A Reply and Challenge to Ben Gadd By Monika Schaefer

A Reply and Challenge to Ben Gadd

By Monika Schaefer

Sunday, January 8th, 2017

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

yegaddz

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

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

December 17, 2016

Dear JEA members

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

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

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

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

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

 

Regards, Rocky Notnes


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

— Ben


Screen Shot 2016-08-07 at 4.23.58 PM

Monika Schaefer

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

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

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

Truth is Hate to those who Hate the Truth.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Former Israeli Minister Shulamit Aloni- Anti-Semitic Trick!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Monika Schaefer

Some further thoughts, …

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


January 6th, 2017 from Ben:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sincerely, and ‘bye for now,

 

— Ben


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

You never know how minds can be changed.


SOURCE ARTICLE

If It’s Not the Jews … by Digger for Truth

jewish-reptoids-742x445
If It’s Not the Jews …
October 1, 2015 Digger for Truth
… then who are the instigators of this NWO?

new-world-order-pledged-to-jews
Could you please explain to us ….

1) Why JEWS make up two tenths of one percent of the population, yet represent a whopping seventy percent plus of high positions in global government?

2) Why it is not the four leaf clover, nor the Australian kangaroo, nor the Islamic crescent in the centre of £20/50 and $ bill – it’s the JEWISH star of David?

3) Why is it that the ONLY area in history one is not allowed to question, in sixteen countries without facing incarceration, happens to be JEWISH history?

4) Why is it that the JEWISH Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion are the exact blueprint manifesto for this NWO?

5) Why is it that out of ALL the multitude of holocausts throughout history* – it seems to be only the JEWISH holocaust which is constantly shoved in our faces?

eyeonfreespeech600-copy

6) Why the complete members of the American congress gave an unprecedented 29 standing ovations to the JEWISH president?

7) Why is it that one is allowed to defame the Muslims, black people, white people, gypsies, antipodeans, red necks, Mexicans; in fact any group of peoples on the planet; as well as aliens – yet JEWISH people are somehow the untouchables?

8) Why it is the JEWISH state of Israel which is the only country in the world to be exempt from international nuclear weapons inspections?

9) How is it that the JEWISH cabalistic symbology is in both Freemasonry and the police uniforms?

10) Why, out of all the world’s religious texts, it is only JEWISH scriptures which are replete with evil, satanic laws; promoting pedophilia, genocide, rape, theft, deception and anti-non-Jewish practices – which is in exact alignment with this NWO?

11) Why is it that when you google ‘the most hated country in the world’ – it comes up with the JEWISH state of Israel?

12) Why was it JEWISH Mossad agents who were jumping up and down with joy in New York dressed as Arabs? Why did they then go on JEWISH national TV boasting that they were there to ‘record’ the event?

13) Why do JEWS openly boast about running Hollywood and the media, and academia, and global finances, and the military, and the mining industries, and major corporations; in their own manuscripts?

14) Why oh why it is only JEWS who have been booted out of 84 countries 109 times throughout history?

Or are these mere coincidences?


* Which the JEWS instigated.

SOURCE ARTICLE

Prof. Anthony Hall vindicated – B’nai Brith and its U. of Lethbridge punks bitch-slapped by national faculty association By Kevin Barrett

 

screen-shot-2016-12-08-at-5-18-51-pm

Dr. Kevin Barrett, a Ph.D. Arabist-Islamologist, is one of America’s best-known critics of the War on Terror. 

Prof. Anthony Hall vindicated – B’nai Brith and its U. of Lethbridge punks bitch-slapped by national faculty association

screen-shot-2016-12-08-at-5-18-31-pm

Will slandered professor Anthony Hall soon return to the University that has so mistreated him?

By Kevin BarrettVeterans Today Editor

The witch-hunt against University of Lethbridge professor Anthony Hall may have just ended not with a bang but with a whimper. And it is the Israel lobby group B’nai Brith Canada, and its flunkies at the University of Lethbridge, who are whimpering.

The Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) just issued a stinging reprimand for University of Lethbridge president Mike Mahon, a glorified gym teacher who unilaterally suspended Professor Hall without pay because he disagrees with Hall’s political views. See:

Lethbridge University President Says He Can Fire Tenured Faculty at Will for No Reason

Here is CAUT’s statement:

screen-shot-2016-12-06-at-11-19-03-pm

CAUT is using extremely strong language. The statement accuses Mike Mahon of violating “all principles of due process and natural rights” and “denying…legal rights” i.e. violating the law.

CAUT is not only threatening all-out legal action, but also “imposing censure” on the University of Lethbridge. This is a formal process that amounts to a complete boycott of the University of Lethbridge by the entire Canadian academic community – a sort of scholarly BDS action. Professors would refuse to work there, students would refuse to study there, and all Canadian academicians would essentially consider that the “University of Lethbridge” no longer existed.

How could the University of Lethbridge resolve the situation? I spoke to Professor Hall this morning. He was optimistic about the long-term prospects of his academic freedom struggle, and grateful to CAUT for doing the right thing. But he also hastened to point out that Mike Mahon and others at the University had created an extremely hostile work environment for him, and that the University of Lethbridge needs to do much more than merely allowing him to return to teaching in the horrendous environment they have created for him.

