoric against Dr. Hall:

B’nai Brith continues to demand that the University of Lethbridge investigate, to guarantee that students are not subjected to Hall’s anti-Zionist itinerary.

Does the University of Lethbridge feel that Holocaust denial, accusations of world Zionist conspiracy plots and antisemitism are the legitimate “results of research and scholarship?”

Hall’s personal antisemitism cannot be separated from his academic career. [7]

anti-semitism_adca1

Here, Dr. Hall’s stance against Zionism is conflated with denial of the Jewish holocaust and with anti-Semitism – understood as hatred of Jews. It makes no difference that Dr. Hall has been legally absolved of committing a “hate crime.” It makes no difference that in an article he published in the American Herald Tribune, he has vocally decried the racist posting placed on his Facebook page. [8] B’nai Brith has branded him an “anti-Semite.” As Now Magazine puts it in a slanderous and libelous article smearing Dr. Hall, his critique of Zionism means that he is a “Jew-hater.” [9]

The University of Lethbridge has given every indication that it agrees with this assessment. In early October university president Dr. Michael Mahon declared that Dr. Hall’s actions “appear to contravene Section 3 of the Alberta Human Rights Act,” and he promptly suspended Dr. Hall without pay while the university investigates the situation. In explaining his suspension of a tenured professor without due process and without any finding of wrongdoing, Dr. Mahon echoed the accusations and rhetoric of B’nai Brith, citing both the use of Dr. Hall’s Facebook page “for virulent anti-semitic comments” and his research into Israel’s role in 9/11, which Dr. Mahon interprets as an accusation against “Jewish individuals,” absurdly denying Israel’s diverse ethnic makeup.

aht_mahon_5c7b3

jews_mossad_0d0c3

wtc7_d48eb

Dictionaries generally define “Zionism” as “a political movement that supports the maintenance and preservation of the state of Israel as a Jewish homeland, originally arising in the late 1800s with the goal of re-establishing a Jewish homeland in the region of Palestine.” [10] This proper view of Zionism as “a political movement” distinct from Jewish people themselves is supported by many individuals and organizations within the Jewish community. They condemn the genocidal tactics used by Israel in its campaign against the Palestinian people as it seeks to create a state that is solely Jewish.

msm_israel_6db0d

For example, in a recent fundraising email, Jewish Voice for Peace provides this testimony from a retreat participant, “Jake said he’d grown up participating in Zionist youth movements, and travelling to Israel. So when he began to understand the extent of human rights abuses against Palestinians, and the lengths that mainstream Jewish society goes to silence them, he felt like he’d lost something huge. He believed he’d never feel at home in a Jewish community again. And then he found JVP.” [11]

jvp_3403a

The website True Torah Jews takes an even stronger stand against the Zionist political project. In an article explaining that the German Zionists colluded with the National Socialists in creating hostility against the Jews of Germany as a means of ensuring their expulsion to Palestine, the website writes, “We implore and beseech our Jewish brethren to realize that the Zionists are not the saviors of the Jewish People and guarantors of their safety, but rather the instigators and original cause of Jewish suffering in the Holy Land and worldwide.” [12]

israel_cartoon_62a6f

Indeed, under the Transfer Agreement of 1933, concluded between Adolf Hitler’s National Socialist government and Chaim Arlosoroff of the World Zionist Organization, tens of thousands of German Jews were able to migrate to Palestine with their wealth. This seemingly humane cooperation between the National Socialists and the Zionists was in fact based on their shared racist ideas about ethnicity and nationhood. Both agreed that for the good of each “race,” Germans and Jews should no longer live side by side. Absolute separation of the “races” was necessary.

haavara_252da

Thus, when the National Socialists adopted the “Nuremberg laws” of 1935, which prohibited sex and marriage between Germans and Jews, who were no longer regarded as Germans but reconceived as an “alien minority,” the Zionists were pleased. Only on a rising tide of anti-Semitic sentiment could the Zionist political project be achieved. The founder of modern Zionism, Theodor Herzl, “maintained that anti-Semitism is not an aberration, but a natural and completely understandable response by non-Jews to alien Jewish behavior and attitudes. The only solution, he argued, is for Jews to recognize reality and live in a separate state of their own.” [13]

The article by True Torah Jews goes on to explain the tactics of such Zionists – thus shedding light on the conduct of B’nai Brith and its accolades at Now Magazine:

It has been the age-old intention of Zionism to intentionally stir up anti-Semitism anywhere possible, and even more commonly, to take advantage of any Jewish suffering anywhere in order to enhance its cause. Indeed, hatred of Jews and Jewish suffering is the oxygen of the Zionist movement, and from the very beginning [its intention] has been to deliberately incite hatred of the Jew and then, in feigned horror, use it to justify the existence of the Zionist state – this is, of course, Machiavellianism raised to the highest degree. Thus, the Zionists thrive on hatred and suffering of Jews, and seek to benefit thereby through keeping Jews in perpetual fear, causing them to ignore the true nature of Zionism, and instead to consider the Zionist state as their salvation.

In his article in the American Herald Tribune discussing his treatment at the hands of B’nai Brith Canada, Dr. Hall speculates that B’nai Brith may have been behind the anti-Semitic screed and graphic that were posted on his Facebook page. [14] The Lethbridge Herald makes note of this observation: “The discussion also turned to the possibility that some of the organizations currently demanding Hall be disciplined for his statements could have made the posting themselves in order to discredit him and to fuel their argument.” [15] However, this concern is framed by the Lethbridge Herald as dismissible out of hand and in need of no actual journalistic investigation.

Yet the description of Zionism offered by True Torah Jews suggests that Dr. Hall may indeed be right about the tactics being employed against him by B’nai Brith. Clearly, in the case of Dr. Hall, B’nai Brith is bent on seeing anti-Semitism where there is none. Moreover, B’nai Brith does not appear to have attempted to identify or pursue charges against the claimed poster of the racist screed and graphic, “Glen Davidson.” Nor has it sought to identify or pursue charges against the creator of the posting, even though it depicts a known cartoonist, Ben Garrison, assaulting an Orthodox Jew.

