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

Thinking about the “Holocaust” is a crime—interview with Alfred Schaefer By Jonas E. Alexis VeteransToday

 

screen-shot-2016-12-13-at-6-18-49-pm

Thinking about the “Holocaust” is a crime—interview with Alfred Schaefer
By Jonas E. Alexis on December 9, 2016
The awakening masses understand the facts and will not tolerate the lies or those who protect the lies.
?
Alfred and Monika Schaefer

…by Jonas E. Alexis and Alfred Schaefer

Alfred Schaefer: I was born Jan 30 1955, and grew up in Canada, thinking that there could not possibly be anything in all the world that could ever threaten us. We were 5 children, my older brother who is a doctor but a complete zombie, my younger sister who pretends not to understand that this is important, then Monika, who understood immediately and you know her, and my youngest sister who died aged 26 in a mountaineering accident.

Only recently did I figure out that the strife, that the “easy go lucky” hippy movement created for us in the family, came from the “demoralization” that was happening to our entire western society.

We thought that this was all a natural development, never ever suspecting that the entire rock and roll and hippy scene in that era was manufactured by the same forces that are now trying to enslave us. This was all part of the subversion, driving a wedge between the disciplined and cultured older people, and ourselves. We thought they were just old fashioned, and we were so cool.

But, the discipline from our parents did save us from completely failing, and we did have a lot of fun with them doing a lot of hiking and camping and stuff like that. After high school I tried university, but quit that after a couple of months. The next year I attended a technical college. I took a two year “Electronics Engineering Technology Course” in the Northern Alberta Institute of Technology.

After graduating from that, in Edmonton Alberta, in 1977, I went to work for IBM as a “repair man”, fixing photo copiers and typewriters and small computer systems. I did that for three years, with the intention of saving enough money to go on a big bicycle trip.

I spent one year on a bicycle circling the USA, going down the west coast in the autumn of 1980, then across to Florida in the winter months, dipping into Mexico on the way across. Then, up the east coast and across to Edmonton.

The following year I went to Europe, and spent the next 4 years riding and jobbing and helping some Germans that I met, take trucks and busses down from Germany through the Sahara, to Burkina Faso, Togo, Niger, and Mali, to sell them. I did this 5 times with these people, until I realised that if I don’t settle down in a normal life soon, that it may never be possible and I may end up in sorry shape.

So, in 1985, I applied to work as a technician for IBM in Munich. It was a supremely lucky break for me that this effort succeeded, and the two years that I intended to work in Munich turned into a “lifer”. I got a job that I did not even dare to apply for, namely working on the large systems as a technician.

As the technology evolved and the technical skills were less and less in demand, I changed my line of work within the company, which also meant moving several times. I spent 3 years in Boulder Colorado on an assignment for the European countries in the IBM printing systems development lab.

All of these experiences gave me the necessary base for doing what I am now doing for the “truth movement.”

Then, this summer, a series of amazing coincidences once again set the stage. Monika and Tony Hall came for a visit, and that visit resulted in the “sorry mom” video, as well as the CODOH video and so much more. It was a life changing visit for all of us. I am not superstitious, but I do feel that this much good fortune obligates, otherwise, it is all wasted.

My last video summarises my “truther” career, more or less, as I had taken a short scene from my very first video which was the “9/11 Gatekeepers and Controlled Opposition”. This video resulted from me becoming uncontrollably enraged after seeing the video posted by Kevin Barrett on Veterans Today where Noam Chomsky dismisses that student in Florida with his question on WTC7. Remember, Chomsky was like an ikon for us, a guru. When I saw that video, it blew out all my fuses.

It was information that I gleaned from Kevin Barrett’s dialog with Chomsky that enabled me to get though to Chomsky. That idiot Chomsky replied to me, after I wrote him what I thought of his treasonous behaviour. He probably could not stand the fact that some little shit can be so outright brazen and challenge him on this, and he wrote back to me. This went back and forth several times.

Jonas E. Alexis: You have argued that people can face numerous consequences if they “commit the crime of thinking” in Germany. Whatever happens to the German intellectual tradition? What would thinkers like Kant and Hegel say of Germany’s thought police today? Explain those issues for us.

Alfred Schaefer: Our forefathers would turn over in their graves if they were to witness what we are living today, not only in Germany but throughout the European and “western” countries.

The “re-education” that was imposed upon what was left of the German people after the genocidal wars against Europe, what we call “WWI and WWII”, continued the destruction of independent thinking.

The suppression of independent thinking was already well advanced in those countries that were tricked into fighting these totally senseless wars which only the perpetrator of this conflict benefitted from. That winner was international Jewry.

The entire official narrative of those wars, is nothing more than the interpretation that the perpetrators have presented us. They gloat about their ability to do this in the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion”. See Protocol #7 under the subtitle “Universal War.”

This power, their control over the media, gives these people the ability to channel and mould our thinking to serve their interests. Without the hatred incited against Germany well before the start of these genocidal wars, they never would have taken place. They resulted in the extermination of countless millions of the best people, the flower of the European people, a genetic degradation, as well as the wholesale destruction of irreplaceable historical culture. Dresden comes to mind here.

This follows the instructions in the Protocols that calls for the total and utter destruction of those who do not subordinate themselves, including any memory of them. The destruction of cities like Dresden was intended to help erase the memory of the Germanic people as it was perhaps the most beautiful city in the world for its cultural heritage. It was overflowing with refugees fleeing the onslaught of the Jewish Bolsheviks from the east, when it was firebombed in a true holocaust.

Dresden had no military value targets whatsoever. For a description of this barbarity, the book by Thomas Goodrich titled “Hellstorm”, is a sobering account.  Producer Kyle Hunt has also made this into a film, which the Jews unsuccessfully tried to sensor from the German people.

Our world today would be very different indeed had we not been tricked into these suicidal struggles, going back to even before the French Revolution in 1789.

A good contemporary example of how the interpretation of events creates a narrative that has very little to do with reality, is the official version of 9/11, and how 19 Muslims with box cutters hijacked 4 airliners to pull that off. Since this event took place in our lifetime, it is easier to understand. It can be used as a blueprint to illustrate how these lies are implanted into our collective psyche, even though any human being with a functioning brain, knows that this official story is totally false.

After that event took place, only the false narrative is ever repeated, over and over again. Any and all people who are dependent on the Jewish money system lose their ability to survive if they utter one word about what happened on 9/11 that deviates from the official lies.

This process, imposed on a population over a span of several decades or generations, makes any other narrative appear wrong or even insane, simply because everyone is repeating the same lies.

For the “party line” to succeed in becoming the “truth”, all dissenting “opinions” must be subdued.  To accomplish this, both carrots and sticks are employed. Carrots may come in the form of promotions, payoffs, or being puffed up and glorified in the media. Sticks may come in the form simple censorship, deleting data from the internet, or hysterical attacks of denunciation or death.

These include the ultimate: “holocaust denier”, “anti-Semite”, “conspiracy theorist” or any of the other meaningless control trigger words. These control trigger words activate a carefully engineered program that has been installed in our minds over a long period of time.