By suspending Professor Hall without pay, without any form of due process, the University essentially endorsed the outrageous, libelous lies concocted by the B’nai Brith and its suspected confederates. The biggest lie, the one that launched the entire witch hunt, was a Zionist-fabricated “kill all Jews” image that was mysteriously planted on Professor Hall’s Facebook page without his knowledge. B’nai Brith and Facebook conspired to create a media scandal about the image, and despite Hall’s complete innocence, media outlets including the Lethbridge Herald and CBC labored to fabricate a spurious link between the horrific, genocidal image and Professor Hall in their coverage of the incident. Rather than reporting the truth – that Professor Hall was the innocent victim of a smear campaign – they absurdly implied that Professor Hall himself wanted to “kill all Jews” !

The genocidal image was created by a Florida-based Jewish Zionist false flag terrorist named Joshua Goldberg (who has been arrested for plotting fake “Islamic terrorism”) and then planted on Professor Hall’s Facebook page by persons unknown. Though the planted image was credited to “Glen Davidson,” an Alberta resident, Davidson  says he was not the source of the image, and does not know how it came to be surreptitiously planted, under his name, on Professor Hall’s Facebook page. See:

The PLANTED weaponized image that got Professor Anthony Hall suspended

screen-shot-2016-12-08-at-5-19-25-pm

We now know that this image was produced by Florida-based Jewish Zionist false flag terrorist Joshua Goldberg, planted on Professor Tony Hall’s Facebook page by an unknown hacker, and then used by B’nai Brith to launch a witch hunt against Professor Anthony Hall, who was completely innocent of any connection whatsoever to the image.

This is B’nai Brith’s tweet slandering Professor Hall. B’nai Brith’s own confederates appear to have manufactured and planted the image on Professor Hall’s Facebook page, then spammed Canada with press releases blaming Professor Hall, who had no idea the image was there!

Why would B’nai Brith and its accomplices target Professor Hall for this kind of slander operation? Presumably they disapprove of Hall’s research and public statements on various controversial issues, especially his work on false flag terrorism. (Hall has interpreted such events as 9/11 and the Ottawa capitol shooting as apparent false flag public relations stunts designed to further the Zionist war on Islam and Muslims.)

CanadaBBLOBBY3 copy 5The University of Lethbridge, by implicitly endorsing B’nai Brith’s libelous big lie, has managed to tarnish Professor Hall’s reputation on campus to the point that many students and colleagues have accepted the false notion that Hall is a “genocidal anti-Semite.” Hall has suffered hostile treatment on and off campus as a result of the University’s going along with the B’nai Brith’s witch hunt.

At a very minimum, the University needs to:

*Fire president Mike Mahon and Board Chairman Kurt E. Schlachter;

*Apologize in the strongest possible terms;

*Vow to support Professor Hall’s academic freedom to study, write, and speak about any and all issues;

*And make it absolutely clear that Professor Hall has done nothing wrong, but has in fact been doing exactly what all tenured professors are implicitly required to do by virtue of their tenure: Investigate the  most controversial issues and pursue the truth wherever it leads, no matter how much  powerful interest groups may be displeased.


SOURCE ARTICLE

Editors’ note: Jim Dean suggests that people who care about freedom should consider emailing CAUT a brief note of thanks:   acppu(at)caut[dot]ca

 

Regina v Radical Press Legal Update # 25 by Arthur Topham

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

University of Lethbridge Suspension of Tenured Professor Lacks Due Diligence Dr. M. R. Islam

http://www.thecanadiancharger.com/page.php?id=5&a=2021

October 17, 2016

University of Lethbridge Suspension of Tenured Professor Lacks Due Diligence

Dr. M. R. Islam

More by this author…

anthony-hall

No one should be under the illusion that University of Lethbridge president Dr. Mike Mahon is giving the case of suspended professor Dr. Anthony Hall proper legal procedure and due diligence.

In case anyone wonders what “due diligence” actually means, it’s about impartially following the rules set out in the university’s Board-Faculty Association Collective Agreement, not just calling a meeting or two to air opinions.

A tenured professor cannot be suspended as a precautionary measure, “just in case” something went wrong. One doesn’t need a lawyer to understand this. One does need conscience, ethical principles and the ability to actually read and interpret the articles of a collective agreement.

Accusations by special-interest groups are levelled against academics all the time, not only concerning their research – which may upset prevailing biases and mindsets – but also to cast aspersions on their character. In a democratic society such accusations don’t form a legitimate basis for even starting an investigation.

In the case of a professor supposedly teaching falsehoods in class, the basis for factually determining truth or lies must be scrutinized at ground level. University presidents have no business interfering with the process, and for good reason.

How on earth can the president of an academic institution know if a professor’s course material is false? Unless the president happens to be a specialist in the same discipline as the professor being criticized (and such is not the case with the University of Lethbridge situation), that individual is at a distant arm’s length of the lecture-hall.

It is the community of professors themselves, not top-down administrators, who are vocationally mandated to seek and define truth. That’s the whole point of having a tenure process. Allowing administrators such as Dr. Mike Mahon to take unilateral punitive action due to subjectively-driven external complaints is akin to allowing a Parliament Hill custodian dictate House of Commons protocol.