If the Lethbridge Herald had done some investigating, it would have unearthed a story that is entirely consistent with the description of Zionism offered by True Torah Jews. It would have discovered what Arthur Topham of Radical Press learned when he contacted Garrison and asked him about the anti-Semitic posting, in which Garrison is supposed to profess, “I will not rest until every single filthy, parasitic kike is rounded up and slaughtered. The greedy hook-nosed kikes know that their days are numbered … KILL ALL JEWS NOW! EVERY LAST ONE.”

hall_bb_01a73

* Original Post Planted on Dr. Hall’s Facebook page and then removed by Facebook without any notice at to the victim of the social media false flag from Facebook or its partner B’nai Brith

In Garrison’s words, “that Photoshopped image of me assaulting that Orthodox Jewish man continues to circulate and be posted everywhere. Ironically, it was created by a 20 year old Jewish kid named Joshua Goldberg. He was arrested by the FBI about a year ago for sending bomb making instructions to what he thought was a Muslim terrorist – instead it was an FBI undercover agent. Goldberg is now pleading mental illness, but for years he was allowed to stir up trouble from his parent’s basement in Florida. For some reason he enjoyed targeting me and he’s the one who created that image as well as many other hate screeds.” [16]joshua_goldberg_1ada2

1113-1

Joshua Goldberg’s arrest is confirmed by newspaper reports. One is in the Sydney Morning Herald, where we learn that Goldberg “is suspected of a number of other online hoaxes, including posing online as prominent Australian lawyer, Josh Bornstein … In the Bornstein hoax, Goldberg established a blog on the Times of Israel in the lawyer’s name before posting an inflammatory article calling for the ‘extermination’ of Palestinians. The Times retracted the article and apologised.’” [17]

In response to the revelations about Goldberg, Dr. Kevin Barrett of Truth Jihad Radio has called the anti-Semitic post that turned up on Dr. Hall’s Facebook page a “weaponized image” that “was created by a Jewish-Zionist false flag provocateur and instigator of phony ‘Islamic terrorism,’ presumably to be used precisely the way it was deployed against Tony Hall.” [18] Indeed, Goldberg’s own description of one of his other plots is consistent with this conclusion. As reported in the Sydney Morning Herald, “the fake jihadi also claimed a friendship with anti-Islamophobia campaigner Mariam Veiszadeh, but only to smear her reputation.” [19]

the-islamophobia-industry_60fa4

In light of the context that produced the anti-Semitic screed and graphic at the centre of the attack on Dr. Hall’s character, B’nai Brith’s failure to investigate the posting’s origins and its determination to focus instead on branding Dr. Hall an “anti-Semite” look suspicious. And given the Zionist movement’s history of duplicitous dealings, as discussed by True Torah Jews, one can understand the historical context of the research done by Dr. Hall and other scholars that shows 9/11 was an Israeli false flag operation conducted in collusion with the CIA.

5_israelis_dac78

Indeed, the Mossad agents who were arrested in New Jersey on 9/11 and later quietly returned to Israel would themselves admit on national television that they had been in New Jersey “to document the event.” [20] This statement, which makes clear that Mossad had prior knowledge of the 9/11 attack, is supported by additional research showing that Mossad agents pretending to be art students had unfettered access to the twin towers and had every means and opportunity to plant the demolition explosives that have been identified in dust samples from ground zero. [21]

Also consistent with this emerging picture of Zionism’s tactics is Mossad’s own motto: “By Deception We Shall Rule and Do War.” From a groundling like Joshua Goldberg to the state of Israel itself, one sees that deception is indeed key to the Zionist’s genocidal project against the Palestinian people and – through the Israeli-US fabricated “war on terror” – against Muslims everywhere. Those who stand against the inhumanity of Zionism should be applauded. Like Dr. Hall, they are not anti-Semites but heroes.

Notes

[1] CTV News Calgary, “Fallout of U of L Professor’s Controversial Views,” September 2016, http://calgary.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=962755.

[2] Bernie Farber, “Facebook Removes Anti-Semitic Post after Online Blowback,” Now Magazine, 7 September 2016, https://nowtoronto.com/news/facebook-removes-anti-semitic-post-after-online-blowback/.

[3] J.W. Schnarr, “Professor Investigated by U of L,” Lethbridge Herald, 29 September 2016, http://lethbridgeherald.com/news/local-news/2016/09/29/professor-investigated-by-u-of-l/.

[4] Rafiq, “Canadian Professor Libelously Targeted as ‘Anti-Semite’ in Coordinated Attack,” American Herald Tribune, 28 September 2016, http://ahtribune.com/world/americas/1225-canadian-professor-anti-semite.html.

[5] Schnarr, “Professor Investigated,” http://lethbridgeherald.com/news/local-news/2016/09/29/professor-investigated-by-u-of-l/.

[6] CTV News Calgary, “Fallout,” http://calgary.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=962755.

[7] B’nai Brith, “Academic Freedom Does Not Include Holocaust Denial,” 28 September 2016, http://canadafreepress.com/article/academic-freedom-does-not-include-holocaust-denial#.

[8] Tony Hall, “Israeli-Canadian Thought Police Take Aim … at Me,” 21 September 2016, American Herald Tribune, http://ahtribune.com/in-depth/1210-israeli-canadian-thought-police.html.

[9] Farber, “Facebook Removes Anti-Semitic Post,” https://nowtoronto.com/news/facebook-removes-anti-semitic-post-after-online-blowback/.

[10] “Zionism,” in The Free Dictionary by Farlex, http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Zionism.

[11] Jewish Voice for Peace, https://jewishvoiceforpeace.org/.

[12] True Torah Jews, “Nazi Propaganda Was Based on What Zionists Said,” http://www.truetorahjews.org/naziismzionism.

[13] Mark Weber, “Zionism and the Third Reich,” Journal of Historical Review 13, no. 4 (1993): 29-37, http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v13/v13n4p29_weber.html.

[14] Hall, “Israeli-Canadian Thought Police,” http://ahtribune.com/in-depth/1210-israeli-canadian-thought-police.html.

