FREEDOM TO OFFEND EVERYONE BUT THE JEWS By Arthur Topham

FREEDOM TO OFFEND EVERYONE BUT THE JEWS

By
Arthur Topham

January 25th, 2017

Fake News sites come in all sizes, shapes and flavours during these heady days of Alternative vs Zionist media wars. And one of Canada’s top deceptive “Fake News” sites has to be TheRebel.Media run by “Rebel Commander” Ezra Levant, Zionist Jew and self-chosen saviour of Canada’s dumbed down goyim ‘christians’, assorted atheists, Germanophobes and most recently Islamophobes.

Ezra loves to think of himself as Canada’s Number One defender of “Free Speech” and has been active in the free speech movement for a long time. In fact it was the issue of freedom of speech that first brought him to my attention a decade ago when the Zionist Jew lobby organization B’nai Brith Canada first filed a Sec. 13 “hate speech” complaint against me with the Canadian Human Rights Commission in the summer of 2007 and I suddenly found myself the latest member of that exclusive Canadian association known as the “Anti-Semitic, Racist, Jew-hating, Neo-Nazi, Hate-mongerer’s Club.”

Of course I wasn’t alone any longer in my then ongoing struggle to bring forward to the Canadian public the facts surrounding the true nature of political Zionism and the ongoing conspiracy by this Rothschild created Apocalyptic Beast to wreak havoc not only in the desert sands of middle eastern Arab nations but around the globe in their relentless quest to create a new world order under the iron heel of Talmudic totalitarian despotism. As is evident in the graphic below I was now amongst the former luminaries of Canada’s modern-day revisionists who, ahead of me, had already solved the ancient riddle known as “The Jewish Problem.”

Initially, because Ezra Levant had also been accused of a Sec. 13 “hate crime” by an Islamic organization here in Canada prior to my own case, a mutual acquaintance attempted to connect us up in the vain hope that we might work together but Levant’s immediate response was to label me an “anti-Semite” and therefore one of the untouchables.

Since that time I’ve covered a number of Levant’s serpentine adventures in the mainstream media, including the example of when he has used his position on national television back in 2012 to libel and vilify me personally via his former position with Sun News media and his tv show “The Source.”

Levant’s modus operandi is to hoodwink gullible goyim Zionist Christians and other assorted small “c” conservatives, atheists and regular tv watchers and mainstream newspaper readers and fill their minds with hatred toward Muslims and Germans and anyone else who might display the chutzpah to criticize the Zionist ideology or the racist actions of the state of Israel or anything remotely related to enterprises that the Jews have their fingers and their shekels invested in.

A couple of other related articles on this zio-wolf in sheep’s clothing that readers might wish to take a look at are the following:

?http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=5722

http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=6000?

A recent article by one of Commissar Levant’s lieutenants, the young, pretty naive and zealous Faith Goldy, a self-confessed “fearless journalist and devout Catholic who stands up for family values, freedom, and firearms” titled, FREEDOM TO OFFEND: Support free speech, not sharia! caught my attention as its title obviously calls out to all those who value the God-given right to be able to speak one’s mind openly and freely without fear of the state or some special interest group laying a “hate speech” complaint against you.

In her article, embellished with a glitzy video presentation to enhance her Islamophobic argument, Faith Goldy slams the Liberal government’s “anti-Islamophobia initiative”; one that was brought on by a petition to the government calling “upon the House of Commons to recognize that terrorists are not real Muslims by condemning all forms of Islamophobia, with no exact definition of what they meant by the term.”

Faith was vehemently outraged by the fact that the petition had gained unanimous consent of Canada’s MP’s. She was also incensed by the Liberal’s tacitly implied proposal to introduce further draconian legislation to prohibit Canadians from “offending” Muslims; legislation that would most likely fall into Canada’s current Criminal Code “Hate Propaganda” sections 318 to 320, the very same legislation that the foreign Zionist Jew lobbyist organization B’nai Brith Canada used to indict me back in 2012 under their spurious claim that:

“Roy Arthur TOPHAM, between the 28th day of April, 2011 and the 4th day of May, 2012, inclusive, at or near Quesnel, in the Province of British Columbia, did by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, willfully promote hatred against an identifiable group, people of the Jewish religion or ethnic origin, contrary to Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code.”

Faith sums up her angst with the Liberals by stating:

“In short: The Canadian government is preparing to silence anyone who criticizes Islam.

Their anti-Islamophobia motion (which will, in all likelihood, be voted on during this parliamentary session) resembles a kind of blasphemy law in favour of one preferred religion above all others. If this motion passes, Canadians can be persecuted for expressing any criticism of Islam, even when warranted.

This unfounded anti-Islamophobia legislation flies in the face of our Constitution and its embedded Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Sharia law and it’s related speech codes are not a reasonable limit on my freedoms.

According to our charter of rights and freedoms — we’re all equal. Every individual (not a belief system or ideology) is equal before and under the law. We all have equal protections and benefit equally from the law.

Muslims do not get special treatment or protections.”

Enter the Bigots and Hypocrites

Allow me now to repeat what I did on my website with Theodore N. Kaufmann’s book, Germany Must Perish! in a satire of it that I titled, Israel Must Perish! and change but a few salient words of what Faith wrote so it now reads:

“In short: The Canadian government is preparing to silence anyone who criticizes Judaism.

Their anti-Semitism motion (which will, in all likelihood, be voted on during this parliamentary session) resembles a kind of blasphemy law in favour of one preferred religion above all others. If this motion passes, Canadians can be persecuted for expressing any criticism of Judaism, even when warranted.

This unfounded anti-Semitic legislation flies in the face of our Constitution and its embedded Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Talmudic Jew law and it’s related speech codes are not a reasonable limit on my freedoms.

According to our charter of rights and freedoms — we’re all equal. Every individual (not a belief system or ideology) is equal before and under the law. We all have equal protections and benefit equally from the law.

Jews do not get special treatment or protections.”

Now either Goldy the intrepid and fearless journalist is extremely naive when it comes to Canada’s “Hate Propaganda” legislation or else she’s intentionally avoiding the fact that these laws were knowingly and specifically introduced into Canadian jurisprudence by the Jewish lobbyists here in Canada in order to first and foremost protect the Jews and the actions of the foreign state of Israel. There’s no other reasonable explanation for why she would make such a ludicrous statement that the Liberal’s “anti-Islamophobia motion resembles a kind of blasphemy law in favour of one preferred religion above all others.” Canada’s “Hate Propaganda” laws are precisely that; laws that “favour of one preferred religion above all others” and that religion just happens to be Judaism, whether Goldy likes it or not.

Surely, as a Roman Catholic, Faith Goldy must have a very clear understanding that the Catholics and Christians in general certainly don’t warrant any protection under Canada’s current “Hate Propaganda” laws. Canadians are free to criticize, vilify, malign, libel and hate Christians as much as they like. As a Christian I can verify the veracity of this statement. The same goes for any other religion, with the one exception – Judaism – and that’s why the Zionist Jew mainstream media here in Canada has been attacking the Muslims with a vengeance and with impunity ever since Israel and its Mossad secret service, in collusion with the Zionist infested White House in Washington, D.C. and its Zionist controlled CIA, pulled off the greatest caper of the 21 century when they orchestrated 911 and then blamed it on the Muslims in order to justify their planned, pre-emptive wars with any Arab nation not willing to bow down and kiss the ass of either the Zionist state of Israel or its global bully the USA.

If Faith Goldy is the “fearless journalist” that she professes to be then she would display that professed trait by looking fearlessly into the politics of Canada’s media and research the involvement of the Jew lobbyists like B’nai Brith Canada, the former Canadian Jewish Congress and the more recent umbrella org know as the Centre for Israel & Jewish Affairs and the roles they’ve played in corrupting and poisoning Canada’s justice system so that it consistently and inevitably favours only one religion, that of the Jews.

But alas, I fear that this seemingly narrow-minded, glib-tongued Roman Catholic is not about to face the truth about Judaism and its bastard satanic, atheistic son Zionism any more that she’s about to face the truth about Ezra Levant and his goy-seducing “Rebel” disinformation site that she’s now using as a soap box to promote the Zionist agenda of spewing forth endless hatred toward Muslims, all of which is designed with the long range goal of inciting yet another major war between the Christians and the Islamic nations; one that will, as all the wars inevitably do, solely benefit the Jews and their sinister plans for global hegemony.