The ability for an “enemy within the gates” to trigger programs residing within our minds, would vindicate Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), who singlehandedly set the stage for German philosophy in the nineteenth century, in his understanding of the human mind. Kant held that any object given to the human mind is subject to the means by which the mind receives it.

All of our lives our minds have been subjected to a barrage of messages that have been “interpreted” for us, as “reality”. In other words, the mind receives certain messages over and over and over again, from all directions, imbedding the Jewish fantasies into our minds until we believe them to be reality. Whether it is “Anna Frank’s” phony dairies, or the fiction “Schindler’s List” turned into fact by presenting it as such, to the children in our schools.

Just recently a friend of mine, a woman from Kenya, dropped by to discuss politics with me. Naomi worked as an Au Pair for the neighbours before studying in Munich. She watched my “Police Raid” video and was delighted that it really told the truth. Then she confessed that she was warned by her friends in Kenya about 8 years ago, before coming to Europe, to be on her guard so as not to get “brainwashed” when in Europe. Her friends expressed concern that she may also get “brainwashed” during her stay in Europe if she is not careful.

She explained the extreme frustration that her German boyfriend and herself are experiencing now with fellow Germans who seem not to be able to understand that the imposed beliefs of the “Holocaust”, and many other beliefs are “brainwashing”.   When a woman from Kenya laments about the “saturation brainwashing” throughout the “western” countries, this gives us an alarming indication about the condition of our “intellectual tradition”.

In your question you mention Hegel. We often talk about the Hegelian dialectic, where two contradictory ideas or entities are mixed together resulting in something different from either of the two initial starting points.

In today’s world of fear and lies, with the perpetrators protected behind a shield that the incessant application of trigger control words provides them, they are now setting up numerous Hegelian dialectic’s that will destroy us, and we are not able to recognise or resist this process because of the condition of our compartmentalised and fragmented minds. Any recognition of the Hegelian dialectics is instantly countered with the application of control trigger words.

For example, if a European notices that most of the “refugees” are tough looking military aged fighting men, this observation is silenced with the simple term “Racist”, or “Neo-Nazi Racist”, and the military aged fighting men can go about destroying and raping without too much interference.

Those foreigners who came here years ago understand the lethal situation that this represents. Another example that Naomi, the woman from Kenya, gave me makes this clear. A fellow Kenyan who has also been in Germany for many years told her the following story.

He observed how two African “refugees” stole a telephone from an unsuspecting European. He confronted these two “refugee” men, and lectured them about how harmful this behaviour will be for them. They should give it back and claim that they saw it fall to the ground. So what did they do? Rather than take his advice, they beat him up for trying to discipline them.

Obviously those people who understand what civilization is all about, and still have a functioning brain, are very alarmed about the Hegelian Dialectics they see being set up.

Here are several of the Hegelian Dialectics:

1 – ) The “ruling elite” pretends that the lies are truth. Their decisions are based on pretending that the lies are truth.
1 + ) The awakening masses understand the facts and will not tolerate the lies or those who protect the lies.
2 – ) Third world “refugees” flooding into our European countries expecting to enjoy all the fruits of the civilisation we have built and inherited from our forefathers.
2 + ) European citizens who worked all their lives understand the injustice of having the invaders take it away from them.  Their sense of justice has been utterly betrayed. The invaders are immune to prosecution while indigenous Europeans are held to account for the smallest of infractions.
3 – ) Jewish financial criminals stand well above the law for multi billion dollar theft and mass murder.
3 + ) Normal working people can no longer get by with regular work and pay.
4 – ) People speak one “language” in public or at work. (the lies, ignorance)
4 + ) People speak another “language” at home or with friends whom they trust.  (the truth)
5 – )  Intellectually weak minded people unable to discern fact from fiction. Easily directed like controlled and programmed laboratory rats. Many feminized men and gender confused people in this category.
5 + )  The exploding numbers of people decontaminating themselves from the lies. Initial confusion turns to rage.
6 – )  Our money is a fiat money based on a foundation of lies and deceit.  Promissory notes based on lies.
6 + )  All fiat money collapses eventually, there are no exceptions to this rule.   Our survival depends on our ability to migrate from the present expired and toxic system to a new system for exchanging real value for real value.

To prevent a catastrophic explosion destroying our civilisation we need to understand these processes and reverse them before they implode in a “Supernova”.

In my video titled “Police Raid and my Confession by Alfred Schaefer” I tried to deconstruct the trigger control words, as this is an essential first step in regaining the ability to think independently. The trigger control words separate the compartments of the fragmented mind that no longer communicate with each other.

The compartmentalisation of the mind produces results similar to a physical lobotomy. In my video I refer to this condition as “induced mental illness”, which can be treated by careful exposure to truth and reason.

The purpose of these trigger control words is to prevent us from understanding and stopping the Hegelian Dialectics that will explode on us, unless they are reversed and dismantled.

Kant and Hegel would be alarmed to see that the descendants of their beloved society have unlearned how to think at all.

Jonas E. Alexis: You said that “The German ministry of forbidden thought” sent their agents to search your house and steal things you had in your computer. Describe this for us in detail. In the process, tell us whether they had any legal right to do so. In your opinion, was there any organization behind this?

Alfred Schaefer: The actual trigger for the “Kriminal Polizei” to come to raid our house, was the video that I had uploaded on the 17th of June 2016 with the title “Sorry Mom, I was wrong about the Holocaust”. B’nai Brith sent out clear messages that “this guy needs to be taken down”.

In the search warrant they stated that my offence was the “Sorry Mom, I was wrong about the Holocaust” video. What is astounding is that they did not seem to have a problem framing an apology to one’s own Mom, as “incitement to racial hatred”.  This logic would certainly have had Hegel and Kant very alarmed about the state of mind of our people.

It makes no sense.  Actually, they then go on stating that the person in this video claims that there were no gas chambers and that the holocaust is the biggest lie in history. That is the simple truth. This is now common knowledge, so obviously we are now dealing with a religious tribunal determined to weed out all heretics. So again, philosophers of the past would be astounded at how far we have regressed to in the year 2016.

The main purpose of this raid was to try to silence me. Ironically, this raid and its aftermath actually provided me with useful data for my latest video. As I stated in this video, “Police Raid and my Confession by Alfred Schaefer”, I think the physical loss of these devises was well worth the price for having an interesting story to tell. Their intention was obviously to make it more difficult for me to work, or to silence me, but it has had the opposite effect.

You ask, if this was legal and what is the organisation behind it?

Allow me to respond with a question of my own: Was 9/11 legal, and what is the organisation behind that?  The answer is the same in both cases.

The paragraph 130 in German “law” that forbids stating that the fake holocaust consists of lies, is a law that allows the totally arbitrary punishment of any and all dissent. If a law was enacted that forbade breathing, then those in power could use the “anti-breathing” law to arbitrarily silence or punish any dissent, no matter what it was. Everyone with a functioning brain and the courage to ask to most basic questions, knows that the Jewish holocaust is nothing more than a fraud on an unprecedented scale.

But the law can now be arbitrarily applied to anyone that they want removed from the scene, which gives them truly god-like power over all of us. For me, I would rather be physically locked up or die, than to submit to this pathetic tyranny that reduces human beings to programmed rats.