A little history is in order when considering the value and necessity of due process.

When Phillippe Rushton, a former University of Western Ontario professor whose theories on race and genetics raised heated controversy in 1989, was discovered to have benefited in his research from the financial support of white supremacist groups, the court of public opinion wanted him fired on the spot. That was not allowed to happen.

Although Rushton (who died in 2012) had few influential defenders, “due process” meant that he was subjected to the same annual academic evaluation as anyone else on faculty, where the protocol would be to suspend a professor after a series of failing scores on criteria covering a wide range of academic and pedagogical criteria.

Despite the hue and cry around Rushton’s case, people were decent back then; they understood he was being targeted for a reason other than “academic failure.” Rushton left active teaching of his own volition and continued on in his research for nearly a quarter-century without any further controversy. His published opinions and findings on racial and gender issues were no more palatable to most of us than before, but we’d entered the “new normal” of post-9/11 society by then and the paradigm had changed.

So, what happened after 9/11? The old days had a code of conduct, embodied in formal terms such as “due process.” Judge R.D. Fratkin wrote regarding the criminal case of once high-profile activist and MP Svend Robinson, “As I say, the public, at least in Canada, I think, has always lived by the sort of guiding principle [that] you don’t kick somebody when they’re down.” In our post-9/11 world of continual electronic downloading and instant media reaction, the new way of dealing with people and things we dislike, or don’t understand, is reactive paranoia.

“Unfortunately, Zionist groups, traditionally defensive and hyper-reactive, are thriving on a climate where everything and everyone is fair game to be judged via social media before informed and impartial “due process” can ever take place. The new mantra: Kick a person only when s/he is down, and just keep on kicking … truth is irrelevant.”

Unfortunately, Zionist groups, traditionally defensive and hyper-reactive, are thriving on a climate where everything and everyone is fair game to be judged via social media before informed and impartial “due process” can ever take place. The new mantra: Kick a person only when s/he is down, and just keep on kicking … truth is irrelevant.

Another historical example of uninformed public censure over-riding and even hijacking due process is the case of once high-profile activist MP Svend Robinson – perhaps the first victim of compromised due process in Canadian political history. He is the man that proposed that September 11 be designated as “Chile Day”, to mark the overthrow of Chilean president Salvador Allende’s democratically elected government on September 11, 1973.

Among a number of gaffes committed during his turbulent career, Robinson made the tactical error in 2002 of attempting to bypass Israeli security to visit Nobel Peace Prize winner Yasser Arafat. Zionist groups – including the one now trying to destroy the career of Dr. Anthony Hall – had a field day raising vitriolic protest against the NDP MP when the international controversy broke in the media.

How did then NDP federal leader Alexa McDonough react to what Zionists called the “travesty” of Robinson’s action? She stripped him of his prestigious Foreign Relations portfolio, and shortly thereafter resigned the party leadership. Alexa McDonough had been known in Halifax to be sympathetic to the Palestinian cause until that time. Two for two in favour of the Zionist fear-mongers … and no due process.

Which brings us full circle back to 2016 and the Zionist hijacking of due process at the University of Lethbridge.

I have always believed that a university president with an iota of self-respect would resist tooth and nail such a blatant assault on academic freedom and professional ethics as is occurring right now at his institution. Unfortunately, Canadian law cannot compel Dr. Mahon to disclose the real reasons behind his actions.  It is no small irony that Dr. Mahon cannot be brought to justice with the charge of misfeasance in public office, similar to the one brought against York University’s Lorna Marsden by Freeman-Maloy, because there is another due process, called Arbitration that was specially designed to protect tenured professors and was supposedly speedier than the lengthy court battle.

To make matters worse, notice the deafening silence of CAUT (Canadian Association of University Teachers) about the case of Dr. Anthony Hall. No wonder some university presidents went on record dismissing CAUT as “a bunch of losers.” Sadly, a group that could have raised a loud and legitimate collective voice in support of due process has lived up to its “loser” label and stayed in the shadows.

And one can only expect similar cowardice from the University of Lethbridge’s own Faculty Association. There will be initial cries of indignation, but soon enough they will decrease to furtive whispers. You see, they will have been “consulted,” making it then acceptable to watch one of their peers left by the roadside with no fair or impartial evaluation.

The experienced, well-orchestrated and politically influential Zionist group is making sure all the legal and ethical loopholes are closed and that the guillotine is firmly in place to chop off Dr. Hall’s career with no chance of appeal.

And that’s what is so manifestly wrong with this picture. As Einstein famously pointed out, “We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.” Others have aptly added that the result of doing so is insanity.

Dr. M.R. Islam is a retired Dalhousie University professor and former Killam Chair of petroleum engineering. The opinions expressed in the foregoing editorial are his own.