[15] Schnarr, “Professor Investigated,” http://lethbridgeherald.com/news/local-news/2016/09/29/professor-investigated-by-u-of-l/.

[16] Arthur Topham, “Ceaseless Smear Campaigns by B’nai Brith Lobby and Zionist Media Must End!” Radical Press, 28 September 2016, http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=10192.

[17] Elise Potaka and Luke McMahon, “FBI Says ‘Australian IS Jihadist’ Is Actually a Jewish American Troll Named Joshua Ryne Goldberg, Sydney Morning Herald, 12 September 2015, http://www.smh.com.au/national/australian-is-jihadist-is-actually-an-jewish-american-troll-20150911-gjk852.html.

[18] Kevin Barrett, “Rafiq on the U. of Lethbridge Witch Hunt,” Truth Jihad Radio, 2 October 2016,
http://noliesradio.org/archives/120566.

[19] Potaka and McMahon, “FBI Says,” http://www.smh.com.au/national/australian-is-jihadist-is-actually-an-jewish-american-troll-20150911-gjk852.html.

[20] Christopher Bollyn, “Five Dancing Israelis,” http://www.bollyn.com/five-dancing-israelis.

[21] Dick Eastman, “The 14 Israeli ‘Art Students’ Were inside the WTC Towers Camping with Construction Passes,” 12 October 2009, http://www.rense.com/general87/14_1.htm; Niels H. Harrit et al., “Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe,” Open Chemical Physics Journal 2, no. 1 (3 April 2009): 7–31, http://benthamopen.com/contents/pdf/TOCPJ/TOCPJ-2-7.pdf.

screen-shot-2016-10-14-at-12-18-01-am


SOURCE ARTICLE

 

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

rancourtvtisraelgazaattack2014

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Your Honour:

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

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

Joseph Hickey
Executive Director
Ontario Civil Liberties Association (OCLA)

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


SOURCE ARTICLE

Les lois sur la propagande haineuse doivent être détruites by Ray Y. Adamson

screen-shot-2016-09-19-at-9-38-33-pm

http://www.lebonnetdespatriotes.net/lbdp/index.php/dossierslbdp/item/8018-les-lois-sur-la-propagande-haineuse-doivent-etre-detruites

Les lois sur la propagande haineuse doivent être détruites 

c119827c4b997d3713e1222e73d94218_xl

lundi, 19 septembre 2016

Ray Y. Adamson

Que penser d’un tract politique faisant appel à l’extermination d’un peuple entier et à la destruction totale de leur pays? Terrible – inadmissible – me diriez-vous. Peut-être même qu’un tel livre, s’il existe, devrait être banni… car on ne peut pas tolérer la Haine.

Cependant il existe! Publié aux États-Unis durant la guerre, mais en 1941 quand l’union américaine était toujours neutre, ce livre de propagande haineuse est toujours disponible au Canada. Intitulé « Germany Must Perish » ou en français : « l’Allemagne doit être détruite » le pamphlet est écrit par un juif du nom de Theodore Kaufman. À l’époque, il a attisé la haine contre les Allemands, ce sentiment étant nécessaire pour que les politiciens américains acceptent de participer à la Deuxième guerre mondiale.

De retour aux temps modernes – en 2011 un intellectuel dissident canadien nommé Arthur Topham a voulu utiliser à son tour sa liberté d’expression, le premier droit protégé par la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés. Monsieur Topham  a republié Germany Must Perish!. C’est légal. En parallèle il a publié un second livre identique en tous points sauf pour les changements suivants : à chaque fois qu’il trouvait le mot Allemagne dans le texte originel, il le remplaçait par Israël. À chaque fois qu’il voyait Nazi, il écrivait Sioniste et à chaque fois qu’il trouvait le mot Allemand il le remplaçait par Juif. Le titre du livre L’Allemagne doit être détruite! devenait donc Israël doit être détruite!. Les deux livres étaient publiés ensemble avec une préface expliquant le procédé de Topham et précisant ses motivations. Il y avait donc mise en garde et encadrement.*

La communauté juive organisée, soit l’organisme de pression B’nai Brith Canada, n’a pas apprécié. Elle a fait ce qu’elle fait de mieux : dénoncer. Le travail satirique a valu à Arthur Topham des accusations de crime haineux et il s’est rapidement retrouvé face à la justice. Un verdict de culpabilité a été rendu à la fin d’un procès en novembre 2015.** C’est une chose merveilleuse!

Merveilleuse en effet car pour ceux qui chérissent réellement la liberté d’expression ce verdict est la clé qui ouvre la porte à la cause judiciaire la plus importante des temps modernes au Canada : il s’agit de la contestation de la légitimité constitutionnelle des lois sur la « propagande haineuse », en particulier la section 319(2) du Code criminel canadien.***

Cette loi est une menace pour la liberté de tous les Canadiens car nul n’est à l’abri d’une interprétation vicieuse du Code criminel si une parodie visant à critiquer un texte haineux est elle-même considérée comme propagande haineuse. La clause de la Loi intitulée « Fomenter volontairement la haine » devrait donc être revue ou biffée.

Tout citoyen ayant à cœur la valeur occidentale la plus importante, soit la liberté de penser, d’être en désaccord, de débattre et de s’exprimer publiquement devrait soutenir Arthur Topham dans son appel à la Cour suprême de Quesnel en Colombie Britannique, dans l’ouest canadien. Le procès de contestation constitutionnelle des lois sur la propagande haineuse aura lieu du 3 au 7 octobre 2016. Pour contribuer au succès de cette cause qui nous affecte tous en ces temps de rectitude politique et judiciarisation croissante, veuillez diffuser cet article dans vos réseaux et surtout veuillez contribuer financièrement ici : http://gogetfunding.com/project/canadian-publisher-faces-jail-for-political-writings/.

Arthur Topham est un des rares hommes droits au pays qui se bat réellement pour la justice et la vérité. Dans ces temps d’extrême violence, il le fait pacifiquement et avec humour. Soutenons-le!