The double-edged sword

Allow me to conclude this critique of Faith Goldy and Ezra Levant with a general explanation as to why the Zionist Jew media and their lobbyists here in Canada were so fervently opposed to Sec. 13 and its “hate speech” provisions as contained in the Canadian Human Rights Act and why, when that draconian legislation was repealed in 2012, they didn’t then proceed on to ridding the country of the far more dangerous, Orwellian and freedom-denying legislation contained in Sec. 319(2) of the Canadian Criminal Code known as the “Hate Propaganda” laws.

For many years the Jewish lobby groups in Canada used the Sec. 13 legislation to attack anyone who criticized either Israel or its political ideology known as Zionism. Then, the Muslim organizations here in Canada realized that they too could wield this same legislation in order to prohibit the Jew mainstream media from spreading hate and lies about them and so they set out to do just that. They laid complaints against Ezra Levant for publishing the insulting and degrading images of their spiritual leader Mohammad as well as Mark Steyn; two Canadian Jews who had been vilifying and promoting hatred toward the Muslims and their Islam religion for years. On top of that Steyn was a regular contributor at Maclean’s Magazine and suddenly it found itself embroiled in the Sec. 13 “hate speech” complaint. That was when the Zionist Jews in Canada finally saw the light and realized that the sword they’d inserted into the Canadian Human Rights Act right after 911 was double-edged and could be used against them too. Oi veh! they exclaimed. Such a deal! This law has to go. And it did. It took a number of years of promoting it via the Jewish media establishment and on social media and blogs around the country but eventually enough awareness was raised and political pressure applied that the Conservative government under Harper finally buckled under and decided they had to get rid of Sec. 13.

I, like many others, fought long and hard to have the legislation repealed. Of course I had a vested interest in seeing it thrown out. I was being forced to run the gamut of both the Canadian Human Rights Commission and the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal where “Truth” was no defence and the only outcome of appearing before the dreaded Stalinist tribunal was to be found guilty and have one’s rights to freedom of speech squashed along with the strong possibility of incurring exorbitant fines and restrictions on using the internet and ever publishing one’s views again. And I wasn’t alone. There were dozens of others who had already suffered and were still caught up in this vortex of madness that the Zionists had created thanks to their narcissistic, power-crazed delusions of power and grandeur. When the legislation was repealed there was great rejoicing amongst those who had been caught up in the merciless machinations of this Talmudic-driven censorship machine that had been running over our Constitutional and Charter rights for so long.

By the time the repeal occurred I had already come to the conclusions stated above and realized that the chances were not likely that the same forces who had brought to bear enough political and media pressure upon the government to repeal Sec. 13 were now going to do the same for Canada’s “Hate Propaganda” laws. And for obvious reasons. The “Hate Propaganda” laws had taken painstaking years of Jewish lobbying in order to get them implanted in the Criminal Code and it was understood by the Zionists that these laws were their last refuge and defence against having their long-range, secret agenda exposed to the general public on the internet. Without these Bolshevik-inspired laws to stem the inevitable tide of “anti-Semitism” that would automatically and naturally begin to rise once the public began realizing what the bigger picture was all about and their game plan was unravelling on the Internet they knew damn well that in order to keep the gullible goyim in their place and restrict the truth about their conspiracy they had to keep those “Hate Propaganda” laws intact and protected.

No sooner had Sec. 13 been repealed the same B’nai Brith Jewish lobbyists who filed their Sec. 13 complaint against me did an about turn and filed a Sec. 319(2) criminal code “hate complaint” against me in order to perpetuate the harassment and intimidation and legal torture that had finally ceased with the repeal of Sec. 13. When my trial came up in the fall of 2015 none of the former “rebels” and “free speech warriors” who I had worked with on the Sec. 13 campaign were to be found. Former allies in the fight for “freedom of speech” scurried like rats off a sinking ship. The likes of the great “free speech” fighters like Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn suddenly pulled a disappearing act. Others, like Marc Lemire, whose Sec. 13 battle was the final spike driven through the draconian heart of the Sec. 13 legislation and who I had worked tirelessly to assist, were now as silent as lambs when it came to Regina vs Roy Arthur Topham. Mark and Connie Fournier who had run the conservative website and forum known as “Free Dominion” and, ironically, had won the George Orwell Award from Lawyer Doug Christie’s Canadian Free Speech League after labouring for years to have Sec. 13 repealed also faded into the void when the trial of Arthur Topham was reported across the country in the Zionist media. All of my efforts to help them during their tribulations proved fruitless. Instead of standing up for Canada and going the extra mile required in order to destroy these “Hate Propaganda” laws once and for all they chose instead to betray the country and their fellow partisans in favour of Israel, Zionism and Judaism. Hypocrites, one and all, they will go down in history as being little more than Zionist sycophants who enabled the destruction of the nation’s Charter rights to freedom of expression.

God have mercy on their tormented, deluded souls.

As for Faith Goldy there appears to be little Hope and no Charity for the Islamic nations of the world. It appears that Goldy has traded her Bible in for a copy of the Babylonian Talmud and is now in total denial of the words of Jesus Christ, her supposed Saviour, who once so prophetically stated in Revelation 2 verse 9: “I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.”

——

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

Merry Christmas from RadicalPress.com

goldenchristmasgreetingsrp-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 the Special 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 the Special 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, focusing 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 focused 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 traveling 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.)
 

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

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

When is this “6 Million” bullshit going to end? A Public Service Announcement from RadicalPress.com

6MilJustin

THE TRIAL: REGINA V ROY ARTHUR TOPHAM

TheTrialHEADERFINAL copy

ATEditorPic185 copy

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

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

_________________________________

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

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

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

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

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

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

DAY7173249.Nov 3 15.Trial.Electronic copy 2

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Extraordinary Trial of Arthur Topham by Eve Mykytyn

Screen Shot 2015-11-07 at 4.51.44 PM

The Extraordinary Trial of Arthur Topham

Part 1

by Eve Mykytyn / November 7th, 2015

Five security guards, members of the RCMP, two in bulletproof vests, all entrants pass through metal detectors, undergo a wand search, check all electronics including cell phones and have their bags meticulously scrutinized. Why all the security? The crown was presenting its criminal case against Arthur Topham, for the crime of “hate.’

The Law

Section 319 of Canada’s criminal code is an extraordinary law by most western standards. It reads, in relevant part: “(2) Every one who, by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, willfully 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.

The statute does not define hatred, but does provide 4 statutory defenses.

(a) if he establishes that the statements communicated were true;
(b) if, in good faith, the person expressed or attempted to establish by an argument an opinion on a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text;
(c) if the statements were relevant to any subject of public interest, the discussion of which was for the public benefit, and if on reasonable grounds he believed them to be true; or
(d) if, in good faith, he intended to point out, for the purpose of removal, matters producing or tending to produce feelings of hatred toward an identifiable group in Canada.

It is important to understand that the prosecution (the Crown), with all of its resources, need only prove ‘hate,’ and then the only available defenses are affirmative, meaning that the burden of proof switches to the defense.

This week I attended some of the extraordinary trial of Arthur Topham in the Supreme Court (the highest provincial trial court) in Quesnel, British Columbia. As a lawyer, the differences in procedure between American and Canadian courts were of interest to me. Ahead of the trial, I read a little about the Canadian legal system and found that on paper the differences appeared minor. I don’t know if the huge differences in practice that I observed in this trial has to do with the way trials are usually conducted in Canada, the understandable loosening of formality in a court in a small town and/or the nature of the trial.

The Background

The history of Mr. Topham’s travails can be found here.

It is sufficient to understand that this trial follows eight years of harassment. Mr. Topham has already had to close his successful remodeling business. This is a criminal trial, and Mr. Topham could go to prison for two years. Mr. Topham and his wife live on a remote property on which they maintain a chicken coop, grow vegetables and engage in other rural activities. But it is clear that Mrs. Topham could not live there alone. These are not wealthy people. Mrs. Topham told me that she is not a political person, but she loves and supports her husband and believes in free speech. The defendant and his wife have exhibited bravery, courtesy and calm to a degree that is awe inspiring.

The police arrested Mr. Topham for ‘hate’ after they received complaints from various Jewish people who found his writing hateful. Although the police clearly knew where he lived, they arrested Topham as he and his wife were driving, leaving his wife stranded and Mr. Topham in jail. While jailed, Mr. Topham’s house was searched and his computers, shotguns and other items were taken. (Shotguns are essential in an area where grizzlies often decide to take up residence on the porch.)

The Trial

I understand that before I arrived, the Crown presented the arresting and investigating officers. Clearly the officers are not qualified to establish ‘hate,’ so how does the Crown do this? There is no victim to present, no one whose injuries the jury must assess, instead it is to the jury to decide if ‘hate’ is present, no injury need be shown.