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

amhertribune

OCTOBER 13 ,2016

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

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

1113

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

anti-semitism_adca1

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

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

aht_mahon_5c7b3

jews_mossad_0d0c3

wtc7_d48eb

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

msm_israel_6db0d

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

jvp_3403a

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

israel_cartoon_62a6f

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

haavara_252da

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

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

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

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

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

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

hall_bb_01a73

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

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

1113-1

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

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

the-islamophobia-industry_60fa4

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

5_israelis_dac78

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

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

Notes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


SOURCE ARTICLE

 

DENY THE LIE! – JUSTIN TRUDEAU & LIBERAL GOVT. ARE TRUTH-DENIERS By Arthur Topham

denytheliefinal

DENY THE  LIE! – JUSTIN TRUDEAU & LIBERAL GOVT. ARE TRUTH-DENIERS  

By Arthur  Topham

The Liberal Party of Canada under their new rookie Prime Minister Justin Trudeau are guilty of outright lying to the people of Canada about the alleged “6 Million Jews” who were supposed to have been “gassed” and “burnt” in German work camps during World War II.

Like clock-work the Prime  Minister’s Office (PMO) spits out announcements over and over stating that the “Nazis” murdered “millions” of “Jews” between 1939 – 1945. This is wilfully done by Justin Trudeau’s ‘advisors’ (i.e., read Zionist Jew handlers) who are firmly in control of both him and his party.

The latest repetition of this lie came forth from the PMO’s office yesterday, Wednesday, September 21, 2016. It reads:

Prime Minister of Canada welcomes progress on National Holocaust Monument

September 21, 2016
Ottawa, Ontario

The Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, today participated in a site dedication ceremony for the National Holocaust Monument, which is being built at the corner of Wellington and Booth streets in Ottawa.

The Monument, which is scheduled to be unveiled in 2017, will honour the millions of Jews and other innocent victims who died in the Holocaust. It will also promote a better understanding of the historical events surrounding the Holocaust and how they affected Canada, and celebrate the tremendous contributions that Holocaust survivors have made to this country.

Quote

“It is important for Canadians and the rest of the world to remember the suffering and murder of millions of Jews and others in the Holocaust. We must never forget the stories of the victims, and the important lessons of the Holocaust. As Canadians and citizens of the world, we must fight the hatred and fear that once fuelled these deplorable acts, and ensure that tolerance and pluralism always triumph over anti-Semitism and racism. We must also pay tribute to the resilience of those who survived that horrific ordeal and went on to make enormous contributions here in Canada as well as many other countries around the world.”
—The Rt. Hon. Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada

“This national monument will stand as a testament to the suffering of the millions who lost their lives and families to the Holocaust and tell the stories of those who came to Canada to build a new life. The Monument will serve as a reminder to future generations of Canadians to keep the lessons of history alive in our country’s consciousness. We must never take for granted our freedom, diversity, and deep commitment to human rights.”
The Honourable Mélanie Joly, Minister of Canadian Heritage

The question needs to asked over and over, “Why is the Liberal government emphasizing and repeatedly pushing this 6 Million Lie so much?

Is it because the Zionist lobbyists here in Canada like B’nai Brith and their USA Anti-Defamation League (ADL) counterpart the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada as well as the latest traitorous Israeli espionage agency the Centre for Israel & Jewish Affairs (CIJA), are beginning to panic because their 71 year old “6 Million” deception is now, thanks to the Internet and Social Media outlets like Facebook, so tattered and torn by the Truth that they’re frantically attempting to shore up this massive deception in any way possible?

It must be remembered that the Zionist Jew lobbyists here in Canada built their draconian “Hate Propaganda” laws, contained in Sections 318 – 320 of the Canadian Criminal Code, and now being used against Truth Revealers, on the baseless foundation of the “6 Million Jews” holocaust lie. This fact is documented in my March 29, 2014 article, Bad Moon Rising: How the Jewish Lobbies Created Canada’s “Hate Propaganda” Laws.

We’re seeing a quickening by the Jewish lobbyists in their last-ditch attempts to sustain their fraudulence and deception when it comes to the greatest lie ever told to the world. Could it be because more and more Canadians and especially German-Canadian citizens are finally standing up and speaking  out in defence of their ethnic homeland and especially in defence of Truth itself?

Monika Schaefer of Jasper, Alberta and Brian Ruhe of Vancouver, B.C. are two of the latest shining examples of German-Canadian truth revealers who’ve shown the courage of their convictions by speaking out on the net through their blogsites and their videos in order to inform Canadians and warn them against continuing to believe the Zionist-controlled mainstream media (MSM) and the Liberal government of Justin Trudeau.

There is also a concerted effort on the part of the B’nai Brith foreign lobby in Canada to destroy the livelihood and reputation of University of Lethbridge tenured Professor Anthony Hall by spreading lies on their website and in other Zionist-controlled media that are simply not true.

Could all of this be a prelude to the Liberal government possibly attempting to introduce “Holocaust Denial” laws into Canadian jurisprudence like the ones we see in occupied Germany today in order to stem the growing tide of Truth about what really happened during WWII and who the real perpetrators were?

Will Canada become the next Germany and start jailing its citizens for questioning historic events that have been created and spun throughout past history like gigantic spider webs of lies in order to keep the world in a state of perpetual ignorance?

It won’t take too long to find out given the times that we’re living in.


See the following related article dealing with my upcoming Constitutional challenge to Sec. 319(2) due to begin October 3rd in Quesnel Supreme Court.

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

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

THANK YOU!

Enough Already! HolocaustDeprogrammingCourse.com

EnjoughAlready!