* Les deux textes en questions peuvent être consultés à http://www.radicalpress.com/

** http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/topham-anti-semitism-jewish-hatred-1.3317052

*** « Quiconque, par la communication de déclarations autrement que dans une conversation privée, fomente volontairement la haine contre un groupe identifiable est coupable : a) soit d’un acte criminel et passible d’un emprisonnement maximal de deux ans; b) soit d’une infraction punissable sur déclaration de culpabilité par procédure sommaire. »

Crédit image : Ray Y. Adamson. Ivstitia Canadianna est une imitation burlesque de la statue très respectable Ivstitia (Justice) que l’on retrouve à la Cour suprême du Canada.

SUPPORT RADICALPRESS.COM’S BATTLE FOR FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN CANADA – PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION

IPETITIONIMAGE

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/support-radicalpresscom-free-speech-in-Canada

Talmud-driven Marxist materialism at the root of all discriminatory “hate crime” legislation

TalmudHateCrimes

Talmud-driven Marxist materialism at the root of all discriminatory “hate crime” legislation

ATEDITOR0216

[Editor’s Note: Wallace’s reply to Australian Senator Bernardi is a worthy and required read for those who struggle with the whole notion of political correctness and how and why it suddenly made its appearance on the truth-telling scene over the past half century. While it may be useful to read Senator Bernardi’s article first it’s not necessary in order to appreciate what Mr. Klinck is saying on the topic as a whole.]

Dear Senator Bernardi,

Thanks for your latest bulletin.

The “anti-discrimination” activists are engaging in classic Bolshevik tactics of intimidation and they are using both the legal system and the conditioned naïveté of the general population to use the very constitutional and legal framework which historically we have developed essentially in accord with Christian principles to protect basic natural rights and freedoms, literally and subversively as a reverse instrument of terror, in order actually to destroy them. This is being done with an appeal to our innate sense of decency and essential fairness by inducing in us a guilt complex which renders us helpless and defenceless when we would oppose any issue purely and obviously fabricated in a way that is intended to make everything we think or do appear as having selfish and evil motivations designed to exploit other less privileged people. This strategy is pure, unadulterated cultural Marxism in action.

What people do not seem even to suspect is that this policy derives from Pharisaism—the rule by decree enforced by a self-appointed select few who arrogate to themselves the supreme right to dominate others on the assumption that they alone are divinely destined and ordained to determine, prescribe and adjudicate every aspect of the lives of other persons. There is absolutely no theoretical limit to the measures or degree to which these people will go to establish this power and anyone who thinks that there is a limit to their ambition is sadly, and fatally, deceived. Law is the area of their expertise and it is primarily in Law that they act to establish their tyranny. What did Christ say about “lawyers” and the Pharisees? “Beware the Leaven of the Pharisees!” This no doubt sounds all entirely far-fetched and anachronistic to those who are not schooled in ideological and theological matters—but, sadly and unfortunately, it deals with the metaphysical and practical world in which we live. It all seems almost surreal, but is an obvious and undeniable tragic reality. Those who succumbed in the hell of the Bolshevik Gulag could attest to that ersatz reality wherein all were to be made “equal”—as has, e.g., Alexandr Solzhenitsyn, who could by instinct and observation detect the moral and intellectual decline of the West.

One might ask how this situation can be—or why it should exist. But such questions alone are no solution to our problems, which require sound and practical policies and actions predicated upon realistic principles. The fact of the matter is that our culture has been stripped methodically of virtually any Christian awareness we may once have had and, if Christ was indeed the Great Realist, we have no longer any firm ground upon which to stand. The opinion-making media, the educational system, the clergy and the socio-economic institutions all have been captured and co-opted and in general have thoroughly infected society with false notions about scarcity, morality and the purpose of human existence in general. C. H. Douglas was not making a frivolous or misconceived allegation when he declared that “Society has been hypnotized and only a drastic de-hypnotization can save it.” The problem is fundamentally metaphysical and what must be done is to replace the existing system of false values with an entirely new ethic of social and economic values based upon essential Christian precepts and principles which we must proceed to incarnate in our daily organic affairs. We must give “Flesh” to the “Word” in order to make of it a reality rather than a parody.

In this regard, we must cease our rejection of the Abundance of the Kingdom by outright faithless denial, and the diversion and perversion of our human and natural resources increasingly toward useless and destructive purposes which serve the advantage of third interests. We must establish in place of the existing acquisitive economic and social order one which is properly distributive and does not rely upon ever expanding financial debt. We must assure material security for all persons so that in security faith can “cast out all fear” and, indeed, “move mountains.” We must create a dispensation wherein “Every man can sit under his/her own fig tree and none can make them afraid.” We must discredit and destroy the absurd myth of scarcity and the hurtful circumstances which such belief imposes upon humanity. This must be done so as to empower the individual while diminishing the alleged need for an increased assumption of power by the State.

The existing financial and economic system which insists upon paid “work” as the exclusive source of income, while the opportunities for it are increasingly diminished by the amazing phenomenon of escalating technological efficiency, causes individual insecurity to be increasingly endemic and with it entirely unnecessary, growing and fallacious demands for more “jobs”. Of course where economic survival is dependent upon paid labour everyone clamours for more “work” and demands access to it. In a society that is conditioned to believe that Salvation is conditional upon Works rather than upon Grace, the provision of “Work for All” is regarded as both a moral and practical imperative and no forms of discrimination can be countenanced. In this manner the new religion of universal equality has been established and imposed upon humanity as the supreme, allegedly irrefutable and un-challengeable basis of life and “civilization”. Of course any rigorous attempt to impose equality, with envy as its inherent malevolent inspiration, can only result in absolute tyranny. That is the precise goal which is intended and anyone who doubts it is a fool. This is the inevitable destiny of any who worship Mammon– which is the embodiment of so-called “scientific” Marxist materialism. The God of “”Equality” will destroy human civilization because it denies the very individual creativity and general abundance upon which it can be based and flourish.