The Crown chose to use an expert witness to show hate, and qualified Len Rudner as an expert in Judaism and anti-Semitism. Mr. Rudner’s biography indicates that he is a ‘professional Jew,’ in that he has been employed for the last 15 years by the Canadian Jewish Congress and its successor organization, the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA). Prior to this trial, Rudner has attempted to force Mr. Topham’s internet service provider to shut down his web site, and has lodged civil complaints against Mr. Topham.

The crown used its questioning of Rudner to introduce what it considered to be the most damaging articles on Topham’s site, Radical Free Press (RFP). These included a list of books and articles, all of which are easily accessible on the internet and/or for sale at Amazon.ca.

Most of these publications accuse Jews of some pretty nasty politics. What at first appeared to be the Crown’s most damning evidence was a picture of a stereotyped Jew holding puppets that were Canadian politicians. On cross examination, it was hard for Mr. Rudner to counter what a careful viewing showed to be a clear political statement. I think the shocking picture of the Jew served to make the statement more powerful. But is it the job of the court to evaluate the strength of a political cartoon?

Without going to the truth of the matters presented, I am troubled that Mr. Topham is on trial for reprinting sources that are widely available in Canada. Again, on cross examination, Mr. Rudner had to admit that this was so. A quick google search for “the protocols of the Elders of Zion,” reveals hundreds of sources that display the protocols in full.

The procedure, at least in this court, was that all objections had to be heard outside the presence of the jury. This meant that each objection forced the jury to leave the room (not the judge and the lawyers) thus making an objection, even for the record, was a cumbersome and time consuming process.

In one of these interminable objection interludes, the Crown stated that ‘free speech is not on trial here.” Shockingly, Judge Butler echoed her sentiments. Legal fictions (such as that all lawyers are capable of providing an adequate defense) are generally employed to allow the system to work. In this case, the legal fiction went to the charge itself. Mr. Topham is on trial for writing and for publishing articles that presumably reflect his beliefs. What else is free speech if not that?

Mr. Rudner indicated under direct examination that he was the author of the written expert opinion he provided to the court. This was troubling, because the Crown had originally employed Bernie Farber as its expert, and Mr. Farber had provided an opinion that was word for word the same as Mr. Rudner’s. If Mr. Rudner did not commit perjury, he was at least deceptive in his presentation of his expert opinion.

The Defense

Barclay Johnson, defense attorney extraordinaire, gave an opening argument that was an impassioned call for freedom of thought and speech. Later the Crown objected, but the damage so-called had been done. Mr. Johnson endured a tongue lashing and a civil procedure lesson from the judge. The jury was instructed to ignore some of Mr. Johnson’s speech. I assume that this helped plant the speech more firmly in their minds.

Mr. Topham countered the charge of hate and argued as a defense that the writing was political with an expert of his own. Gilad Atzmon, the iconoclastic jazz musician, writer and philosopher volunteered his time to help. It seems wrong to enjoy a presentation when a man’s freedom is at stake, but it was delightful to watch Mr. Atzmon ignore or flaunt every rule of procedure and get away with it.

Atzmon was qualified as an expert on Jewish Identity Politics a topic that clearly few in the court had heard of. In his most amusing argument on the subject, Atzmon explained that there was a section on identity politics in every bookshop, and that topics included the LBGT community. Faced with political correctness, the court backed off and agreed to allow Atzmon in as an expert.

Atzmon began by explaining his system of characterization. He divides ‘the Jews’ into three non-exclusive categories. The first, Judaism, is made up of religious Jews. The second, Jews, are people who are Jewish by an accident of birth. The third, and most important category for this purpose is ‘Jewishness,’ those who identify politically as Jews. Mr. Atzmon described the first two categories as innocent. Objections were raised, innocent is, after all, a legal conclusion and if the first two are innocent, the third is, by implication, guilty. Judge Butler agreed with the Crown’s objection and then allowed Atzmon to proceed in describing the first two categories as innocent. From then on, the defense attorney, the prosecution and the judge adopted these categories for clarity of discussion.

Atzmon argued that contemporary opposition to Jewry is driven by political and ideological arguments; that no one criticizes Jews as a race or a biology. There is little criticism of Judaism, the religion, as a whole, but there has been some criticism leveled at a few aspects of the religion such as blood rituals and goy hatred. The thrust of his argument was that Jewish politics and ideology must be subject to criticism like all other politics and ideologies.

Like a rabbi on acid, Atzmon explained his philosophy, allowed few questions, and browbeat the attorneys. He dealt with his own philosophical approach to Jewishness and the dangers of believing oneself ‘chosen’ and then he got in a few swipes at categories one and two as well. The jury was mesmerized. Later, Atzmon told friends that he had directed his remarks to the juror sleeping in the first row. If he could be made to listen, presumably the others could as well.

Atzmon made the point that many of the most apparently anti-Semitic writings were made by the early Zionists. According to Atzmon, Herzl and others saw a problem with European Jewry and thought that the existence of a homeland could cure problems such as usury, discrimination against non-Jews, exclusiveness, etc. The take away is that if Jews are entitled to criticize Jews, why can’t other people? This is especially true because the Jews have a disproportionate amount of power in government, finance and the media. They clearly have the means to counter criticism if they choose to do so.

Part 2 will cover the closing arguments and the verdict.
Eve Mykytyn graduated from Boston University School of Law and was admitted to bar of the state of New York. Read other articles by Eve.
 
•••0•••
 
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

 

Tim Hortons Censors RadicalPress.com in their Coffee Outlets across Canada by Arthur Topham

TimHortonCensorship

Tim Hortons Censors RadicalPress.com in their Coffee Outlets across Canada

By
Arthur Topham

RPEdNew300 copy

Will it ever end? Everywhere we turn these day on the Internet someone is trying to censor you. Now it appears that one of Canada’s oldest coffee outlets, Tim Hortons, has also joined the Zionist Jews in deciding who they will allow their customers to visit online while they’re having coffee and a donut.

Over the past while I’ve had a number of readers email me telling me that when they’re in Tim Hortons they can’t access my website and when they try to they get the following message pop up on their screen:

THAccess denied

“inappropriate content”???!!! Says who? Is there someone working in this coffee venue who sits and views every website on the net and makes some subjective, arbitrary decision that they don’t like RadicalPress.com and so they simply block it to spare their thousands of customers from seeing the site?

Well I certainly don’t think there’s anything “inappropriate” on my site and so on August 11, 2015 I sent an email to Tim Hortons at the address they provide in their pop-up window TimHortonsWiFi@timhortons.com saying:

Dear Tim Hortons WiFi,

It has been brought to my attention by a number of my readership both here in British Columbia and also in Alberta that when frequenting your coffee outlets they are unable to access my website RadicalPress.com.

Being a regular visitor to one of your outlets in Quesnel, British Columbia where I live and run my publishing business I have also experienced this. Here is a screen shot of what readers and I see when we go to visit my site and read articles and news stories which I have been publishing online for the past 16 years. (see above)

I am not sure where you have received your information that there is “inappropriate content” on my site but my educated guess is that whatever software you are using for your WiFi system has erroneously and/or possibly intentionally included my website for purely political reasons.

I have ran a publishing business here in British Columbia  since June of 1998 and have been online since 1999. While Radical Press is known to be a part of the Alternative News media rather than the Mainstream media this does not imply that the content on my website is somehow “inappropriate”. It may be contrary to the Mainstream media but then that is perfectly legitimate in a free and democratic society such as Canada is.

I would therefore request that you please unblock my website so that your customers can not only enjoy your fine coffee but also whatever news sites that they, of their own free will, choose to visit while they are in your restaurant.

Since realizing that you are censoring my business I have stopped visiting my local Timmy’s and now spend my money at Starbucks instead. I would like to be able to buy your coffee and donuts as I have been doing for many many years but of course I expect you to respect my right to remain in business as well.

I look forward to hearing from you regarding this matter at your earliest convenience.
Sincerely,

Arthur Topham
Pub/Ed

radical@radicalpress.com
The Radical Press
Canada’s Radical News Network
“Digging to the root of the issues since 1998”

The next day, August 12, 2015 I received the following email from TimHortonsWiFi@timhortons.com:

Good day,

Thank you for your email.
We have received your request and it is in the process of being reviewed.

TimHortonsWiFi@timhortons.com

I immediately replied saying, “Thank you for your prompt reply. I will await your review.”

By August 16 I still had no response and so I wrote again saying:

Dear TimHortonsWiFi,

It is my understanding that you are in the coffee and food industry and not in the business of censoring websites that are legitimate business enterprises.

I feel that you’ve had more than sufficient time to come to what ought to be a very simple solution which is to unblock my site.

We in the Alternative News Media don’t take too kindly to harassment and censorship as that is the main reason why we exist because the mainstream media isn’t doing its job.