HolocaustDeprogrammingCourse.com

Holocaust deprogramming course

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

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

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

When You Write a Letter on Monika Schaefer’s Behalf

Letters4MonikaHdr

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

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

Elizabeth May, Monika Schaefer, and the Betrayal of Canada by Prof. Tony Hall

GREENWASH!

Elizabeth May, Monika Schaefer, and the Betrayal of Canada

by
Prof. Tony Hall

The crass opportunism of the Green Party of Canada’s leadership, including Elizabeth May, is on full display in its rush to slander Monika Schaefer.  The slander came in response to Ms. Schaefer’s You Tube video entitled “Sorry Mom, I Was Wrong About the Holocaust.

The Green Party has made a serious mistake in its haste to expel Ms. Schaefer after she has already resigned from the organization on July 30, 2015 based on reasons of high principle. As I understand it, Ms. Schaefer resigned because she sees Ms. May as a full participant in the ongoing criminal cover up of what actually transpired on 9/11. The effect of the Green Party’s involvement in this criminal cover up is to protect the guilty parties responsible for this most consequential and ongoing crime against humanity. John Duddy has made similar points to Ms. May repeatedly I believe.

“All Canada’s parliamentarians and all our federal political parties are complicit in torture by virtue of accepting the 9/11 Commission Report as the basis for the making of federal enactments on terror threats in Canada.”

MayShocked

As I see it Ms. May’s rejections of the information on 9/11 brought to her by Ms. Schaefer amounts to the Green Party Leader’s acceptance that it is OK to make Canadian public policy on terrorism based on tainted evidence obtained through illegal torture in the United States. That is the implication of Ms. May’s uncritical acceptance of the conclusions reached in 2004 by the 9/11 Commission in the United States. All Canada’s parliamentarians and all our federal political parties are complicit in torture by virtue of accepting the 9/11 Commission Report as the basis for the making of federal enactments on terror threats in Canada. I won’t go into the sorry details of the Paul Estrin affair that also caused Ms. Schaefer to lose confidence in the Green Party’s leadership.

“Is Ms. Schaefer a more authentic embodiment of honest and unwavering Green environmentalism than Ms. May? To my way of thinking the answer is clear given the mounting evidence that Ms. May is no friend of free speech, open debate and even rudimentary honesty in the hoax that now passes for Canadian parliamentary democracy.”

I share Ms. Schaefer’s disappointment that Ms. May has failed when it counts most to live up to her past promises that she would speak truth to power even on difficult issues. Have Greens become grey when it comes to confronting the big issues of war and peace, life and death? Is Ms. Schaefer a more authentic embodiment of honest and unwavering Green environmentalism than Ms. May? To my way of thinking the answer is clear given the mounting evidence that Ms. May is no friend of free speech, open debate and even rudimentary honesty in the hoax that now passes for Canadian parliamentary democracy.

Ms. Schaefer’s involvement with the Green Party goes back to her attendance at the founding convention in 1983. She has proven herself especially in recent years to be much more true than Ms. May to the originating ideals of the Green Party.

MonikaSchaeferPhoto

Unfortunately the party that Ms. Schaefer helped to found and build has now been subjugated to some very powerful interests, the same interests that seem intent on criminalizing Jasper’s most celebrated violinist for honestly articulating her beliefs. How tragic to see Ms. May in the role of media cop feeding slanderous vilifications of Ms. Schaefer to the Ottawa press corpse that has become little more than a stenographer for official sources. Very little of substance gets investigated by mainstream Canadian journalists with the result that the authoritarianism of Police State Canada keeps getting ramped up as is now becoming very clear by the treatment heaped on Ms. Schaefer especially in Jasper and Ottawa.

The interests Ms. May is representing in her federal slander of Ms. Schaefer are the same interests that are demonstrably sabotaging the promise of Canada as a sovereign place of freedom, self-determination, decency, and justice, as a place devoted to peace and environmental sanity. The Green Party still has it in its power to do the right thing and correct its horrendous mistake with an apology to Ms. Schaefer for misrepresenting her actual relationship with the political organization Monika worked so diligently to help build up. Given what I know of the history of Monika’s helpful support of Ms. May’s quest for power in not-so-distant times, it seems to me some thanks are in order for Ms. Schaefer’s many contributions to the Green Party of Canada.

What will the Green Party do to correct its announcement that it will expel an individual who already resigned from Ms. May’s party based on reasons of high principle? Will the Green Party of Canada publish Monika Schaefer’s letter of resignation dated July 30, 2015? An excerpt from the letter has already been published in the American Herald Tribune.

Escape From The Holocaust Lie by Arthur Topham

EscapeHoloHdr

Escape From The Holocaust Lie

By
Arthur Topham

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

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

DouglasHChristiecopy_zps43b1b5c0

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

tazebook_dees-1-copy

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

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

ZundelTrialFreeSpeechDC800 copy

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

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

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

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

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

As Doug Christie put it in his summation:

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

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

RaulHilbergPic

And the Beat(ing) Goes On

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

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

MonikaSchaeferSorryMomHdr copy

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

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

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

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

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

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

CanadaBBLOBBY3 copy 5

What to do?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

RepealHateLaws-1000 copy 2

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

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

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

______

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

MonikaSchaeferTruth

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

Monika Schaefer

From: Monika Schaefer monika_schaefer@hotmail.com

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

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

Dear Paul,

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

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

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

I agree with those words 100%.