Sincerely
Wallace Klinck

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivfdcpB_fmg
www.socred.org
http://www.social-credit.blogspot.ca
http://www.socialcredit.com.au

https://www.amazon.com/Social-Credit-Philosophy-Oliver-Heydorn/dp/1530390923?ie=UTF8&*Version*=1&*entries*=0
https://www.amazon.com/Social-Credit-Economics-Oliver-Heydorn/dp/1493529765
https://www.amazon.com/Economics-Social-Credit-Catholic-Teaching/dp/1494946262/ref=pd_bxgy_14_img_2?ie=UTF8&refRID=N82A1EGWQ489F2A16J03

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_credit
Major C.H. Douglas on “Causes of War” – part 1 – YouTube
Major C.H. Douglas on ‘The Causes of War’ – part 2 – YouTube
http://social-credit.com/index.html


Screen Shot 2016-08-17 at 8.13.42 AM?

Dear Wallace,

Early in my Senate career I wrote that I got into politics to do something, not to be someone. That intention hasn’t changed in the ten years since.

Sometimes, in politics and life, there are things so important that they need to be defended under any circumstances. For lovers of freedom and jousters in the battle of ideas, one of those principles is freedom of speech.

Be under no illusion, that freedom is under assault like never before in this country.

It is not just the odious and subjective nature of section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, but the group think that is infecting almost every part of our lives, where citizens are socially bludgeoned into conformity.

Many in the political class, aided and abetted by sections of the media, harangue and condemn anyone who doesn’t fall into line with their PC agenda. We are now expected to accept unquestioningly that there are dozens of self-declared gender identities, supporting traditional marriage means you are a ‘phobe’ and that Hillary Clinton is a trustworthy person to be US President.

Next time you go to a dinner party, see how you fare disagreeing with any of those statements. My bet is at best you’ll be met with uncomfortable silence. If you dare stick up for Donald Trump you’ll probably receive much worse!

Now, some might conclude that this is just the normal course of events with supposedly objectionable ideas subject to the court of public opinion. In normal circumstances that may be correct but things are different now.

The social justice warriors (SJWs) believe that the ends justify the means to stop others from even voicing opinions that don’t comply with their agenda.
Cartoonist Bill Leak produced an image that captured perfectly one of the issues facing many Aboriginal communities. He was condemned as a racist and the SJWs called for his sacking. Kudos to The Australian for refusing to bow to their pressure. I have no doubt that had the skin colour of the cartoon characters been white, there would have been no public outrage.

The message is very clear: don’t criticise Aboriginal communities or risk losing your job. The refusal to confront the truth may help explain why over $30 billion of taxpayer funds has been spent on these communities over the past ten years with little visible improvement in conditions.

We saw a similar thing with the Four Corners program about juveniles in detention in the NT. The ABC report was biased, incomplete and a perfect example of why we can no longer trust sections of our ABC with impartial and factual reporting. The release of a letter written by the journalist involved praising the NT minister responsible in order to gain access to the facility demonstrates how dubious we should be of such ‘exposés’.

I have experienced similar duplicity and cherry-picking of information to suit a pre-determined agenda by some of those linked to the same Four Corners report. Put simply, I cannot regard some of those individuals as credible and unbiased. They have a political world view which they are seeking to pursue through our publicly-funded broadcaster.

But it doesn’t end there. Section 18C of the RDA is now being used as a tool to stifle speech on the basis it may offend or insult someone – not necessarily the person complaining.

The students at a Queensland university excluded from a computer room on the basis of their skin colour are now subject to potential court action. Their crime was to mention the segregation they experienced on a Facebook page. As a result of these innocuous remarks, the complainant supposedly has been incapable of working for several years and wants $250,000 in compensation.
Amazingly, this disgraceful complaint is being considered for trial and these poor students are being subject to the most ghastly and expensive process because they offended someone with a different skin colour who discriminated against them on the basis of their skin colour! A perpetual circle of the grievance industry in action.

My Senate colleague David Leyonhjelm has complained to the Human Rights Commission about being called an ‘angry white man’ by a journalist, not because he is actually offended (although that isn’t a criteria under 18C) but to prove a point. I agree with him. If you simply changed the word white to black, brown or yellow the SJW would spring into a deafening chorus of complaint. Now, such is their silence, you can only hear the crickets chirping, because in their world, only white people can be racist.

I could go on.

We are now being subject to identity politics, pursued through publicly-funded institutions, that only seek to divide us and stifle our freedoms. It is a pervasive step toward Orwell’s totalitarian Newspeak, where words mean whatever the bureaucracy want them to mean.

So what can we do?

Fixing this problem begins with fixing Section 18C of the RDA. While some want to abolish it in its entirety, a good start would be to remove the words ‘offend’ and ‘insult’ from the act. This has even drawn strong support from across the political divide. In the last parliament a Bill to this effect (which I co-sponsored) was introduced but was never voted upon.

It’s time for that to change. In the first week back in parliament I’ll be reintroducing the same Bill with the expectation that this parliament will finally get a vote and expose very clearly who among your elected representatives is interested in protecting our freedoms and way of life. It will also indicate those who have been captured by and surrendered to Orwell’s frightening vision characterised in his book Nineteen Eighty-Four.
Until next week.
?
Cory Bernardi

PS. I will also be presenting a petition to the Senate encouraging reform of Section 18C. You can add your name HERE. Please encourage your friends and family to do the same.

You can also keep up with Cory Bernardi on Facebook.

Enough Already! HolocaustDeprogrammingCourse.com

EnjoughAlready!