I will ask you civilly once again to unblock my site and should I not get a clear answer from you within 48 hours then you will have to bear the consequences of your irresponsible actions.

You have absolutely NO reason to be doing this and ought to be ashamed of your undemocratic, communist tactics.

The next day, August 17, I received an identical reply as I did the first time I contacted them telling me that my “request is in the process of being reviewed”.

Again I replied by stating:

It’s apparent that you either have a robot responding to my emails or else you are not serious in attending to my concerns regarding your censorship actions against my website.

As I stated I would like my site unblocked within 48 hours.

By August 19, 2015 there was still no reply forthcoming from TimHortons so I sent them one final email stating:

Dear TimHortons,

This is my final gesture of good will. You need to ask yourselves whether or not it’s worthwhile for you to be censoring other business’s websites.

I have yet to go online with my planned campaign of telling Canadians and the world at large about your illegal and unethical practises and the boycott of your business.

The following graphic is but a sample of what you will have to deal with.

TimHortonCensorship

Please reconsider your position and respond to me immediately or else I will take it that you are determined to block my site.

As of August 22, 2015 and numerous requests I’ve yet to hear back and so I’m taking my concerns online as I advised TimHortons.

Obviously whoever is in charge of dealing with blocked sites on Tim Hortons wifi is asleep at the wheel and in dire need of a Extra Large Triple Triple dark roast in order to wake them up!

This is where you, dear friends on Facebook and readers elsewhere can lend me a hand. It won’t cost you a cent. All you need to do is take a moment of your time and send Timmy a brief email asking them to unblock RadicalPress.com. When you do that please bcc me a copy of your email at radical@radicalpress.com so I can get an idea of how many requests are being sent to them.

I’m hoping that if they start to receive more requests than just from me that they will unblock the site.

Also, Tim Hortons is on Facebook as well so maybe those of you on FB might pop over to their page and post a comment regarding this matter. I certainly plan to do so.

Let’s see if we can help them to change their minds.

——

QuesnelCaribooObserver: Topham grateful for legal ally by Autumn MacDonald, Observer Reporter

 CaribObserverTophamGrateful

Topham grateful for legal ally

By

Autumn MacDonald

Observer Reporter

 

He says if controversial speech is prohibited then no speech is safe.

Jeremy Maddock is studying law at UVIC and is currently helping Arthur Topham, charged with “promotion of hatred” navigate the judicial system.

And after the death of his lawyer Doug Christie in March of 2013, Topham said he’s even more grateful.

“He’s been so dedicated since Doug passed away,” Topham said.

“I’m so grateful, otherwise I’m sure I’d be hooped.”

Maddock, who was working under Christie for three years, said Topham’s case and the issue of freedom of expression are his motivating factors for offering his time and expertise.

“If you’re having a political discussion – I would hope you would have the right to agree or disagree with foreign government,” he said.

Topham was arrested and his house searched in May 16 of 2012 after it was determined there were “reasonable grounds the offence of promotion of hatred was committed.”

At the time a number of items were seized, including:

• Computer, laptop, smartphone, or device that accesses the Internet and is capable of uploading and downloading information, and all their peripheral equipment, computer discs, drives or storage devices which could be used to store information; and

• Billing records, receipts and correspondence with ABC Communications and Netfirms and correspondence in the form of mail or physical documents directed to Radical Press.

The alleged offence falls under section 319(2) of the Criminal Code: willful promotion of hatred. The search warrant and arrest were executed by the New Westminster Police Services, British Columbia Hate Crime Team.

At the time Topham was prohibited from accessing the Internet and operating his websites, including the Radical Press, but those restrictions were reinstated in early November of 2012.

Anyone wishing to contribute to Topham’s “freedom of expression fund” check out, http://gogetfunding.com/project/canadian-publisher-faces-jail-for-political-writings

——

Je suis Arthur – Images by Radical Press

JSAT7

JSAT1

JSAT11

JSAT4

JSAT6JSAT14

JSAT2

JSAT15

TO ASSIST ARTHUR IN HIS FIGHT TO DEFEND FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN CANADA PLEASE SEE:

http://gogetfunding.com/project/freedom-of-speech-in-canada-under-attack

OR HERE:

http://www.radicalpress.com/?page_id=657

Je suis Dieudonne! – RadicalPress.com

Je suis Dieudonne!! 800 copy

Repeal Canada’s Zionist-Created “Hate Propaganda” laws

RepealHateLaws 1000

Happy Thanksgiving from The Radical Press

Thanksgiving copy

Ontario Civil Liberties Association (OCLA) issues strong support statement and online Petition for Arthur Topham and RadicalPress.com by Arthur Topham

OCLA Hdr

RPEdNew400 copy

Dear Readers and Supporters of Freedom of Speech,

After eight years of unrelenting legal harassment (commencing in 2007) on the part of the Canadian government and the masonic Jewish lobby group B’nai Brith Canada I’m most pleased to announce that the Ontario Civil Liberties Association (OCLA) has assumed a positive leadership role in offering its support to both myself and RadicalPress.com in the current sec. 319(2) CCC “Hate Propaganda” charge which was laid against my person and RadicalPress.com back on May 16th, 2012.

I would like to publicly thank Joseph Hickey, Executive Director for the OCLA for his supportive endorsement of this very important case, one that will ultimately determine the fate of free expression on the internet in Canada and affect all other bloggers, writers, artists and publishers who would, in all likelihood, suffer the same fate as myself for expressing political commentary and viewpoints which are deemed as “hate” by the Jewish lobbyists who consistently monitor Canada’s alternative and mainstream media in search of websites and blogs that host contrary perspectives on the issues of political Zionism and the motives and actions of the state of Israel.

As well as issuing the following public statement the OCLA has also posted an on-line Petition which I, and hopefully many others, will be spreading around cyberspace in order to gather additional support for their initiative. See the Petition here: Please sign it.

Further efforts are also planned which will be posted as they unfold.

Please take the time to read this short pdf file containing the OCLA’s statement on R v Arthur Topham and feel free to comment.

The time to commence a concerted effort in order to bring this case to the attention of more Canadians is now. Please share this post as widely as humanly possible.

 

Sincerely,

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

 

CLICK ON PDF URL BELOW TO READ OCLA STATEMENT:

http://ocla.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/OCLA-statement-re-Arthur-Topham.pdf

Politically Incorrect Truths About History, Current Events Surface in Sea of Information By Trevor LaBonte

TrevorLaBonteHistoryHdr

Politically Incorrect Truths About History, Current Events Surface in Sea of Information

By

Trevor LaBonte

July 28, 2014

As the internationalist Zionist banking cabal/world shadow government laments the recent developments with Putin’s Crimea referendum and also the establishment of the BRICS bank to circumvent the previously unipolar financial system, it must also be lamenting its loss of control of the popular historical narrative which was, until recently, effectively controlled by Zionist interests via their monopoly on publishing. The internet has evolved, people have fingers, and, well, millions of people worldwide seem to be reaching a solid consensus as to what a more accurate and unbiased account of history and current events might be, absent the propagandizing of said interests.

For starters, Benjamin Freedman’s 1961 speech at the Willard Hotel, is widely available online, and it blows the lid completely off of the fact that the aforementioned European Jewish banking cabal/shadow government made an illegal secret deal with the British government wherein Britain was enticed into promising Palestine to the Rothschilds, the head family of international banking, in return for the Zionists utilizing their media monopoly in the United States to, using made-up stories to demonize Germany, persuade Americans to jump into WW I. Imagine if everyone fully grasped that the fact that a few Zionists in a back-room deal managed to get millions of people killed under false pretenses, just so they could obtain Palestine, a country which did not even belong to Britain to begin with.

Freedman also details how the “Treaty of Versailles” was yet another product of pure bankster intrigue, wherein Germany, who entered WW I because of mutual defense treaties, was made to pay all reparations for the entire war, and was cut into pieces, having its appendages doled out to the surrounding countries, in an obvious attempt to destroy Germany’s ability to recover from the war. The shadow bankster government then had a real run for its money when the German people eventually responded by electing Adolf Hitler, who promptly set the German economy back on track, eradicated unemployment, and showed the world what was possible in absence of Rothschild debt slavery. Germans went from living in hovels and having to pay billions of marks for a loaf of bread, to having good jobs in production, the Autobahn, paid vacations, and Volkswagens (designed by Hitler and Dr. Ferdinand Porsche, complete with a genuine Tesla coil) for only five marks per week. Nevertheless, the zionist domination of media [http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=2334] and academia [http://www.academia.org/the-origins-of-political-correctness/] managed to thoroughly propagandize the entire story and convince the entire world that Adolf Hitler was the most fearsome dictator in all history, when in reality he was only an elected populist leader who, by the way, enjoyed a 95% approval rating from his people.