Jonas E. Alexis: Describe how people in Germany and Canada can legally and effectively fight against the thought police.

Alfred Schaefer: Fighting the thought police legally and effectively is like trying to fight the inquisition with logic and reason.

It is not possible to fight an oppressor who labels “Sorry Mom, I was wrong about the Holocaust”, which is an apology to one’s own mother, as “incitement to hatred”, in a system where “law” is arbitrary and one-sided.

Thought laws as we have them now, in what was once our civilisation, are pure tyranny. You cannot fight this tyranny with logic or laws that negate free speech and justice.

To fight “legally and effectively” with a “lawmaker” who is a Talmudic psychopath is like a sparrow asking the cat to negotiate.

A regime that imposes thought laws will not relinquish the power that thought laws represent. Our oppressors will never voluntarily relinquish power. This is psychopathic behaviour, and it will continue on the same peak and crash trajectory that it has always experienced in the past. Peak and crash, peak and crash, peak and crash.

The past crashes were characterised by the expulsion of the Jews from either cities or regions. This is the fist time that the magnitude of the crash can be seen as a life threatening event that may put us back to something that more resembles the Stone Age than our present day technological society and civilisation.

Our best hope is for very large numbers of people to stand up and ignore thought laws by publicly announcing their defiance. A law becomes unsustainable when the productive people of the society openly defy these destructive and suicidal thought laws.

Any thinking person with the smallest amount of self-respect would not blindly subordinate himself to these bizarre thought laws. They are not accidental, harmless or irrelevant laws.  They are the shield behind which the Jewish mega criminals bring us death and destruction on a global scale.

Maybe the fear of being seen as too cowardly or too stupid to speak up needs to become greater than the fear of possible consequences for actually speaking up, before the lemmings join those who are now already speaking up. In any case, fear is the overwhelming force that is determining the outcome.

The danger of our present situation is, that the perpetrators have always seen this moment in time as the timeframe reserved for their long planned “WWIII”. Their hope is that the traumatised remnants of this conflict will be in no more a position to resist the imposition of their long planned “Jew World Order”, than were the Germans able to resist the imposition, by stealth, of the imaginary “Holocaust” as we have witnessed over the past decades.

SOURCE ARTICLE

 

Police Raid, My Confession Latest Video by Alfred Schaefer

alfredconfessionhdr

Dear friends,

Here is a video that is designed to help understand the process that is being used against us by the parasite, to subdue us, leading to our own intended extermination. I believe that understanding how the parasite does this to us, gives us much better odds for containing it, and reflecting the “hate and fear” back to its source. It is 35 minutes long.

Alfred Schaefer

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.)
 

The bravery of old women By John Kaminski

braveryofolderwomenhdr

The bravery of old women

Detoxifying the disinfo that keeps us enslaved

INSPIRING THE YOUNG WITH COURAGEOUS GRACE AND AUTHENTIC INTEGRITY

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

How Do Canada’s Hate Propaganda Laws Work Behind the Scene? The R vs Roy Arthur Topham Case By Arthur Topham

behindthescene

How Do Canada’s Hate Propaganda Laws Work Behind the Scene?
The R vs Roy Arthur Topham Case

By
Arthur Topham

September 25th, 2016

As the Constitutional challenge in the R vs Roy Arthur Topham case moves close to the hearing date of October 3 to 7, 2016 in Quesnel, BC’s Supreme Court it’s time Canadians were told how the methods of surveilling, complaining, charging, arresting and trying a Canadian citizen for such a flawed and unwarranted “crime” actually plays out behind the scene and not just what the mainstream media and courtrooms attempt to portray in order to lend credence to the charade in the eyes of the general public.

My example, given all that I’ve learned over the past decade about how the Zionist Jew lobby organizations operate in conjunction with the police forces and provincial and federal court systems here in Canada, is, I believe, fairly typical of how the process works.

I must preface the article by first stating that there were two individuals who were responsible for laying the “hate crime” complaints against myself and my website RadicalPress.com. That’s two people out of a population of 33,476,688 citizens (as of February 2012) who decided they didn’t like my website and wanted to have it destroyed. Due to a bail order issued by the the Honourable Provincial Court Judge R. D. Morgan on April 15, 2014 I am forbidden to “post on any internet site or otherwise publish the names of the two civilian complainants… and that he [me, Arthur Topham] immediately remove their names from any internet site he has direct or indirect control of. I find that there may be a risk of harm or intimidation in posting the names of these two civilian complainants.

Of the two complainants I can state that one is a Jew living in Victoria, BC who is (or was at the time) a regional director for the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada and the other is a lawyer living in Ottawa, Ontario who is not a Jew but has acted on behalf of Jewish lobby organizations in Canada for at least the past twenty years and is in all likelihood Canada’s Grand Champion of “hate crime” complainants. The Jew in Victoria I will refer to as “Agent Z” throughout the article and the non-Jew lawyer from Ottawa will be known as “Agent S”. The rest of the protagonists throughout the melodrama will have their real names cited as there is no court order prohibiting mention of them.

How the Ten Year Show Trial Played Out Behind the Scenes

My “hate crime” trials initially began on February 14th, 2007 (Valentine’s Day) and have gone through innumerable twists, contortions and transmutations that saw them morph from a Canadian Human Rights Act Sec. 13 complaint in November of 2007 to a Criminal Code of Canada (CCC) Sec. 319(2) complaint in May of 2012 that resulted in my arrest on the Barkerville Hwy near Quesnel, BC and my incarceration in the Quesnel jail. From there it went to a further three years of ongoing legal wrangling that eventually resulted in a trial in BC Supreme Court in Quesnel that commenced on October 26th, 2015 and ended on November 12th with the jury finding me Guilty on Count 1 and Not Guilty on Count 2. Both Counts of course were identical.

As I said it began on Valentine’s Day when Agent Z sent me an email under a false alias calling himself “Brian Esker”. He accused me of publishing all sorts of materials on my website that he stated were “anti-Semitic” and “hateful” demanded that I take them down then let him know when I had and he would send me a list of more articles to take down. Of course he never stated which articles he wanted removed other than to mention the fact that I had The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion on my site and that was verboten as far as he was concerned.

I civilly and politely attempted to find out who “Brian Esker” really was but “Brian” refused to communicate any further with me and I never heard a thing more until I received a letter in my mailbox from the quasi-judicial Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) back on November 20, 2007 that contained a Sec. 13 “hate crime” complaint first filed with the (CHRC) back on August 14, 2007. That’s when I first learned that the skulking, serpentine troll who wrote me on Valentine’s Day was in fact Agent Z of the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada, the same foreign, false flag organization that’s been recently attacking German-Canadian citizens Monika Schaefer and Brian Ruhe and also doing its damnedest to slander and libel Professor Anthony Hall of Lethbridge University with false accusations in order to have him fired from his tenured professorship.

By 2008 I was coming out swinging and refusing to back down to the spurious accusations brought on by this agent of Israel. The CHRC decided that they had another victim and referred my case to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (CHRT) which was another total gong show of misfits and miscreants who must have thought they were living in Stalin’s Soviet Russia back in the 1930’s and would pull any dirty trick they could think of to intimidate and torture their victims.