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

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

Sincerely,
Monika Schaefer

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

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

18 July 2016 noon Mountain Time

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Monika Schaefer

GLARING Hypocrisy Interview with Truth-Teller Monika Schaefer

GLARING Hypocrisy Interview with Truth-Teller Monika Schaefer

By Sean M. Madden
July 15, 2016

GLARING Hypocrisy Interview with Truth-Teller Monika Schaefer

(GLARING Hypocrisy) On June 17, 2016, Monika Schaefer, a native-born Canadian citizen of German parents, posted a brief video to YouTube entitled “Sorry Mom, I was wrong about the Holocaust”.

This led to a fellow citizen of Jasper, Alberta (Canada) filing a complaint with the Alberta Human Rights Commission. Although we watched Monika’s video shortly after it was published to YouTube, we only learned of the formal complaint and general local backlash on Thursday July 14, the same day we recorded this nearly hour-long Skype interview with her.

We recommend you take the six minutes to watch Monika’s above video — so you can hear her in her own words, and get a taste of her love for music and life. You’ll then be well-equipped to listen to our below interview with this gentle yet courageous truth-teller who has managed to free herself from the stifling birdcage of countless Jew World Order lies so that truth itself can soar unhindered to the minds of many others.

GLARING Hypocrisy Crowdfunding Update: On July 5th, we launched our self-hosted crowdfunding campaign in search of patrons who’d like to help us reach our goal of earning our full-time living via GLARING Hypocrisy, so that we can direct all of our passions and creative energies into resisting the Jew World Order. And we’re honored to report that we now have 9 such patrons, and are 4 percent of the way towards reaching our Stage 1 “Daily Bread”, and 1.6 percent towards reaching our Stage 2 “Sustainable Living”, goals. And we’re at 9.7 percent of our Equipment Upgrade goal as well. If you’d like to become a patron, or to learn more, click here.

 

 

Hate speech complaint filed against Jasper woman for Holocaust denial video By Min Dhariwal, CBC News Edmonton, Alberta

Screen Shot 2016-07-17 at 10.52.22 AM

Hate speech complaint filed against Jasper woman for Holocaust denial video
Green Party condemns former candidate’s ‘terribly misguided’ statements
By Min Dhariwal, CBC News

 Jul 15, 2016

MONIKAPIC
Monika Schaefer denies the Holocaust ever happened. (Supplied)

On her Facebook page, Monika Schaefer lists herself as a self-employed violin instructor.

In the first five seconds of her video titled “Sorry Mom, I was wrong about the Holocaust,” the former Green party candidate is shown deftly playing the violin.

However, it’s not her violin playing but what she says in the video that is garnering all of the attention.

Screen Shot 2016-07-17 at 10.14.09 AM
‘This is the biggest and most pernicious and persistent lie in all of history.’ – Monika Schaefer

Less than three minutes into the video Schaefer, who was born in Canada of German heritage, tells a story of how as a child she was taught to believe the Holocaust happened.

She goes on to say she confronted her parents about why they didn’t do anything to stop the Holocaust. They replied they didn’t know it was happening. Schaefer says her parents didn’t know about the genocide because “these things did not happen.”

Later in the video she says that since 2014 she started to realize the Holocaust “is the biggest and most pernicious and persistent lie in all of history.”

Throughout the video she expresses her firm belief that six million Jews did not die at the hands of Nazi Germany and refers to the Holocaust as “the six-million lie.”

Human rights complaint
Reaction to her video has been wide ranging.

In the comments section under her YouTube posting, there are supporters — some even applauding her for “speaking the truth.” But just as many are condemning the Jasper music teacher’s comments.

Ken Kuzminski is one of them.

KuzminskiNDP
‘It is a hate crime in my mind and I believe it should be investigated as such.’ – Ken Kuzminski

Kuzminski used to be friends with Schaefer but says that all changed after he saw her video.  He says many people have approached him in the town of Jasper in disbelief over what Schaefer has said.

“It is a hate crime in my mind and I believe it should be investigated as such,” said Kuzminski, who is also the president of the local Legion in Jasper.

He says Schaefer is no longer welcomed at the legion.

Kuzminski filed a complaint with the Alberta and Canadian Human Rights Commission, citing Schaefer’s denial of the Holocaust as hate speech.

“By allowing it to be unchallenged like this gives licence to the people that want to spread hatred, and ignorance even further, and you see that on the comments of her YouTube videos, the hatred that’s being expressed there,” said Kuzminski.

Monika&May

The Edmonton Jewish Federation wasn’t aware of Schaefer’s YouTube video or its contents.

After watching it, Tal Toubiana, the director of community relations and communications for the federation, was hesitant to give Schaefer any further attention.

“Any media coverage inadvertently gives her a larger audience and platform,” he said.

Despite that, Toubiana added: “I find it curious that a woman who allegedly faced bullying based on her country of origin would rather continue a cycle of irreflexive hate than reflect deeply on the wounded history and trauma the Holocaust did create.