Also the kosher narrative of WW II has fallen completely to pieces. It used to be that Hitler’s repeated, generous peace offers were never mentioned, but instead, people were relentlessly bombarded by mainstream media and academia with absurdly distorted propaganda blaming Hitler for starting the war. Meanwhile, internet sources such as [http://justice4germans.com] tell a totally different version which illustrates to truth seekers that mainstream sources are demonstrating a systematic concealment of a number of key factors, including an internationally supervised popular referendum with the people of Danzig voting nearly 99% in favor of rejoining the Reich, ignored by the Rothschild-influenced Polish government, which led to Germany’s invasion, and two days later, a British and French declaration of war on Germany. Throughout the mainstream narrative is woven a hollow and monotonous theme of “anti-Semitism,” with no mention of the fact that Germany was fighting a 100% defensive war against the international banking elite who, as it turns out, created and funded the Bolshevik “revolution” and populated its leadership ranks with 85% Jews, who, in turn, killed 60+ million mainly white Russian Christians, out of nothing but deep ethnic hatred combined with limitless funding and help from the B’nai B’rith Jewish-only Freemasonic headquarters in New York City. But remember, Hitler is the bad guy for fighting against this international jewish conspiracy.

The internet has also allowed some very interesting facts regarding the mainstream Holocaust narrative to rise to the surface. People are now learning of the works of historians such as Robert Faurisson, Fred Leuchter, Germar Rudolph, and many others who are making millions of people aware of the total lack of any physical evidence for the alleged “Nazi gassings” of “Six million Jews.” Also lacking is any documentary evidence of any policy, plan, budget, blueprints, autopsies of gassing victims, and it has been revealed that the entire Holocaust narrative is based only on a few paid “eyewitnesses” whose very testimonies prove that they had never even seen a gassing, being that they testified that the corpses turned blue, when with a little more effort on their part, they could have made their stories more believable by at least stating the correct color that would have resulted from cyanide gasses: bright cherry red. Combining the total lack of physical evidence with the evidence of phony witness testimony, the color of the lies becomes transparent. Sound crazy? It should! at first, but scratch the surface of the scholarly field know as “Holocaust Revisionism” (or perhaps it is more accurately called “history”) more closely and the lies evaporate before your eyes. But don’t take this author’s word for it. Try to find one shred of actual evidence that a single Jew was gassed. You can’t do it. Even Raul Hilberg, author of “The Destruction of the European Jew” 3-volume set, could not produce any evidence when called as an “expert witness” at the 1985 Ernst Zundel trial. (Insert record scratch sound effect here.) The general public has not figured this out yet, but internet truth-seekers have! [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbBWIx1AhAU]

The lack of “gassings” evidence factored in with the preponderance of baseless Holocaust propaganda from the 8 Jewish-controlled Hollywood movie studios, Jewish publishing houses, and Jewish censored academic institutions have led truth seekers to universally conclude something which has shocked each discoverer: That the international banksters that founded these institutions  invented the extermination hoax as a brainwashing tool to discourage people from criticizing the inordinate amount of Jewish influence we see all around us, to extort billions from Germany, and to utilize as an essential myth in the founding of Israel in 1948.

Jumping ahead a bit, this shadow government cabal held a successful coup against the United States on Nov 22, 1963, when it assassinated JFK over a secret diplomatic battle he was having with “Israel” on their illegal nukes and for his efforts to force the Jewish lobby, then called The American Zionist Council, to register under the Foreign Agent Registration Act, which would have ended its ability to control congress altogether. Undoubtedly, he was not a fan of the FED either. Yes, they killed JFK too. Read his letters to Ben-Gurion, archived here [http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/FRUS5_18_63.html] and ask yourself why these motives have never been explored in the controlled media. Also recommended highly is Michael Collins Piper’s book, “Final Judgement,” the only book brave enough to trace connections from the Israeli Mossad through James Jesus Angleton to the CIA, Meyer Lansky, and the Jewish organized crime syndicate know as “Murder, Inc.”

Having assassinated Kennedy, and with America now totally under its control, Rothschild’s Israel then tried to draw America into its so-called “Six-Day War” of zionist expansionism by way of perpetrating a false-flag attack on the USS Liberty, intending to blame the attack on Egypt. They botched the operation by failing to sink the Liberty, and at this point, the war for Israeli expansionism was temporarily put on hold. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=fFQrsdj7BLs]

The Israeli Defense Force did try and was defeated twice, at the hands of the Islamic Resistance of HizbAllah, to permanently occupy Lebanon, and it became clear that they could get nowhere in their plan to absorb their neighbors into “Greater Israel” without help from the US, but how could this be achieved?

Then, like someone un-pausing a video tape, the war for Israeli expansionism suddenly resumed on Sept. 11, 2001, when the Israelis collaborated with corrupt neocons in the US government, staging yet another in a long list of Israeli false-flags against the US to be blamed on Muslims.

This operation, like the USS Liberty attack, was badly botched when one of the planes did not reach its target, and WTC 7 collapsed at free-fall speed perfectly into its own footprint for apparently no reason, but in reality it was to prevent anyone from finding out that, like WTC 1 and 2, WTC 7 had been pre-rigged for demolition. We even have Larry Silverstein (not a Muslim with a box cutter) on a PBS documentary admitting that he brought WTC 7 down HIMSELF on 9/11, as well as Frank Mineta’s testimony of neo-Cohen Dick Cheney barking orders to maintain the NORAD stand-down which is what allowed the other planes to reach their targets. Just for fun, picture a terrorist coming at you with a box cutter. What would you do? I think I would laugh at him. It seems the architects of the 9/11 cover story received their training originally from watching Hollywood B, C, or D-movies. At any rate, the documented evidence of Israeli involvement was largely suppressed once again due to zionist control of the media, but not before reporters like Carl Cameron exposed the Israeli spies, the Mossad truck bombs, and other things that suspicion of anything other than Israel sound silly.

Muslims were framed and demonized as always, and full scale war was waged on the Middle East in perfect accord with Israeli foreign policy advisor Oded Yinon’s ambitious 1982 policy paper, which outlines the plan to balkanize the surrounding nations in the Middle East for expansionism of the Jewish State which would then rule the world in a Jewish NWO.

Vladimir Putin stymied the Greater Israel project when he exposed and countered a big part of the zionist plot against the Syrian government, and the false flag at Ghouta did not fly. Syria is an extremely important link in the chain, because not only is it openly slated to become part of “Greater Israel,” but it’s leadership in Bashar al Assad simultaneously provides arms to aid in the Palestinian resistance and connects Palestine with Iran which is then connected to Russia. The battle is not over yet to establish a New World Order where gentile nations are slaves to a “Jewish state” which regards gentiles as sub-humans as per the Jewish religion , and the jews use the Samson Option and blow up the planet with nuclear bombs if their openly racist, genocidal project somehow goes awry. Crimea and BRICS threaten the NWO, and a third prong consisting of the availability of “alternative” history sources which allow real truth seekers to circumvent attempts to conceal politically incorrect facts which are facts nonetheless, is rising, and it seems this “alternative” version is the only one that puts the whole puzzle together into a coherent picture, revealing starkly who has been cloaking themselves and running the show, creating world wars, manufacturing depressions and economic crashes with a phone call, the flick of a pen, or entering a few zeroes into a computer.

—–

T’is Some Days Before Christmas (2013) by Robin Mathews plus a Radical Press card

 

MerryChristmasRPFinal copy

SomeDaysBeforeChristmas

T’is Some Days Before Christmas (2013)
by Robin Mathews

A lighthearted, rollicking, fun-loving Yuletide verse for Canadians.