But I learned something else back in 2008 regarding Agent S. This snake in the Zionist grass hadn’t filed a Sec. 13 complaint with the CHRC when Agent Z did but he was personally known to Agent Z at the time. I only found out when both of them threatened Black Press (not affiliated with Conrad Black) the publisher of my local community newspaper The Quesnel Observer with a law suit because the paper was publishing my side of the story. Agent Z was going ballistic and phoning the newspaper and threatening the editor and being his belligerent, arrogant, Zionist self. So both these agents were working in tandem from day one.

The whole CHRC and CHRT charade carried on right up until the Conservative government finally repealed the Sec. 13 law in June of 2012. Fortunately for me there were other victims ahead of me and by the time my turn came up the case was stayed due to it being repealed.

But the end of Sec. 13 didn’t stop the two Israeli agents from pursuing their goal of harassment of myself and my website. The second time they came after me it was prompted by Agent S, who, by the way, was also a former employee of the Canadian Human Rights Commission. I had just published an article called Hating Harper on April 27, 2011. The following day Agent S filed his Sec. 319(2) complaint with the next player in this freedom of speech farce, Det. Cst. Terry Wilson of the BC Hate Crime Team, centred in Surrey, BC.

On May 28th, 2011, precisely one month later, I published my controversial satire of Theodore N. Kaufman’s 1941 pro-German genocide book, Germany Must Perish! I called it Israel Must Perish! The very next day Agent Z filed his Sec. 319(2) “Hate Propaganda” complaint with Det. Cst. Terry Wilson and the Hate Crime Unit in Surrey.

gaywilsonlevasimage

Enter the Queer-Jew Connection

There are aspects to the R v Roy Arthur Topham criminal case that have yet to be revealed to the general public since this Stalinist Show Trial began almost a decade ago and had it not been for the Liberal government’s lamentable decision to threaten, via the use of Sec. 319(2), the decent folks of Canada now outraged at their government’s degrading attempt to drag the nation down into the mire of mendacious sexual masochism, these revelations may never have surfaced. But they have and so I must share now what has thus far remained hidden from the general public.

It was soon after I was arrested on May 16th, 2012 while my wife and I were traveling to Prince George on placer mining business that I found out that Det. Cst. Terry Wilson, who was leading the BC Hate Crime Team in their tireless efforts to hunt down “haters” on the Internet, was a queer. Then, as my court case carried on and further revelations occurred I also learned while cross-examining Det. Wilson during the Preliminary Inquiry back in January of 2014 that Det. Wilson had first joined the London Ontario Police Service back in 1989 and then their hate crime unit in 1995. But more importantly was the fact that as far back as 1996 Det. Wilson was already working on similar cases such as mine with the same Agent S who initially filed the first Sec. 319(2) complaint against me!

Det. Cst. Wilson has since retired from the New Westminster Police Force and has suddenly morphed into a “Hate Crime Expert” even though in court he swore under oath that he wasn’t a hate crime expert. His website http://www.hatecrimeexpert.com/ contains all the essential ingredients showing Wilson’s former connections with the Jewish lobbyists and other unsavoury characters.

screen-shot-2016-09-26-at-7-54-57-am

Now I don’t have any proof that Agent S is a homosexual or not. I do know that I’ve seen his photo on the net numerous times and read much that he’s written on his website but I’ve never seen or heard of him either having a girlfriend or being married. All I do know is that he and Wilson have been conspiring to hunt down Canadians for the past twenty years and charge them with “hate crimes”. As for Agent Z out of Victoria, BC, he’s also been working in concert with these same two “hate” hunters for at least a decade and most likely longer. Being a married man with a family it’s doubtful that Agent Z is a queer but regardless it’s no secret that the Jewish lobby has been pushing the Queer agenda in the courts and through the media for decades.

So here we have this Zionist triune of truant “hate crime” agents all directly connected up with B’nai Brith Canada and its ADL arm the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith hell-bent on accusing Arthur Topham of promoting “hatred” against people of “Jewish ethnicity” and attempting to get the jury to believe that my satire of the Jewish book Germany Must Perish! was a blatant attempt to convince the Canadian public to genocide “the whole of the Jewish population”. Did the jury buy the argument put forth by Crown counsel Jennifer Johnston during the trial that this was in fact why I wrote the satire? God only knows because the jury is under strict orders not to reveal why they found me Guilty of one count of promoting hatred and then Not Guilty of the second and identical count.

The upcoming Charter challenge to this Zionist-created legislation will argue that Sec. 319(2) is an unacceptable infringement on Sec. 2b of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and ought to be struck down. It will be of interest to anyone concerned about their right to open debate and freedom of speech because if these “Hate Propaganda” laws contained in Sections 318 to 320 of the Criminal Code of Canada aren’t repealed you can bet your bottom dollar that there will be more and more innocent Canadians charged and arrested, their homes invaded by these goon squads of “Hate Crime Units”, all their computers and electronic files stolen and God knows what else, all at the behest of these foreign interlopers disguising themselves as Jewish “lobbies” so that they can then infiltrate and poison the Canadian judicial system via their clandestine pressuring and media control in order to prevent their own crimes and the criminal activities of the state of Israel from being revealed on the Internet.


Please help out with the costs of the upcoming Charter hearing by going to the following website and making a donation.

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

Reflections on Canada’s failure as a free and democratic society – Monika Schaefer’s open letter responding to the witch hunters at the Alberta Society of Fiddlers by Monika Schaefer

Reflections on Canada’s failure as a free and democratic society – Monika Schaefer’s open letter responding to the witch hunters at the Alberta Society of Fiddlers

BY MONIKA SCHAEFER?

SEPTEMBER 24 ,2016

monika_schaefer_e6903

August 30, 2016

Dear Monika,

As President of the Alberta Society of Fiddlers, and on behalf of the Board of Directors and Executive, I am writing to advise you of decisions made at a special ASF meeting called on August 17th, 2016.

As a result of your recent public comments regarding your views on the Holocaust, we are relieving you of your duties as Director for the Yellowhead West Region of the ASF, and also rescinding your invitation to be an instructor at our upcoming music camp at Camp HeHoHa in February of 2017.

Thank you for your past contributions to our society.

We wish you all the best in your future endeavours,

Sincerely,

Randy Jones, President 
Alberta Society of Fiddlers
*******************************************************
Open letter to the Alberta Society of Fiddlers:

September 23, 2016

Thank you for the registered letter in which you informed me of the outcome of your meeting. I am being relieved of my duties as ASF Director of the Yellowhead West Region, and you are rescinding the invitation for me to be an instructor at Camp HeHoHa in February 2017. Here are my questions and comments.

At the time of the meeting, I was on the board of directors of the Alberta Society of Fiddlers. Therefore, I would expect that I should be informed of a meeting, especially if I was the subject of the meeting. Was there any attempt to contact me? It seems there was not, and if not, why not? Was there a prior meeting to discuss whether I should be invited? Is there a record of the discussion leading up to the special meeting? Who made the decision to have a special meeting? Is there a record of the special meeting? Was there a vote? Were minutes taken? I would like to see those minutes please. I would like to know if my membership will be next to be terminated. What indication do I have that I would be welcome to attend an ASF event in future?