‘The Holocaust is a historical event that is not only undeniable in regards to the facts and documentation of its existence, but in the collective trauma it created.’ – Tal Toubiana

“The Holocaust is a historical event that is not only undeniable in regards to the facts and documentation of its existence, but in the collective trauma it created. Ms. Schaefer is a product of the very trauma she claims does not exist.

“Genocide sadly has not stopped at the Holocaust and lives continue to be lost all over the world. Perhaps we should shift our conversation away from those who choose to put on blinders rather than face pain, and discuss how we can combat hate and indifference in our world.”

Green party condemns former candidate

The Green Party condemned Schaefer’s comments in a strongly worded statement released Friday.

“I am shocked by comments made by Ms. Schaefer and I condemn her terribly misguided and untrue statements,” said Elizabeth May, leader of the Green Party of Canada. “Ms. Schaefer does not represent the values of the Green Party nor of our membership.”

The party said Schaefer was rejected as a potential Green candidate for the riding of Yellowhead before the 2015 federal election, and was also rejected as a potential candidate for the 2014 by-election in Fort McMurray-Athabasca.

“In light of Ms. Schaefer’s untrue statements made in a recent online video, we will be initiating the process to terminate her membership with the Green Party of Canada at the earliest possible opportunity,” said Emily McMillan, Green party executive director.

Even though there has been backlash, Schaefer is standing firm on her position made in the June 17 video, which now has well over 30,000 views.

She says for the last two years she has spent “a great deal of time researching this topic.” What is being taught to Canadians about the Holocaust is full of “inaccuracies,” she claims.
“When I started to look at the evidence, and I researched, and I researched and I researched, and the lies are coming apart, this house of cards is crumbling, and that is why there is this very fierce reaction against what I’m saying, because this lie, this public myth, has shaped our world.”
________
SOURCE

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

 

Conspiracy theories
By Lethbridge Herald
June 19, 2016

Screen Shot 2016-06-24 at 11.13.41 PM

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

6MilJustin

“Being a Jew and a Zionist are one and the same” (Jewish Chronicle) by Gilad Atzmon

Gilad
1465553780067
“Being a Jew and a Zionist are one and the same” (Jewish Chronicle)
By Gilad Atzmon

Anti-Zionist Jews insist that Zionism and being Jewish are entirely different matters that have nothing to do with each other. Jonathan Boyd, the Executive Director of the Institute for Jewish Policy Research (JPR) claims the opposite.  According to Boyd, statistics proves that “being a Jew and a Zionist are one and the same, they cannot be separated out.” Demands to separate Zionism and the Jews tear “Jewishness in two,” Boyd wrote today in the Jewish Chronicle.

According to Boyd, a 2010 JPR survey of British Jewish attitudes towards Israel found that “82 per cent of British Jews say that Israel plays either a central or important part in their Jewish identity. 95 per cent of British Jewish adults have visited the country at least once, and 90 per cent regard it as the ancestral homeland of the Jewish people.”

I guess that Jewish statistics has now replaced the Talmud and the Torah as sources of law. If as many as 90% of Jews believe that Palestine is a Jewish land, then the Palestinians must have been living there by mistake.

Boyd opines that drawing parallels between Nazis and Israelis, or calling for boycotts of Israeli products makes British Jews feel threatened.

I agree with Boyd. I am not keen on the equation between ‘Israelis and Nazis.’ I think that it is not fair to German National Socialism. Israel is a democracy and its crimes reflect the popular choice of the Israeli Jews and according to Boyd the vast majority of world Jewry who identify with Israel and Zionism. National Socialist Germany wasn’t a democracy and the different measures of political oppression it inflicted on Jews and others lasted for, at most, 12 years. Israel’s racist abuse of Palestinians has been going on for almost seven decades.

Boyd further reveals to us that most Jews do not believe in God. They actually believe in the ‘Jew.’ In 2013, JPR asked British Jews which aspects of Jewishness were most important to them.  Eighty-nine percent highlighted “feeling part of the Jewish people.”

This makes economic sense. Instead of inventing a god who chooses you over all other people, the contemporary secular Jew cuts out the almighty middle ’man.’ The Jews love themselves just for being themselves. This seems the ultimate form of collective narcissism. JPR’s findings agree with what I have observed so far: all permutations of Jewish ID politics from JVP to ADL and beyond are in practice different forms of intense tribal self love.

Boyd explains.  “The reason for that is because the Jews are a people over and above a religious group…the truth is you don’t actually have to believe anything to be Jewish. According to Jewish law, you simply need to be born to a Jewish mother, or convert. What you believe, or practise, whilst vital to the maintenance of that identity, is immaterial to your fundamental status as a Jew.”

There you go. Jewishness is a blood related identity, call it biology or race or a matter of conversion. Conversion into what? You guessed right –collective narcissism, self love or shall we simply say, ‘choseness.’

But Boyd insists that British Jews are also connected to Britain. “That (Zionist) feeling does not necessarily translate itself into Jews wanting to live in Israel. While about 35,000 have made aliyah since 1948, most British Jews feel very connected to Britain.”