T’is some days before Christmas, and all through The House
The PM’s voice drones.  He’s attempting to douse
The things being said there that all know are true
And replace them with rancid and festering brew.
His MPs are trained seals, with nary a brain –
“Elected” there by voters, completely in vain.
His Office is full of appointees with might –
All ‘Truthful’ And ‘Honest’, ‘Upholding The Wright’.
They strong-arm whoever might step out of line.
Or they bribe (if it works). For all think that’s just fine.
They’re the worst of the rot in a system decayed –
Betraying, for pay, ‘the people’ (by whom they are paid).
None tells the PM when a bribe is “to go”,
(Though Nigel, it seems, thought he had to do so),
For our PM has set up a dishonest shop
Where the crimes go ahead when he doesn’t say “Stop”.
With a memorized script, and dead, empty eyes ,
With a Robocall voice that denies and denies,
To a lobotomized chorus of cheering and cries –
The PM pulls wool over NOBODY’S eyes.
On Duncan! On Aglukkak! Answer the call!
On Fantino! On James Moore! On Findlay! On all!
To the sewer! To the sleaze-pit. There’s no further to fall!
You chose Duffy, Pam Wallin, and poor Patrick Brazeau
To bring in, for payoffs, much partisan dough.
[What they spent (on the side) for their comfort and ease
Was okay while they proved how much they could please.]
Which is why, for Wallin, he stood by her side –
Reporting he’d checked out the True Spending Guide
And her spending’s appropriate [hoping his bold,
Blocking action would STOP every hot question – COLD].
But, then, Party Grassroots stirred up such a big fuss
The PM threw all three of them under the bus.
Orders flew to the Senate: “Act now as we say.
Betray them. Besmirch them. Just get them AWAY”.
That’s not a new game – and hardly surprise
As we watch him at work (with our wondering eyes).
He praises the troops and calls them our heroes.
But when they get home, he treats them as zeroes.
Budget payouts for veterans are plainly unfair –
As vets grow more and more sick, and sink deep in despair.
Lost to friends, and to families, to children, and wives,
They reach out … a last time – to take their own lives.
‘Veterans Affairs’ turns away, and refuses to count
Suicides by our vets – as they steadily mount!
[We suspect he tells all his Corporate friends
There’s more money for THEM as each veteran life ends!]
For he loves Corporations. They ‘stick it’ to workers,
Who, for him, are – without doubt – unConservative shirkers.
So he pays U.S. Steel, GM … and many more
To show our own people the Corporate door,
While their jobs and their every ‘secret-of-skill’
Go to some U.S labour camp over the hill.
He slashes and burns, and he attacks all the way
Every sign of free speech, for he wants single sway.
Obsessed with Control – and with hammer in hand,
He smashes and smashes all over the land.
We’ve watched his sick Party move deep into crime
To steal elections … more than one time.
He knew nothing, he says, when in 2006
A Con Careful Plan worked an Election Fraud Fix.
His Conservatives, lying and fighting in court,
Steered Stephen, by crooked ways, bent, into port.
And the Robocall fraud in 2011
Was sent to his Party from Mafia Heaven.
Lies, Fraud, Dirty Tricks, and Despicable Acts
Were used by his Cons to destroy voting facts.
They gained Dirty Power beyond Stephen’s dreams,
And they did it, remember, by CRIMINAL means.
Canadians must know – as Christmas draws near –
That there’s more – a lot more – that they really must fear.
With John Baird and the rest he will build Fascist Truth
And support it with thugs, to be called ‘Harper Youth’.
On Kenney! on Poilievre! on Ambrose and Raitt!
On Flaherty! on Clement! – Don’t ever go straight!
Your task – it is clear – is to shape this nation’s fate
As a jail-filled, truncheon-ruled, new Police State.
[Unless we all gather and challenge … and FIGHT,
There’ll be no: “HAPPY CHRISTMAS TO ALL,
AND TO ALL A GOOD NIGHT.”]

 

 

Topham denied Rowbotham application – Quesnel Cariboo Observer

ObservFPageRowboth copy

Radical Press Legal Update #15

NewLegalUpdateLogo-700

notice4RP

Regina v The Radical Press: LEGAL UPDATE #15

November 20th, 2013

Dear Free Speech Advocates and Radical Press Supporters,

My last Legal Update was sent out well over four months ago on July 11th, 2013 so for those who may not recall all what transpired up to that point I’ll give a brief overview so as to put subsequent events into some meaningful context.

All of what is going on concerns the matter of the Sec. 319(2) CCC charge and arrest for the purported crime of “willfully promoting hatred against ‘people of the Jewish religion or ethnic group’” originally brought on by B’nai Brith Canada’s Agent Z and serial Section 13 complainant Ricardo Warmouse.

Crown had anticipated that the Attorney General’s office was going to go for a “direct indictment” and skip the preliminary hearing stage of events but that strategy fell through on July 8th, 2013. That then brought my proposal to file for a Rowbotham application back to the forefront. As explained in earlier Updates the Rowbotham application was part of my former counsel’s plan to get government funded legal counsel to defend me and to act on my behalf during the preliminary inquiry to determine the merits of the aforementioned Sec. 319(2) charge. Of course when Doug was alive it was he who anticipated being that counsel.

I had met with the Trial Coordinator and via telephone spoke with Keith Evans, legal counsel for the B.C. Attorney General’s office in order to discuss my Rowbotham application which he was overseeing. Prior to that I had already submitted my Notice of Application and Affidavit to the AG’s regarding the Rowbotham back on April 23, 2013 and received a package of material back from Mr. Evans on May 11th explaining all the additional information that I was expected to furnish him with prior to a hearing taking place on the matter.

On August 13th I met again with the Trial Coordinator and a date was set to hold a hearing on the Rowbotham application on Monday, November 18th, 2013.

During the interim time period leading up the hearing I had to furnish the AG’s office with as much documentation as I possibly could that would show that I was not in a financial position to be able to afford to hire a lawyer to represent me at the upcoming preliminary hearing scheduled for January 22nd, 2014. As a result the month of September leading into the early weeks of October were spend doing what was basically a forensic audit of all of my finances and sending all of this information to the Attorney General’s office in Vancouver, B.C. It was quite time consuming and left little opportunity for doing much else besides publishing the occasional article on the website. Keith Evans of the AG’s office was very congenial and willing to assist me with any questions that that arose during the period that I was amassing all of my evidence I felt would show that I was in fact indigent and unable to cover the cost of a hiring a lawyer. The term “indigent” is one that the AG’s office uses and it means “impoverished or destitute or poverty-stricken or disadvantaged, hard up, etc.” All of these descriptive words I felt fitted my circumstances.

Approximately one week before the hearing on November 18th I received all of this information back from the AG’s office along with all of my email exchanges with AG lawyer Keith Evans. The booklet containing these communications ended up being 455 pages in length!

Screen Shot 2013-11-20 at 11.05.23 AM

Radical Press Publisher Arthur Topham displaying the Rowbotham application documents from the B.C. Attorney General’s office

There are basically two main features or parts to a Rowbotham application, the first deals with having to prove you are in fact “indigent” and the second being able to argue that your particular case is complex and out of the ordinary to the point where it is evident that without legal representation you would not have a chance of a fair trial and therefore your Charter right to a fair trial would be infringed upon.

The hearing began at 9:30 a.m. in the Quesnel courthouse with Judge Morgan presiding. Also in attendance was Christina Drake, a lawyer working for the Attorney General’s office out of Victoria, B.C. who had flown up to argue against the application.

Judge Morgan began by asking me to explain to him why I felt I was unable to afford to hire a lawyer and why I felt my case was so “extraordinarily complex” (another expression that the AG’s office employed throughout their argument repeatedly). I then proceeded to tell him about how I have been battling with legal issues brought on by B’nai Brith Canada’s two separate complaints, (the sec. 13(1) Canadian Human Rights Act complaint from 2007 and the  Sec. 319(2) CCC charge of May 16th, 2012), for the past six years and how having to do all the legal work on my own has affected my ability to earn a sufficient income that would allow me to hire a lawyer.

Following all of that (which took a couple of hours) I then outlined for the Judge the reasons why I felt my case was unusual and complex enough that it warranted having a professional legal expert to represent me during the preliminary hearing stage so as to show how the illegal search warrant that resulted in the invasion of my home and the theft of all of my computers and electronic files was an actual criminal offence on the part of the RCMP and the B.C. Hate Crime Team led by Det. Cst. Terry Wilson. It was my argument that because of this initial illegal act that the case should be thrown out at the preliminary hearing stage. In fact my former lawyer Mr. Christie had planned to set aside five days for the preliminary hearing in order to accomplish this. After his demise the court changed that time period from five days to five hours! Obviously they felt that whatever Mr. Christie was planning to present to the court didn’t warrant further consideration after he was out of the picture.