My classes at Camp HeHoHa the last two years were well received, and the feedback, by all accounts, was very good. You are telling me now that because of my interpretation of the events of WW2, I am no longer welcome to teach at fiddle camp. Surely this is setting a precedent that a person’s opinions about history trumps their ability to play or teach the fiddle.

Last February I had the same views on the history of WW2 as I have now. I have been studying these matters for a few years now. Did anyone complain? Of course not! I did not talk much about history or politics during the camp, and definitely not in class. Whenever I have attended fiddle camp as a student or as an instructor, it was to immerse myself in the joy of playing music together with others in this wonderful musical family which has now been broken. And even if I had discussed history or politics in private conversations, what would be the problem?

We find ourselves in a world where certain conversations can only be whispered behind closed doors, and other conversations are permitted in public. Who would have imagined this could happen in our own province of Alberta in Canada? Who would have thought George Orwell’s world of thought control would prove to be so prophetic? It is shameful that the Alberta Society of Fiddlers is participating in this thought control.

I wonder what this saga teaches young people. If I was to return to the camp as a student like in years past, have you not set me up to be treated as a leper? Surely when asked why I am no longer teaching, I would tell the truth. It was not my teaching that received a failing grade, but my opinions and conclusions about an event which took place 70 years ago. I think the ASF action teaches young people to be conformist, and if they were to disagree with a prevailing view, they sure had better keep it to themselves and lie publicly about their beliefs.

This is becoming an international story. Here is a quote from a recent article by Editor-in-Chief of The American Herald Tribune, Professor Anthony Hall:

“The new configurations of authority are extending to important agencies like the Royal Canadian Legion, Jasper National Park [Parks Canada], and the Alberta Society of Fiddlers. Those overseeing these important institutions are made to feel empowered to impose arbitrary sanctions and punishments against an individual who dared to question enshrined orthodoxy.

The message is made clear that the vibrance of art and culture, the wellbeing of veterans as well as the need to protect some of Alberta’s most majestic Alpine environments have become secondary commitments. The treatment in Jasper National Park of violinist Monika Schaefer signals the end of our free and democratic society. Our right and need to express independent thought, the starting point of collective self-determination, has been sacrificed in order to enforce supine obedience to the sanctification of an historical interpretation that must not be subjected to sceptical scrutiny and reconsideration.”

I am in good company with regards to my understanding of the history of WW2. Gerard Menuhin, son of famous (Jewish) violinist Yehudi Menuhin, has written a book called “Tell the Truth and Shame the Devil”. Here is a book review and synopsis.

From the volume of messages of support that I have been receiving, it is becoming quite clear to me that there are people in every village, town and hamlet who agree with my conclusions on the “holocaust”. These messages have come to me from all over Canada and the world, and from many places in Alberta. But the vast majority of those people do not speak publicly about it, because there is a high price to pay. They are afraid of losing their jobs, their friends, and their community standing. An example is made of anyone who dares speak out, to frighten others who might be tempted to question the prevailing dogma. I invite you to read about “ritual defamation”, something that I am becoming an expert on. Evidence and facts have no bearing in this process.

Of the people who have viewed my “Sorry Mom, I was wrong about the holocaust”, those who have voted their approval or disapproval online have consistently done so in a ratio of approximately 3:1 likes over dislikes. Although not the final word, this ratio suggests that many see this video as a positive contribution, well within community standards.

Given that there are people all over Alberta who share my views, are you not now obliged to screen all potential instructors for their political views and their historical understanding? You have set the precedent by your actions against me. In the past, the sniff test might have been whether you believed the earth was flat. People used to be persecuted for saying the earth revolved around the sun.

Free thinkers are often found within the artistic community. I remember long ago hearing about political prisoners in countries far away, such as poets in the Soviet Union who were jailed because of their writings. A tyrannical state is threatened by free thinkers, so the tyrannical state often persecutes its artists. But it is strange when the artist community persecutes their own. That is the context in which I find the actions of the Alberta Society of Fiddlers to be so shocking.

The old adage “the victors write the history books” is not just about choosing the font. We have all been subjected to a life-time of indoctrination. If you have not done independent study of “The Holocaust” outside of the parameters of our schooling and Hollywood, then it is completely understandable that you disagree with my views. However, it is another matter altogether when you demonstrate such a Pavlovian response to my short video in which I apologize to my mother for having held her to account for the horrors of WW2 after having learned that the prevailing dogma is not correct.

I will give just one example to show that you cannot be 100% right and me 100% wrong. I remember learning in school either late 1960s or early ‘70s that the Germans were so evil and depraved that they made soap, lampshades and shrunken heads out of the bodies of Jews. Now they do not teach that propaganda anymore, because that has been proven to be lies. That puts a crack in the untouchable edifice of this narrative.

Aware people are everywhere. I know that. I am hearing from them. Does this mean you will all start looking over your shoulder wondering who else shares my views? Or might it give you cause to reconsider your certainty over this issue? And even if you are absolutely certain that I am 100% wrong, consider the fact that there is no other event in history for which debate is not permitted, quite literally against the law in many countries. There is something wrong with that picture. Only lies need to be protected by laws. The truth stands on its own.

This event called “Holocaust” has replaced our religions. Apparently I am a heretic, and the Alberta Society of Fiddlers is metaphorically burning me at the stake. I think in light of future history, this decision you have made will prove to be one of the more consequential in ASF history.

Will you have the courage to print this letter in your next newsletter? If not, why not? You might say it has no relevance to the fiddling world and the usual contents of that newsletter. Precisely! My views on the “holocaust” also have nothing to do with my participation in the fiddling world of the ASF. But by your actions, you have made the subject of WW2 part of the fiddling world in Alberta.

Sincerely,

Monika Schaefer


monikainfo

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!

Israeli-Canadian Thought Police Take Aim…. At Me By Prof. Tony Hall

aimingtonyfinal

Israeli-Canadian Thought Police Take Aim…. At Me
By Prof. Tony Hall
Editor-In-Chief
American Herald Tribune

Originally published here: 

http://ahtribune.com/in-depth/1210-israeli-canadian-thought-police.html

prof-hallphoto

In recent days I discovered that the Canadian branch of the Israeli-US-based Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith is reporting that I am “well known for using academic credentials to deny the Holocaust.” On August 29, Daniel Leons-Marder mirrored the Canadian B’nai Brith report under the title, Facebook Allows “Kill All Jews” Post on Wall of Canadian Professor. In an item Leons-Marder claims has been shared 11,000 times, he asserted “B’nai Brith Canada reported the image, which was ruled acceptable [by Facebook] within two hours, when it was alerted to it having been posted on the Facebook page of Canadian Academic Professor Anthony Hall, who is a holocaust denier.”

fakebengimage

The B’nai Brith’s Aug. 29 announcement starts with a bald statement that “Police have launched an investigation into an antisemitic Facebook post that was exposed by B’nai Brith Canada last Friday.” The earlier August 26 statement emphasized the role of Facebook, introducing me in the controversy as being “well known for using [my] academic credentials to deny the Holocaust and promote 9/11 conspiracy theories.”