HolocaustDeprogrammingCourse.com

Holocaust deprogramming course

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

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

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

BREAKING NEWS: Canada’s Terror Patsies, John Nuttall and Amanda Korody’s guilty verdict overturned by Judge

http://greencrowasthecrowflies.blogspot.com/2016/07/breaking-news-canadas-terror-patsies.html

Screen Shot 2016-07-30 at 9.52.04 AM

Screen Shot 2016-07-30 at 10.04.15 AM

Friday, July 29, 2016

BREAKING NEWS: Canada’s Terror Patsies, John Nuttall and Amanda Korody’s guilty verdict overturned by Judge

John Nuttall and Amanda Korody
after hearing verdict today
“The world has enough terrorists…we do not need the police to create more.”
BC Supreme Court Justice Catherine Bruce

In what Vancouver Sun reporter Ian Mulgrew describes as a stunning decision, the Judge in the Canadian Terror Patsies trial today ruled that the pair were entrapped by the RCMP. She overruled last year’s jury “guilty” decision and ruled that the police themselves broke the criminal code and if the guilty verdict were left to stand, it would obstruct justice. Well, that’s about as clear a verdict as can be stated by a judge. But it’s not good enough for the Crown and the police. They’re going to appeal. But looking at the verdict from their POV…what other choice do they have? If they don’t appeal, and win the appeal, the government’s going to get its @$$es sued off by the couple for entrapment, false charges and imprisonment.

Here is the CTV news report on the verdict and I will have some more comments to follow:

“VANCOUVER — A British Columbia couple found guilty of terrorism charges have had their verdicts tossed out in a scathing court decision that flays the RCMP for its “egregious” conduct in manipulating naive suspects into carrying out a police-manufactured crime.
B.C. Supreme Court Justice Catherine Bruce said the Mounties used trickery, deceit and veiled threats to engineer the terrorist acts for which John Nuttall and Amanda Korody were arrested on Canada Day three years ago.
The couple believed they were planting pressure-cooker bombs to kill and maim crowds gathered to celebrate at the B.C. legislature.
“The world has enough terrorists. We do not need the police to create more,” Bruce said in a landmark ruling Friday as she characterized the RCMP’s methods as “multi-faceted and systematic manipulation.”
“There is clearly a need to curtail the actions of police … to ensure that future undercover investigations do not follow the same path.”
Bruce said Mounties involved in a months-long sting launched in early 2013 knowingly exploited Nuttall and Korody’s vulnerabilities to induce them to commit an offence.
She described the pair as marginalized, socially isolated, former heroin addicts dependent on methadone and welfare to subsist and said they were “all talk and no action.”
Nuttall and Korody were recent converts to Islam. Their trial heard Nuttall say in a recording that he wanted to kill and maim countless people during Canada Day festivities in retaliation for Canada’s role in the mistreatment of Muslims in Afghanistan and other countries.
Without the heavy-handed involvement of undercover officers, it would have been impossible for Nuttall and Korody to articulate, craft and execute a terrorist bomb plot, Bruce said.
“Ultimately, their role in carrying out the plan was minuscule compared to what the police had to do,” Bruce said. “It was the police who were the leaders of the plot.”
She also condemned the behaviour of the primary undercover officer who, at the direction of the operation’s overseers, discouraged Nuttall and Korody from seeking outside spiritual guidance and convinced them he was a member of a powerful international terrorist group that would likely kill them if they failed to follow through.
“He was their leader and they were his disciples,” said Bruce, who stayed the proceedings, which threw out the convictions and allowed the couple to walk free after more than three years behind bars.

Screen Shot 2016-07-30 at 10.03.34 AM

They embraced outside B.C. Supreme Court before being temporarily re-arrested and later released from provincial court under a peace bond, which places them under strict conditions for up to a year.
A jury found the pair guilty in June 2015 of terrorism-related charges but Bruce delayed registering the convictions at the request of defence lawyers, who wanted to argue the Mounties had entrapped their clients.
The stay of proceedings means the charges won’t appear on any criminal record and can’t be used against the couple in the future. Had they been convicted, Nuttall and Korody could have faced a maximum sentence of life in prison.
Nuttall’s mother, Maureen Smith, was in court for the ruling and pumped her fist in the air when Bruce ordered a stay of proceedings.
Smith said she was ecstatic about the verdict but still furious at the RCMP.
“It makes me so angry that the cops did that to my son and Amanda,” she said. “The police were dirty crooks for committing these crimes against people, especially marginalized ones.”
Outside court, Crown lawyer Peter Eccles said he was disappointed by the decision and emphasized that the couple still pose a threat to the public.
“Let’s face it, they did do it,” Eccles said about Nuttall and Korody planting the inert explosives. “And they meant it.”
The Crown has filed an appeal of the ruling issued Friday.
Marilyn Sandford, Nuttall’s lawyer, referenced a section of the judge’s ruling, which described the RCMP’s perception of the risk posed by her client as “farcical.”
“We don’t criminalize thought in our country,” Sandford said. “We don’t criminalize crazy ideas. There are a lot of people with crazy ideas who are not inclined to act on them.”
Korody’s lawyer, Mark Jette, described the ruling as a “powerful indictment” against the RCMP and said the next step will be helping the couple re-integrate into society.
Jette rejected the suggestion that the public should be concerned about the ruling hamstringing police from investigating terrorism threats.
This is the first time in Canada that the legal defence of entrapment has been successfully argued in a terrorism case. Three previous attempts failed.”

Screen Shot 2016-07-30 at 10.03.21 AM

This is not over…as John Nuttall himself stated outside the courtroom after the verdict. He said he and Amanda Korody just want to go away and live their lives and have children. But he’s afraid to walk the streets of Canada…afraid the police will frame him again and/or take any children he and Amanda have. He says he can’t live in this country anymore.

I would say that John’s fears are well-founded. The police (and the police officers’ handlers…CSIS) cannot let this verdict stand. Not only will it bring lawsuits by the victimized couple for entrapment and imprisonment, etc…as I said before…but the RCMP and CSIS are in deep doo doo with the international cabal. They were supposed to get a conviction, which would serve as a precedent in the further corruption of the justice system in Canada….and lay the groundwork for more entrapment of vulnerable patsies and more terror plots/false flags for the international terror grist mill they’re setting up.

This Canadian legal precedent can be applied internationally and is a major setback for Terror Inc. The mistake the perpetrators of the entrapment scheme made was that they needed a corrupt judge to go along with the corrupt police officers and CSIS agents. The Canadian judicial system just isn’t far enough along in terms of corrupt judges….and hasn’t kept up with the corruption of the police departments.