According to Boyd, EU data reveals that “84 per cent (of British Jews) feel fully part of British society.” Fascinating. I would advise Boyd and his fellows at the Jewish research institute to try and find out what the British people think about the Jewish Lobby, the CFI and the LFI that push them into immoral interventionist wars in Iraq, Libya, Syria and Iran.  Boyd and his institute should try to ascertain what British people think about the fact that a tribal foreign lobby dominates Britain’s political affairs. What do the British people think about the idea that an ethnic group that amounts to less than half a percent of British society has so much influence in politics, finance and media? Looking into these topics may help to save both Britain and its Jewry from an unfortunate disaster.

SOURCE ARTICLE

Globe & Mail steps up to the “free speech” plate to support Dr. James Sears & YOUR WARD NEWS publication

ATEditorRedCap200

[Editor’s Note: While this article is far from being a ringing endorsement for the repeal of Canada’s anti-free speech legislation contained in Section 318 to 320 of the Canadian Criminal Code it definitely is a good start in the right direction. Apart from the standard zionist show of obeisance in Marcus Gee’s needless epithets aimed at Dr. Sear’s character and motives the focus on government and private corporate (Canada Post) censorship is refreshing to see in a msm publication and, in Facebook is deserving of a “like”.]

Postal censorship is a cure worse than the disease

By MARCUS GEE

The Globe and Mail

June 7th, 2016 

Dr.SearsG&Mpic

Canadians who value free speech – and let’s hope that is all of us – should be deeply troubled by Ottawa’s decision to tell Canada Post to stop carrying a fringe Toronto newspaper. Public Services Minister Judy Foote ordered the postal service to cease delivering Your Ward News, which has been accused of being anti-Semitic and pro-Nazi. Her “interim prohibitory order” gives its editor 10 days to appeal.

This is a catch-all ASF view; only displays when an unsupported article type is put in an ASF drop zone

Those who have campaigned against the free paper are “ecstatic.” But consider the awful precedent this act of postal censorship sets.

If people who are offended by something that appears in their mailbox can complain and get it banned from the post, where does it stop? Can a pro-choice feminist block the graphic pro-life pamphlet that comes in the mail? Can a fierce pro-lifer ban a flier from an abortion clinic? Or consider the feelings of the victim of East European communism who gets a Marxist tract in the mail? Why should an agency of the government that her taxes support be allowed to introduce that propaganda into her home?

This is the trouble with just about all limits on free speech. Who says what is beyond the pale? Deciding to block child pornography or open incitement to violence is easy enough, because of the direct physical harm they can be shown to cause. After that, it gets tricky.

Someone must have the power to determine what is dangerous or odious speech and what is merely passionate expression. It is always a matter of opinion. The line is impossible to draw, the scope for abuse endless.

Even in democratic countries, authorities have often succumbed to the impulse to black out what they don’t like. Communist propaganda was blocked on the grounds that it threatened national security, erotica on the grounds that it undermined public morals. The postal system was once one of the main agents of censorship. A century ago, postal censors blocked mailed instalments of James Joyce’s Ulysses.

Your Ward News is not Ulysses. Its editor, James Sears, who has been known to style himself as Dimitri the Lover, told City News that Hitler is his second-biggest idol, after Jesus. He ends his e-mails “Expel the Parasite!” – all in capital letters, of course. The group that has been fighting him calls his publication a “neo-Nazi-rag” that “has been permitted to disseminate racism, homophobia, misogyny and anti-Semitism to as many as 300,000 homes in Toronto.”

If so, there are a couple of ways to fight back short of censorship. One is simply to toss Your Ward News where it belongs: in the recycling bin. Nobody is forced to read it when it comes in the mail. People like Mr. Sears thrive on the oxygen of attention. Ignoring him is the best revenge.

Another is to argue back. If his opponents feel his maunderings are too despicable to pass over, they can always denounce or refute him. It is always better to fight speech with speech than to gag the speaker.

It is a good time to remember these old lessons about how to handle troublesome speech. Free expression is always under attack to some degree, and the danger seems especially acute today. The little tussle over Your Ward News is part of a wider struggle.

Overseas, authoritarian governments from Moscow to Beijing to Cairo are cracking down on the right to speak openly without fear. Canadians got a small glimpse of their attitude when China’s foreign minister dressed down a reporter in Ottawa for daring to ask a question about human rights. At home, on university campuses and beyond, the tendency to take offence is stifling healthy debate and silencing dissenting voices.

Sometimes those voices can be obnoxious, but it won’t do to try to snuff them out. Ottawa has no business telling the postal service to censor the mail just because some people don’t like what comes through the slot.

—-

SOURCE ARTICLE

CANADA: The New Sodom and Gomorrah? By Arthur Topham

 

CANADASODOM?

CANADA: The New Sodom and Gomorrah?

By
Arthur Topham

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

UpYoursTrudeauJr

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

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

FREEXPRESSIONLOCKUP copy 4

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

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

5FeetFury copy

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

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

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

EyeOnFreeSpeech600

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

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

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

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

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

JewShitter

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

Bill-Whatcott-Image

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

Conclusion: What’s coming next?

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

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

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

Time will soon tell.

——

SUPPORTFREEDOMOFSPEECH

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

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

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

ATEDITOR0216

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

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

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

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

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

JustinIsraelPuppetStatement by the Prime Minister of Canada on Israel Independence Day

May 12, 2016
Ottawa, Ontario

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

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

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

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

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

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

—-