Under the headline, “Killing Jews Is Now an Acceptable Message, Facebook Says,” the B’nai Brith announced,

“Antisemitism in all forms is rampant on social media, but this is the clearest, most obvious kind of antisemitism one could possibly create,” said Michael Mostyn, B’nai Brith CEO. “The classification of this as antisemitic cannot be challenged, and the fact that this promotes violence towards Jews is beyond dispute. Regardless, Facebook has deemed it acceptable despite its ‘community standards’ containing clear provisions against hate speech. The Jewish community deserves no less protection or respect than any other when it comes to hate speech and threats of violence.

“Every year, upon publication of our Annual Audit of Antisemitic Incidents, a contingent of detractors accuses us of saying the sky is falling, and that antisemitism does not exist in Canada,” said Amanda Hohmann, National Director of B’nai Brith’s League for Human Rights. “Content like this is proof positive that not only antisemitism of a genocidal nature exists in Canada, but the systems that are supposed to protect us from racist hate speech don’t consider hatred of Jews to be problematic.

B’nai Brith has reported the post to Lethbridge Police Services.”
The Canadian B’nai Brith’s post, together with those of others that have mirrored B’nai Brith’s announcement, constitute the first time I have seen myself described in print as a ‘holocaust denier.” What is the definition used by the thought police to decide who is or is not a “holocaust denier? Are there many holocausts or only one? Who owns the term, “holocaust?” If there are exclusive rights, how were they obtained?

In the eyes of the B’nai Brith, is a “holocaust denier” anyone who disagrees with any element, large or small, of its favored historical interpretation? Is the B’nai Brith naturally hostile to anyone that retains independent, evidence-based perspectives on some of the most fraught issues of historical interpretation in contemporary times?

What is behind the creation of the original post that set the controversy in motion? Who created it and why? Is this whole episode an engineered crisis? Is one of its purposes to fend off the criticisms of those that accuse the B’nai Brith and related Zionist agencies of claiming “the sky is falling” with their Orwellian system of Annual Audits of Antisemitic Incidents. Please see below the map published to present cartographic interpretations by the Coordination Forum for Countering Antisemitism.

As shall be explained below, the B’nai Brith has failed to perform due diligence in its handling of this matter. Its officers did not even attempt back up their provocative characterizations of me with even a shred of genuine evidence. The organization opted instead to exploit for its own political agenda the shock value inherent in the vile contents of an item allegedly posted, apparently very briefly, on my FB page. The item is said to have been posted by Glen Davidson. I did not ever see it on my FB page. I did not invite nor did I even have any knowledge of it until recently.

In its material the B’nai Brith describe the post as a “depiction of a White man assaulting an Orthodox Jew accompanied by a lengthy, violent anti-Semitic screed beside the photograph.” Here is the post, which I first saw sometime early in September as part of a smear piece published about me at “Aussie Dave’s” Israellycool.

To reiterate and to be absolutely clear, I did not post this social media item myself. I did not create it or solicit it. I do not approve of its contents. In fact I of course strongly condemn the message conveyed in both the image and the text. Due diligence demands, however, that I look further into this matter.

The B’nai Brith in Action

My initial research into the item’s content is leading me to the opinion that the image probably emerges from some sort of staged situation, one that seems to include the application of photo shop techniques. The most basic questions that must now be pressed concern the source of the atrocious text. From whence does it originate? Certainly I did not write it. Glen Davidson did not write it. Who did write it and why? Not once yet have I seen this deeper question posed by those who are exploiting the vile item to dramatize a real or concocted dispute with Facebook.

Quite possibly by design, the miniscule, densely compressed text is very difficult to read especially on small digital devices. Could this attribute be because the text was conceived not as a means of winning adherents but rather as a justification for political actions like the B’nai Brith’s current hate speech campaign highlighting my academic position at the University of Lethbridge?

I first saw the item among a number of screen shots all dedicated to “Aussie Dave’s” nomination of me as “Anti-Zionist-Not-Anti-Semite of the Day.”

I remember being particular interested in the part of the post that mentioned Ryan Bellerose, a Metis man and convert to Judaism who has recently been hired as the B’nai Brith’s new Western Canadian representative. Most of my attention zeroed in on Aussie Dave’s suggestion to his readers that they communications to the president of my University, Dr. Mike Mahon. I also took note of a screen shot of an item on U of L letterhead where Dr. Mahon responds to “JP.” Who is “JP”?

amandahohmann

I can trace one thread of this matter’s origins to a recorded telephone call I listened to a year ago. Its source was Amanda Hohmann, National Director of B’nai Brith’s League for Human Rights. In August of 2015 Ms. Hohmann telephoned the manager of a community venue in downtown Edmonton Alberta. Ms. Hohmann aim on behalf of her employer was to shut down a book promotion event. At the time Dr. Barrett along with his wife, two sons a dog and me were touring Alberta to call attention to an edited text entitled We Are Not Charlie Hebdo. Dr. Barrett edited the volume to which I had contributed an article.

The venue’s manager, Richard Awid, taped Ms. Hohmann’s intervention and subsequently played it back for me. Here is how I described this part of the episode in in an article entitled “B’nai Brith Moves to Quash Free Speech in Canada,”

Mr. Awid was somewhat dumbfounded that a small event at his community hall, “one of 100 such venues in Edmonton,” would elicit such an intense response from a very powerful organization in Toronto. He played back to me on his answering machine a recorded message he received at about 9 am on August 12 from Amanda Hohmann. Ms. Hohmann explained that she had received “a few complaints” about “Mr.” Kevin Barrett on the B’nai Brith’s “anti-hate hotline.” (1-416-633-6224; 1-800-892-2624)

Ms. Hohmann asserted that

“Mr. Barrett is a known anti-semite conspiracy theorist, a Holocaust Denier, and 9/11 Denier and all sorts of other things.”

Ms. Hohmann made no effort whatsoever to give background proof of her allegations or to identify the sources of the supposed “complaints.” Nevertheless she proposed to Mr. Awid that he should “cancel the event and let Mr. Barrett know he is not welcome in Edmonton.”

In this telephone call the B’nai Brith’s “human rights” director tried to defame a colleague offering absolutely no proof whatsoever to provide evidentiary backing for her directive from Toronto that Dr. Barrett should not be welcome in Alberta’s capital. I believe the Western world currently supports many Amanda Hohmanns paid very well to target and slander regularly individuals like Dr. Kevin Barrett.

Are the protagonists in these ugly witch hunts ever held accountable for the excesses? Are there any constraints on the increasingly severe incursions of the Zionist thought police? What remedies are or are not available for the likes of Dr. Barrett who is a Muslim man. Along with the rest of the omma, Dr. Barrett and his family are regularly subjected to heavy does of “hate speech” and sometimes worse?