And speaking of justice. Kudos to Supreme Court Justice Catherine Bruce…a true Canadian heroine if ever there was one! Hopefully she can now retire in peace. She saved the integrity of the Canadian judicial system…for now at least.

—-

When You Write a Letter on Monika Schaefer’s Behalf

Letters4MonikaHdr

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

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

Escape From The Holocaust Lie by Arthur Topham

EscapeHoloHdr

Escape From The Holocaust Lie

By
Arthur Topham

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

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

DouglasHChristiecopy_zps43b1b5c0

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

tazebook_dees-1-copy

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

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

ZundelTrialFreeSpeechDC800 copy

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

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

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

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

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

As Doug Christie put it in his summation:

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

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

RaulHilbergPic

And the Beat(ing) Goes On

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

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

MonikaSchaeferSorryMomHdr copy

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

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

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

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

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

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

CanadaBBLOBBY3 copy 5

What to do?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

RepealHateLaws-1000 copy 2

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

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

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

______

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

MonikaSchaeferTruth

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

Monika Schaefer

From: Monika Schaefer monika_schaefer@hotmail.com

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

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

Dear Paul,

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

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

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

I agree with those words 100%.

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

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

Sincerely,
Monika Schaefer

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

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

18 July 2016 noon Mountain Time

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Monika Schaefer

The Leader of “Black Lives Matter” is arrested … by RadicalPress Levity Dept.

Obama Arrested

Thanks to Your Ward News‘ graphic artist Robert James for this excellent cartoon.

Regina v Radical Press Legal Update #25

NEWERESTLegalUpdateLogo-700

Regina v Radical Press Legal Update # 25
 July 11th, 2016

RPEdNew400-copy-3 copy 2

Dear Free Speech Defenders and Radical Press Supporters,

It’s been close to a year since I last posted a Legal Update back on August 8th, 2015. That was prior to the actual trial which began on October 26th, 2015 and concluded fourteen days later on November 12th, 2015.

The outcome of the trial, as many will know, resulted in a Guilty charge on Count 1 and a Not Guilty charge on Count 2. What was perplexing for everyone who heard the results (including myself) was that BOTH Counts 1 and 2  were the same charge, that is, both were a Sec. 319(2) Criminal Code of Canada offence which reads:

“(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.”

Immediately following the trial a date was set for December 7th, 2015 in order to fix a date for the Charter application hearing to be heard. The Charter issue had already began back in the spring of 2015 but was postponed pending the outcome of the trial. Had I been victorious and found Not Guilty on both counts there would not have been grounds to file the challenge to the legislation. That date came and went and Crown and Defence were unable to agree upon a date for the hearing. It was put over to January 25th, 2016. On the January date issues came up about Defence calling Expert Witnesses and so it was rescheduled to March 29th, 2016 to fix a date. March 29th came and went and more delays required the setting a new date of April 4th. The 4th of April came and went and another date of May 2nd was chosen. On May 2nd the computers in the courtroom malfunctioned causing further delays and a new date of June 6th was set. On June 6th Defence counsel’s computer went down and a new date of July 11th, 2016 was set. After  eight months and seven attempts to fix a date the deed was finally accomplished on the 11th of July!

As it now stands the Charter application will be heard in Quesnel Supreme Court beginning October 3rd, 2016 and run (possibly) for the full week to October 7th, 2016.

As stated previously, I, as the Applicant will be raising the following issues; ones that are included in my Memorandum of Argument:

• Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code constitutes an infringement of Section 2(b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

• The Crown bears the onus of justifying the infringement of Charter rights on a case-by-case basis.

• The present case is distinguishable from Keegstra on its facts.

• The infringement of Section 2(b) of the Charter is not reasonably justified by Section 1 in the circumstances of this case, and specifically: The “pressing and substantial objective” of legislation must be defined narrowly for the purpose of a Section 1 analysis.

• The use of Section 319(2) in this case is not rationally connected to the pressing and substantial objective of preventing harms associated with hate propaganda.

• Criminal prosecution by indictment is not a minimal impairment of the Applicant’s Charter rights.

• The infringement of the Applicant’s Charter rights is disproportionate to any possible salutary effect that Section 319(2) could have in the circumstances of this case.

• The appropriate remedy is to read into the law a constitutional exemption, to the effect that Section 319(2) is not a reasonable limit on Section 2(b) in circumstances where the allegedly hateful material is legal to possess and lawfully available from other sources.

The bottom line is that Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code constitutes an infringement of Section 2(b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms which states:

“Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: …

(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication …”

The Order that I intend to pursue is based upon Section 52(1) of the Constitution Act1982 reads as follows:

“52. (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect.”

Citing R. v. Sharpe in support of Section 52(1) I will be respectfully requesting an order that would read as follows:

A declaration that Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code constitutes an infringement of Section 2(b) of the Charter, as already established in R. v. Keegstra.

A declaration, pursuant to Section 52(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982, that Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code is not reasonably justified by Section 1 of the Charter in circumstances where the allegedly hateful material is legal to possess and lawfully available from other sources.

Crown of course will be arguing that the applicant’s (my) argument is entirely without merit.

Now that the date has been set there is still the responsibility on my part to cover a number of financial costs related to the hiring of Expert Witnesses and also travel expenses and accommodations for legal assistants who I will be bringing to Quesnel for the week of the Charter hearing. These and many other miscellaneous costs that are part of this ongoing process must be raised over the next two months in order accomplish our goals. Any help that people can offer will be gratefully accepted and put to good use.

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 All for your ongoing help throughout this long process!

The Jew World Order – Can it be fixed? a RadicalPress.com Poster

BobCanYouFixIt??? copy

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”

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

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.”

—-

PM JUSTIN TRUDEAU: Just Another Jew-controlled Puppet Pushing the “6 Million” Holohoax Lie

TheHOLOPUPPET

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!

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

MUSLIMS (AND CHRISTIANS) THE BAD GUYS? a Radical Press Public Service Announcement

KeepYerEyeontheBall!BLUE copy

Editor’s Note: Let’s not delude ourselves about who the real enemy of humanity is. Those who fall for the lies of the Zionist media campaign against the Muslims (as well as the Christians) are being hoodwinked into aiding and abetting the Jewish agenda of divide and conquer of nations for the benefit of their NWO program. Stay focused on the ultimate designers of deception – Israel and World Jewry headed by the Rothschild criminal cartel.