Due to space constraints I won’t go into the details of my argument for why I felt the case is complex other than I told the Judge that, based upon my personal experience with the whole free speech issue over the past six years, I felt it was the aim of Jewish lobby groups here in Canada, specifically B’nai Brith Canada, to set a precedent using my charge so that, were they successful in obtaining a conviction, it would affect every other publisher and writer in Canada who might try and criticize either the Jew’s-only state of Israel or anything else related to the Zionist political ideology or their religious practices as found in Judaism and the Talmud. It would, in other words, create a stifling climate of censorship that would negatively affect every Canadian’s right to freedom of speech and expression as stated in the Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

One additional point needs to be emphasized here regarding all of the sec. 13 controversy that has taken place over the past quarter century or longer. When I began to speak to Judge Morgan about sec. 13(1) and about the fact that the federal government had repealed that section of the Canadian Human Rights Code back in June of 2012 he confessed that he knew nothing about the whole issue! I was literally taken aback by this unexpected pronouncement on his part and my facial expression must have surprised him as he then stated that he actually sat on a “human rights” committee of some sort and yet he was still unaware of the whole issue. Then, only to exacerbate his revelations further, the lawyer for the Attorney General’s office also spoke up and informed the court that she, too, was aware of what was going on in terms of Section 13 and the Canadian Human Rights Code.

After a lunch break the hearing continued and Christina Drake, representing the Attorney General’s office, gave her arguments as to why I ought to be refused the Rowbotham order. She cited numerous case law examples and how in one way or another none of them met the financial threshold that the Crown demands. Of course it’s always a great advantage to be able to be the party that sets the threshold in the first place and when it comes to the state having to pay for a lawyer to defend an accused (and presumed innocent) citizen the Crown finds such a proposal most abhorrent and the thought of it appears to terrify them that such a precedent might actually occur (as it did in the case of Rowbotham) and they would have to actually defray the costs of a Canadian citizen receiving justice in the courts of the land.

When the issue of complexity was addressed Drake stated:

•     [The applicant] Has four years of university education and communicates effectively orally and in writing, as evidenced by the sophisticated written summary he provided of the arguments he wishes to make with respect to the search warrant;

•         Has experience in legal and quasi-legal proceedings, specifically in the context of a human rights complaint in which it appears that he represented himself;

Of course, to my way of thinking, there’s no direct correlation between a person’s ability to express themselves either orally or through the written word or having obtained a Teaching certificate for Elementary school and their ability to perform the work of a qualified and legally trained lawyer. To try and suggest that this is the case would be akin to asserting that the Applicant, because of his university training, would also be qualified to perform the work of a surgeon.

Drake argued that I hadn’t done enough to show that I had contacted other lawyers in order to find out if they would work at lower rates and represent me. Of course I had checked into this and did contact those who I felt might come to my defense but I never received a reply back from them. Again, what the AG’s office intentionally appears to overlook is the reality that defending cases such as mine is a very serious matter for any lawyer who wants to steer clear of being labeled a defender of “hate mongers” and “anti-Semites” and “racists” and end up with a reputation such as that which Douglas Christie acquired by his willingness to defend those charged with “hate crimes”. To defend a person against a charge of “willfully promoting hatred against ‘people of the Jewish religion or ethnic group’” is to accept that you will will also be attacked by these very same foreign lobbyists who are now threatening me.

It was around 4:00 p.m. by the time the AG’s argument was completed. I was then given an opportunity to “sum up” my financial picture which I proceeded to do culminating by emphasizing once again that I and my wife have been forced to live an extremely minimalist existence ever since 2007 and that this ought to be given consideration. Judge Morgan then left the courtroom for about fifteen minutes and returned to give his decision. Predictably, based upon the AG’s argument, he concluded that I hadn’t met the financial threshold and so therefor my reasons regarding the complexity of the case wouldn’t be considered. He added further that this might change after the preliminary hearing when, should the case go to trial (which it appears is highly likely), that I would then have the opportunity to file another Rowbotham application and give it another shot so to speak.

When we left the courthouse it was -20 Celcius outside with a cold, bitter wind blowing. Rather fitting in some respects.

—-

Adolf and Icke: The Long Road Back to Historical Reality by Arthur Topham

IckeHdr

“We call them “Nazis” just to piss them off.”

~ Friedrich Hollaender, from the 2003 CBC mini-series, “Hitler – The Rise of Evil” [thanks to Justice4Germans.com]

“Exposing the evil of Nazism. Absolutely.”

~ David Icke, in an email to Radical Press publisher Arthur Topham, Sept. 24, 2013

 

On September 22nd, 2013  I ran an article on RadicalPress.com which I received via email from David Icke. It concerned efforts on the part of Icke and his supporters to start a television station called “The People’s Voice”*. The email was basically a promotional advertisement video designed to increase donations and solicit funding for his project.

Having promoted Icke off and on over the past fifteen years, beginning with my now defunct newspaper The Radical, (circa 1998 – 2002), in which I ran ads for his upcoming tours here in Canada as well as articles plus a front page spread covering his 2002 spring speaking tour that I attending in Vancouver on March 25th of 2002, I was fairly well versed in the materials which David was speaking and writing about.

IckeMarEdiRad copy 2

Screen Shot 2013-09-27 at 2.29.25 PM

But, as the old adage goes, life is for learning and evolving and over the ensuing years I slowly began to realize the depth to which our society and our ‘Canadian’ culture in general had been overshadowed, manipulated and deceived by the Zionist Jew forces who then, as now, control the vast majority of the mainstream media and the publishing houses and who’ve worked in concert with the US dominated movie industry since its inception in order to create a milieu of mind-control that for the most part still goes unrecognized by the average Canadian, especially that segment of our ‘classless’ society known euphemistically as the “intelligentsia”.

When I first began publishing The Radical in June of 1998, even though I had been writing and challenging many of the mores of my time for decades, I was still heavily under the influence of my cultural upbringing where, from the moment of my birth, I had been conditioned, like all Canadians, into believing that there was no greater evil on the face of the earth than Adolf Hitler and the “Nazis”. The endless articles in the newspapers; the slanderous, denigrating and hateful portrayals of the German people and their leader Adolf Hitler in books, movies and on TV, plus the myriad mountains of comic books from my early childhood, had all worked their clandestine, black magic way into my subconscious to the point where the whole background gestalt of what I consciously perceived to be actual history was simply taken for granted unquestioningly even though in most other matters of a political nature I was relatively, as the old Hippie saying went, “hipped to the scene”.

HitlerSnowball 2 copy 3

Typical anti-Hitler war propaganda appearing in Canadian news magazines

As the years passed and I researched more and more into the history of the 20th century, particularly the first half of it, the light slowly began to increase and the truth about what had taken place with respect to the German nation and the rise of Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist party and World War II became more and more glaringly obvious to me.

I was also assisted by Providence in this process of re-awakening to the actualities of Germany and its history through the medium of the “Letters to the Editor” section that I ran in my monthly tabloid. It was there that the first promptings of what would eventually become my long and at times arduous mental journey back to historical reality began when one of my subscribers to the newspaper from out in Ontario started sending letters informing me that some of my articles, which at the time still reflected my ingrained ignorance of Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist party, were not necessarily factual. I can only thank God that they brought the error of my ways to my attention for ever since that time, like a recovering alcoholic, I’ve been forced to recognize daily my addiction to the deception that I had been unconsciously brainwashed into believing. For some time it seemed that my recovery was traveling at a snail’s pace but when another associate and friend of mine sent me Douglas Reed’s classic 1950s work on the origins and nature of political Zionism, The Controversy of Zion, my fate was finally sealed and I experienced an epiphany of political realization that has since steadfastly remained and continues to wax in fullness with each passing day.

It was now clearly obvious to me that the history of the 20th century had been tampered with to such a degree that none of its political and/or historical orthodoxies could be taken for granted any longer included the greatest, most massively pervasive deception of all, that of the true nature of National Socialist Germany and its illustrious and loved leader, Adolf Hitler.

Jewhate2Nazis copy 3

After the physical war ended then came the Greatest Lie of the 20th century

It may have become obvious to me perhaps but not, as it turns out, to David Icke, who in the meanwhile had continued to advance in prestige and notoriety as the Internet and his periodic world tours enhanced his position in the growing alternative truth movement of which Icke had been one of the initial protagonists.

As my efforts increased to inform my readership about the true nature of Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist movement in Germany so did the harassment from the Zionist Jews who perceived my truth telling to be extremely detrimental to their ongoing program of mind control which, up until the advent of the Internet, had been so successful in brainwashing the population on most levels of reality ranging from history and culture to religion and spirituality and much that lay in between those broad-ranging parameters.

By the end of 2007 I was facing my first serious attack by world Jewry in the form of a sec. 13(1) “hate crime” complaint registered against my person and my website radicalpress.com by B’nai Brith International’s Canadian cell known as B’nai Brith Canada. That attack is still ongoing and now exacerbated by a second assault by the same forces, one which occurred in May of 2012 when I was arrested and charged with a second Criminal Code of Canada Sec. 319(2) “hate crime” soon after publishing the article “Israel Must Perish!” , a spoof based upon an actual book originally published back in 1941 called, Germany Must Perish!