When Richard Awid, a Muslim himself, did not adhere to Ms. Hohmann’s instructions, the B’nai Brith was able to send in a representative of the “hate speech” unit of the Edmonton police. The officer monitored the first part of the event and then left after informing Dr. Barrett that our presentation was not to be deemed hate speech by the police force he represented. I recall wondering at the time, does that bizarre episode foreshadow an era when all university classes will be policed by officials answerable to agencies like the B’nai Brith? Is that where this is leading?

The B’nai Brith has been front and center in Canada’s increasingly notorious record of aggressively policing citizens for supposed thought crimes and speech crimes. The B’nai Brith’s assault on free speech in Canada includes among its objects for criminalization Doug Collins, Malcolm Ross, Jim Keegstra, Ernst Zundel, Terry Tremaine, David Ahenakew and, most recently, Arthur Topham.

screen-shot-2015-11-12-at-11-27-58-pm-640x369

The case against Arthur Topham and his Radical Press is still ongoing. By following at a distance the tawdry prosecution of the self-employed reporter, publisher, editor and carpenter in Quesnel British Columbia, I was made aware of a very significant text published in 1941. Theodore Kaufman’s Germany Must Perish! outlines an extremely ruthless strategy of genocidal destruction of a whole people. Has this classic description of genocidal intent and methodology been ever given prominence in a school curriculum in Canada?

germanymustperishmed

germanymustperishbackmed

My reading of an Internet copy of the text, one that became integral to the proceedings of the Topham trial, caused me to reflect on how one-sided the whole discourse on genocide is becoming. The suffering of one group is highlighted and elevated above all others while the suffering and assaults imposed on other groups is often downplayed, ignored or even denigrated. I had no idea before the B’nai Brith-instigated prosecution of Arthur Topham that there was such a detailed plan to annihilate the entire German people.

I only recently have become fully aware of the extent of the murder, rape and pillage of several millions of Germans after 1945 in American prisoner war camps and in orgies of Soviet-instigated ethnic cleansing in Eastern Europe. Where are the museums to promote public education about these crimes against humanity? Where is the museum to commemorate the horrendous intergenerational genocide of perhaps a hundred million Indigenous peoples in the Holocaust of the Americas since 1492? Will future You Tubers make videos to ask elderly members of today’s generation what they did or didn’t do about the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians now underway in order to clear the way for Greater Israel?

Thought Police Wreaking Havoc on Campus

The B’nai Brith is becoming especially aggressive in campaigns to have individuals fired from their work for expounding historical interpretations it does not like. The B’nai Brith boasted menacingly on September 15 of having destroyed the career of Nikolas Balakas, a long-serving lab technician at York University’s Department of Astronomy and Physics. The announcement that Canada’s most ruthless thought police agency had succeeded in its campaign to get York University to fire its employee was written by Aidan Fishman. Mr. Fishman is Campus Advocacy Coordinator of B’nai Brith Canada.

After counting coup on Mr. Balaras’s dismissal, Mr. Fishman concludes with the following plea that the University of Lethbridge should follow York University’s example. The B’nai Brith official wrote,

 

“Unfortunately not every administration is prepared to act with such decisiveness [as that of York University], as the ongoing saga surrounding Professor Anthony Hall at Lethbridge University shows. I hope that the administration in Lethbridge can use the excellent example set by York University on this matter, and take appropriate steps to ensure that their students are not similarly subjected to hatred and antisemitism on campus.”

Who is the real author of this “ongoing saga?” Where is the proof as of today that University of Lethbridge students are being subjected “to hatred and anti-Semitism on campus.” I have not once seen this kind of language appear in 26 years of teaching evaluations. Where is there any accountability for floating this kind of vicious agenda of smear? The intrusion into this matter of a B’nai Brith official described as Campus Advocacy Coordinator is, as far as I know, setting precedents at my school. What is the nature of the “advocacy” Mr. Fishman is “coordinating”?

The effort of B’nai Brith’s “campus coordinator” and possibly others of his group to inject themselves into the internal governance of the University of Lethbridge brings to mind a similar controversy brewing at Oberlin College. Oberlin College is a renowned Liberal Arts school in Ohio whose origins long predate the American Civil War. There Dr. Joy Karega has been suspended with pay from her teaching position as a result of a controversy also involving Facebook posts. I have written a lengthy open latter on the matter to Oberlin President, Dr. Marvin Krislov. The text, which has been mirrored on other web sites, was first published at the American Herald Tribune.

In my effort to reach out to President Krislov, Dr. Karega and the other students and faculty involved in what has definitely become a fiasco for the Oberlin community, I proposed in my open letter that we all work together to mount a joint academic conference. I proposed that my own Liberal Education program at the University of Lethbridge ally itself with the embattled Liberal Arts College in Ohio to organize an event aimed at bringing thoughtful academic commentary to address a mounting crisis in higher education in North America.

I hereby invite Aiden Fishman to join this initiative and thereby embark on a constructive course rather than the trajectory of negativity implicit in his present preoccupation with hate talk and advocacy for division. Of course Mr. Fishman is far from alone in the type of “advocacy” in which he is engaged. There is a barrage of interventions currently underway from organizations like the AMCHA Initiative, the Simon Wiesenthal Center for Campus Outreach, Hillel, the American Jewish Congress, David Horowitz’s FrontPage and Daniel Pipes’ Campus Watch to mention only a few. As currently on full public display at Oberlin College, these well-funded and deeply staffed interventions invariably wreak havoc on the principles of academic freedom and civil academic discourse on campus?
I suggested the following title for the event.

Anti-Semitic Conspiracy Theories:
A Rational or Irrational Phrase in Academic Discourse?

In my research research into the Joy Karega/Oberlin debacle I became aware of the concerted campaign in 2014 to destroy the career of Prof. William I. Robinson. Dr. Robinson is Professor of Sociology at the University of California at Santa Barbara. Like Dr. Joy Karega, Dr. Steven Salaita, Dr. Hatem Bazian, Dr. Rabab Abdulhadi, Dr. Richard Falk, me and many others, Dr. Robinson includes in the curriculum some focus on the plight of Palestinian people.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmJFqmMvOYM

 

Caption: Prof. Richard Falk, Former UN Rapporteur and Princeton University Professor of International Law, Speaks on the Issue of Academic Freedom at the University of California at Santa Barbara
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IesTlj0F98c

The sociologist refused to back down from incorporating in his teaching critical perspectives on the harsh treatment of Palestinians especially in Gaza and the so-called Occupied Territories. Amidst proliferating Jewish settlements and the constant repressions of the Israeli police state, many Palestinians continue to eke out marginal existences on the heavily militarized lands set aside for them by the United Nations in Resolution 181. Resolution 181, an international instrument calling for partition of Palestine and UN trusteeship over Jerusalem, constitutes the primary law at the roots of the Israeli entity in its present form.