Books of Importance: The Holocaust Hoax Exposed by Victor Thorn on Amazon. com

61S8bffFqrL

The Holocaust Hoax Exposed

Perfect Paperback – March 15, 2012

by Victor Thorn (Author)

4 out of 5 stars

Today, if a book similar to this one were published in Europe, its author would be arrested and imprisoned. Their crime: simply questioning the so-called holocaust where six million Jews were allegedly exterminated during WW II. Indeed, researchers have endured solitary confinement, brutal beatings by Jewish assailants, ongoing harassment, lengthy court battles, career suicide, and media attacks directed against their work all because they presented a revisionist history of this pivotal event. Other writers have been the victims of hate crimes, extensive smear campaigns, fines, death threats, and monetary rewards placed upon their heads after going into hiding. The perpetrators behind these jack-booted Thought Police tactics are an entire holohoax industry devoted to suppressing factual data in favor of peddling heavy-handed doses of propaganda. Despite these obvious dangers, The Holocaust Hoax Exposed dissects every element of what has become the 20th century s most grotesque conspiracy. Covered in jarring detail is the mythology surrounding concentration camps, the truth about Zyklon B, Anne Frank s fable, how the absurd six million figure has become a laughingstock, and the betrayal by maniacal Zionists of their own Jewish people that led to their deaths (via starvation and disease) after Allied bombings cutoff supply lines to German work camps. Yet, the only way an Israeli state could be created on stolen Palestinian land following WW II was through the most outlandish lies imaginable. Consequently, the holohoax industry has become a tyrannical dictatorship that incessantly manipulates, distorts, marginalizes and manufactures false results to achieve their Machiavellian ends. By taking their hysterical obsessions to psychopathic levels, the charlatans behind this ruse make it glaringly apparent how weak their foundation is. To compensate, these intellectually dishonest con men (and women) continue to persecute revisionist historians all because they re incapable of supporting their arguments through legitimate debate. The Holocaust Hoax Exposed is the final nail in a rotting coffin that has long been buried beneath a plethora of deceit.

Click HERE to view book on Amazon.com

Merry Christmas and a Happy, Hopeful New Year from RadicalPress.com

MerryChristmasA&STopham

ATEditorPic185

Dear Radical Readers and Friends of Freedom of Speech Everywhere,

On behalf of my wife Shastah and myself I would like to thank everyone who has been standing with RadicalPress.com over the past year and longer in my ongoing struggle to defend the legal right of all Canadians, as stated in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, to be able to express their thoughts and viewpoints on the Internet and in other media without fear of being attacked and persecuted by the government of Canada via the use of Sec. 319(2) of the Criminal Code.

This past year saw the case move to the actual stage of trial which commenced in the B.C. Supreme Court, Quesnel, Canada on October 26, 2015 and ran until November 12, 2015 when the jury of 8 women and 4 men found me guilty in Count 1 and not guilty in Count 2 of the identical charge 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.”

As a result of this peculiar and strange ruling the stage has been now set for the continuation of my Charter challenge to Sec. 319(2) in the coming new year. The time when this challenge will occur is yet to be determined but the week beginning January 25, 2016 will see a date fixed for the Constitutional argument to be heard.

In the event that my Charter argument fails to convince the Supreme Court that Sec. 319(2) is in violation of Sec. 2b of Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms then I will then have the right to appeal the decision of the court on Count 1 that was handed down November 12, 2015.

There were a number of extenuating circumstances that arose during the actual trial which will, of necessity, come to the forefront in the appeal and portend a strong case for having the decision tossed out and a not guilty decision rendered. Space here doesn’t allow for any elaboration on the process but the new evidence will be forthcoming in the new year.

As of today I am still raising money in order to purchase the transcripts from the trial. Not only does the legal process in this country unfairly work against the individual through unjust legislation such as Sec. 319(2) of the criminal code but when forced to defend oneself against such specious forms of “thought crime” laws the costs incurred are then further exacerbated by the state in the form of  the victim having to pay exorbitant costs for the transcripts of the proceedings in order to continue on with their defence.

As  it now stands the transcripts will cost me $7,500.00 to purchase from the sole contractor to the Attorney General’s office in B.C. JCWord Assist Ltd. The amount of support and funding for this onerous and ridiculously unfair process of procuring the transcripts has been overwhelmingly positive and to date we have already raised over $7,000.00 toward this end. I am deeply appreciative and humbled by this generosity on the part of supporters world-wide who’ve found it in their hearts to help me out. The transcripts are vital to my defence and will prove extremely useful in the days ahead as this battle to retain our right to freedom of speech continues to unfold in the Supreme Court of Canada.

The transcripts though are not the only expenses that I face and therefore I am forced to continue to ask for financial assistance and will likely do so until the process wends its way to a final outcome. It’s for this reason that I must therefore append my donation “shingle” to this Christmas greeting as well.

As the new year approaches I am filled with hope, strength and an unwavering determination to carry on with this fight until the odious sections of our legal system that make it a criminal act to speak one’s mind are defeated and repealed once and for all.

The world today stands at the brink of despair and hope. Never has there been a more urgent time in our history for the people to be able to stand up and speak out for their basic human rights in order to defend their nation against the incredibly powerful and deceptive actions of their respective governments and media; political bodies and complicit agencies who have shown themselves, over and over, to be working against the fundamental rights of the individual in order to broaden the scope of their control and propaganda now being forced upon the minds and hearts of people around the globe all at the behest of special interest groups who wield, altogether, untold amounts of unwarranted power and influence over nation states worldwide.

2016 bodes well in terms of providing the impetus to speak out and be heard. Let us pray that vigilance and discernment will be the watchwords in the days ahead and that we will retain our basic rights and continue to live freely and in peace and harmony with all of humanity.

May God bless the peacemakers and all who strive for justice and truth!

Sincerely,

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

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!