GerMustPerCover

Over the past few years of endless litigation and all the accompanying hardships that ensue when a person is forced into a defensive position by a government too heavily influenced by lobby groups such as B’nai Brith Canada, I drifted away from having the time to frequent Icke’s website. Occasionally David would publish an article of mine if it was related to his ongoing legal battles with the complainant who also filed a complaint against me in 2011  but other than that there was little communication between the two of us. At one point a few years ago I had already ran into some minor hassles with David when I inadvertently and innocently ran one of his articles which he sends out to his exclusive list of paying subscribers. His reaction, given the fact that I was only publishing the story in order to bring him more subscribers, was overly heavy and I basically backed off at that point from printing his work. But as time went by the memory of that incident also faded and when I received David’s email informing me of his new initiative in the form of a television station to broadcast to the alternative truth movement I was moved once again to put my shoulder to the common wheel of resistance in an effort to assist others in the battle against the dark forces now wreaking havoc around the world. And so I ran his promo ad for him as a gesture of good will.

Soon afterwards though I began receiving feedback from readers explaining to me why they were not willing to support Icke and his planned television station. They referred to him as someone who was spreading the usual Zionist Jew disinformation about National Socialist Germany and Adolf Hitler and also that his recent willing collusion with Alex Jones was another example of why they couldn’t trust what Icke might do if his television show went on the air.

Following that a friend of mine sent me an email containing a number of poster type graphics that Icke normally runs on his website. Most of them were standard anti-government, anti-corporate style images that we see on Facebook and other social media sites but as I scrolled down the list I came upon one that I found quite disturbing and, by coincidence, also in keeping with the recent emails I had received on this very topic. Here it is:

United

After reading the caption there was little doubt left in my mind as to what Icke’s intent was in running such an image; one containing such a clearly blatant and direct attack upon the German nation and their ability to discern truth.

Disappointed, I said to myself, “that’s not the caption that ought to be on an image such as that” and so I re-did the graphic making it read what should have been there in the first place. And this is how it came out.

United

I then decided to sent the newly, “revised” image to David along with a personal message which is republished here verbatim. It reads:

Dear David,

If you are even to achieve the aims of global peace, love, harmony and understanding you first must overcome your ignorance regarding National Socialist Germany, Adolf Hitler and the German nation as a whole.

Your Germanophobic behaviour is unbecoming of someone who professes to understand the true nature of the Zionist New World Order agenda. All you are achieving by this anti-Hitler, anti-German propaganda is creating greater dissension and confusion amongst the growing number of truth-seekers who are fast coming to the realization that the west erred greatly in declaring war on Germany and in truth should have joined forces with the German nation and put a stop to the Zionist/Communist Bolshevik forces, led by Marxist Jews.

You should rightly be going after the Communists and Marxists and Zionists for they are the unholy trinity that formed by stealth in order to wreak devastation and terror upon the world throughout the 20th century and into the 21st. Why you haven’t realized this a long time ago has always been a great disappointment and a mystery to me.

If this is what you plan to do with the “People’s Voice”, i.e spread greater misinformation and yes, hatred, toward the German people and the ultimate sacrifice they made in their gargantuan effort to stop the Zionist juggernaut then I will not be able to do anything further to assist you in your efforts and will in fact have to resist all that you have thus far accomplished. Please [underlined in the original for emphasis. ed.] try to reconsider your position on Hitler and Germany and realize that it was world Jewry who first declared war upon that great nation because they broke away from the Rothschild cartel and their central banking system. It was the Jews who laid all the devious schemes that created that great conflict and all the other major conflicts since that time.

You have got to connect those dots David or else the full truth will never come out and all that you’ve worked for over the past quarter of a century will have been for naught.

I pray that you will reconsider your position on this vital matter.

Sincerely and in gratitude for all the other good work that you’ve accomplished,

Arthur Topham
Publisher & Editor
The Radical Press
Canada’s Radical News Network
“Digging to the root of the issues since 1998”

Well, it didn’t take long to get a reaction. Less than three hours later I received the following email reply from David Icke. It’s reproduced here in full. The Bold text is mine.

From:     David Icke <…>
Subject:     Re: Personal appeal to you David re: your anti-German disinformation emanating from your website
Date:     24 September, 2013 10:33:22 PM PDT
To:     Radical Press <radical@radicalpress.com>

Why don’t you grow up, Arthur, eh? How old are you?

My God.

It doesn’t matter the scale of effort or risk or abuse that someone takes to make a difference and give people a voice worldwide you won’t support it because your personal belief system is far more important.

Then don’t, don’t. Go on living in your self-obsessed, self-indulgent bubble that is changing nothing.

And a few people can’t control the world? It’s a piece of piss.

Promoting hatred of German people? Bollocks.

Exposing the evil of Nazism. Absolutely.

Evil v Evil = Double Evil.

You call yourself ‘radical’, Arthur? You must be joking.

[no signature]

I read it over a couple of times giving it some thought and then replied to David with the following email:

Dear David,

I’m 66 years old and well aware of how the world works and have for a much longer time than you obviously.

I can’t say that I appreciate your insolent response. It’s so typically Jewish. A non-response soaked in epithets and chutzpah. Oi veh. Rather reminiscent of Jeff Rense and his ilk.

What a sad indictment David.  The “evils of Nazism” you say. Someday you must do a program on all those “evils” and show the world, as the Jews have been doing incessantly since 1933, just what they truly were. Oh, and don’t forget the 6 Million as well. It would be a shame to leave that one out wouldn’t it?

And no, I don’t joke about being a radical. I’ve been at it since 1967. That’s 46 years. You’ve got another 21 to go.

God grant that you come to a fuller understanding of the Jewish Question by that time. For your sake and for the world’s as well.

I see now why you’ve colluded with the likes of Alex Jones.

I guess I won’t have to invest in a telly after all. Pity.

Sincerely,

Arthur Topham
Publisher & Editor
The Radical Press

And so that’s how things now stand with respect to David Icke and the Radical Press. For David, it appears that the shape-shifting reptilian lizards are still at the root of our global problems and that Adolf Hitler and the German nation must have all been taken over by these alien creatures prior to the “Nazis” committing their horrendous horrors against the rest of humanity. As for me I’m willing to place my bet on the fact that it was the dark, evil, Satanic spirit of world Jewry that shape-shifted into the visible form of political Zionism in 1897 who has since been the primary instigator of global war, poverty, debt, environmental destruction and disease throughout the 20th century and right up to the present moment.

As always, time will reveal the truth in due course.

I would like at this point to extend an apology to those readers on my list who I may have insulted by sending them Icke’s article. That wasn’t my intention. In retrospect it appears it was, once again, Providence’s way of giving me a further shake and making me aware of what others within our challenged community of New World Order resisters are doing to hinder that inevitable wide-scale awakening which we are all labouring so hard to accomplish.

—-

* An interesting side note regarding the choice of this name. Here in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada there is a communist newspaper that’s been around for a number of years and its name is…you guessed it…” The People’s Voice”.

“Resistance is Not Terrorism” a Radical Advertisement

RadAdResistance

Quesnel Cariboo Observer keeps community up to date on Radical Press Sec. 319(2) Criminal Charge

Screen Shot 2013-09-01 at 11.21.32 AM

RadPress Editor

[Editor’s Note: The Radical Press would like to thank the Quesnel Cariboo Observer for their ongoing coverage of my legal challenges with respect to the spurious sec. 319(2) charge of willfully promoting hatred against “people of the Jewish religion or ethnic group.” Generally cases such as these never receive any mention in the Zionist controlled media unless it’s to add more vilification and slander to the accused and so I am always appreciative when the community that I’ve lived in for the past 43 years recognizes the fact that it is deserving of public acknowledgment.

I might also point out that this is just one more good reason to have public media that isn’t all in the hands of one small minority whose agenda is continuously only pro-Israel and pro-censorship of free speech when it comes to critical discussion of Israel’s ideology and their treatment of the Palestinian people.

I would encourage readers to respond favourably to any updates that are run in the Observer and show support and appreciation for their efforts with regard to freedom of speech and an open media. Feel free to write to the editor of the Quesnel Cariboo Observer at the following address:

Editor editor@caribooobserver.com

Thanks]

Radical Press advertisement

The Radical Press is in serious financial need due to the continuing attacks upon its owner and publisher Arthur Topham. Please consider using the PayPal button on the right hand side of this page to help with legal costs or else click on the Donate to the Radical Press defense fund link located below the site header. Thank you for helping to keep Canada’s internet free and open.

Me&1st Team Final copy 3

Image above shows Radical Press publisher Arthur Topham holding the reins on the farm’s team of horses while harrowing the family garden in Saskatchewan back in 1949.