Prof. Robinson has written of his ordeal in August of 2014 on Truthout. In an article entitled “Repression Escalates on US Campuses,” the sociologist explains,

“The persecution to which I was subjected involved a litany of harassment, slander, defamation of character and all kinds of threats against the university by outside forces if I was not dismissed, as well as hate mail and death threats from unknown sources. More insidiously, it involved a shameful collaboration between a number of university officials and outside forces from the Israel lobby as the university administration stood by silently, making a mockery of academic freedom.
The disciplinary procedure initiated against me by UCSB officials involved a host of irregularities, violations of the university’s own procedures, breaches of confidentiality, denial of due process, conflicts of interest, failure of disclosure, improper political surveillance, abuses of power and position, unwarranted interference in curriculum and teaching and so on. As I would discover during the course of the ordeal, individuals inside the university and in positions of authority had linked up with agents of the lobby outside the university in setting out to prosecute me.”

Will the same toolbox of wrecking instruments deployed at the University of California be shipped in from the United States and unpacked at the University of Lethbridge in Alberta Canada? Will the administration of my own school continue to uphold the University of Lethbridge’s good reputation as an institution of higher education where the vital principles of academic freedom and civil academic discourse are expressed and defended?

On several occasions I have publicly lauded the U of L for creating an environment of academic freedom. I made this observation, for instance, at the University of Lethbridge’s book event when in 2011 my volume, Earth into Property, was launched. In this 900+ page peer-reviewed academic text published by McGill-Queen’s University Press, I incorporate analysis that the B’nai Brith flippantly trivializes as “9/11 conspiracy theories.”

Deeply corrupt agencies like the B’nai Brith have a lot to lose when the basic facts about what really happened on 9/11–who did what to whom—become the common knowledge of the general public. That day may be approaching far faster than those hiding behind the tired old memes about “conspiracy theories” anticipate.

How much longer can the evidence of 9/11 be concealed behind the ruthless kind of ad hominem attacks that have become the well known-specialty of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith in all its many constituent parts? How much longer will the public tolerate the hate propaganda and professional assaults that are obliterating the fundamental integrity of so many of our most important institutions?

What other lies and deceptions are being fed to the public on a regular basis? What is the level of public confidence these days in the trustworthiness of society’s key institutions including government, media, police and agencies of higher education? Who can say public confidence in these entities is high?

What is the appropriate role for universities in addressing issues of officialdom’s fraud and malfeasance especially in situations that have large implications for public policy? If even tenured university faculty can be intimidated into shying away from the professional responsibility to distinguish truth from falsehood, but especially in situations that threaten power’s imperatives, who will perform this vital function? Politicians? Talking heads on TV? Who will speak truth to the unaccountable power that the B’nai Brith in its current reckless demeanor so abundantly epitomizes?

Ritual Defamation in the Social Media Circus

To return to the Facebook post that lies at the root of this controversy, I have already publicly condemned the contents of the offending item in the September 16 edition of False Flag Weekly News. I currently co-host this regular broadcast along with one of its founding partners, Dr. Kevin Barrett.

I noticed a reference to my public condemnation of the item in question in the comments section of the B’nai Brith’s own web post of August 29. A commenter going by the name of Andrew Blair observes,

It is important to realize that Professor Hall publicly condemns that image and text. Go to False Flag Weekly, http://noliesradio.org/archives/119976, at minute 36, to see and hear his denunciation. When I put on my “fairness” glasses and look at that image I see Tony Hall in the headlock, and the arms locking his head are the image and the text. Does anyone else see that, or are my “fairness” glasses defective?

“Andrew Blair’s” question certainly resonates with me. The B’nai Brith’s description of the image in its news announcements refers to “a White man assaulting an Orthodox Jew.” Is the Orthodox Jew not a White man too? What is there to say that the aggressor in this image is not Cherokee or Mohawk or Palestinian for that matter?

What are the politics of the B’nai Brith’s choice of words in its racialized approach to its public announcement highlighting this inflammatory image? What effect is being sought? Did the image emerge from a real or staged situation? If it was the former, what was the event? Where did it happen? Who took the photograph? Have the investigators in the B’nai Brith-police-hate-crime-complex explored such matters.

Is the B’nai Brith’s emphasis on “police investigations” itself a staged tactic of sorts? Is it meant to dramatize the main story line aimed ultimately at seizing control of strategic instruments of Internet communication. The subplot, which is certainly intended to harm me personally and professionally, is that crazed and genocidal anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists– even “holocaust deniers”— are running around loose with full Internet access even in Lethbridge Alberta?

My own best best assessment is that the offending social media item seems likely to have been produced by photo shop juxtapositions of different images. The “White man’s” head and the “Orthodox Jew’s” crushed glasses both look like inserts. The white wing of the victim’s crushed and displaced glasses seems to have been drawn in. There are signs of graphic tinkering in the relationship between the huge muscular arm in the forefront and the squeezed face of the suffering victim.

The reversal of Talmudic-style contempt for the Other (the Goy) cries out the pictured message of Jewish victimhood. The provocative power of the image is reinforced by the B’nai Brith’s very racialized description. In my recent research I have discovered that this image and others images very much like—images that often feature the same racist “White man”— show up in on many Internet posts, even one I found translated into German.

Where the picture provides the main message, the text provides the “evidence” of the antisemitism that the B’nai Brith and its allied agencies are simultaneously engaged in inventing, cultivating, spotlighting and publicly combating. What justification would there be for the existence of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith without the métier of antisemitism? The primary essence of the B’nai B’rith entities is to advance the agendas of the Israeli entity in the Diaspora, in other words in Canada, USA, Britain, France. Australia, and many other countries.

The text in the offending item is perhaps the most appalling excerpt of gutter prose I have ever seen. Its contents are so reprehensible that they demand careful consideration. Like an illegal drug planted by corrupt police on a targeted individual, the reprehensible social media item has been metaphorically put on my digital front door step and then advertised by the B’nai Brith to advance its own political agenda. I am left with little alternative but to respond as decently and as conscientiously to a crime in progress.

The author, it is claimed by the item’s creator, is Ben “Tel Aviv Terror” Garrison. This Garrison person has many nicknames. He is made to exclaim,

“There was never a Holocaust, but there should have been and, rest assured, there WILL be, as you serpentine kikes richly deserve one. I will not rest until every single filthy. Parasitic kike is rounded up and slaughtered like the vermin they are. The White man has had more than enough of International Jewry and we are fully prepared to smite the parasite for the millionth time. The greedy, hook nosed kikes know that there days are numbered and, unlike in the past, they now have nowhere to run. This time, there will be no kikes left alive to spead around the planet like cockroaches. We will get them ALL into the oven and their putrid memory will finally be erased from the planet once and for all. Like all parasites the Jew will continue to reproduce until every last one has been wiped out. This is why it is crucial that all kikes are ruthlessly and mercilessly butchered for the good of us all. KILL ALL JEWS NOW! EVERY LAST ONE!” Ben “Tel Aviv Terror” Garrison

What kind of demented mind would come up with such a macabre celebration of envisaged mass murder? What would be the motivation to pen such a blatant incitement to hate and slaughter of a specific people?

My research into the offending item’s origins quickly led me to the many Internet profiles and posts of Ben Garrison. Ben Garrison is apparently a real person who lives in Montana. It turns out that this Ben Garrison, the sole named individual in the miniature text of the offending Facebook post, is also the aggressor in the photo shopped image. Adorned with dark glasses and a cowboy hat, Garrison is pictured as (in the words of B’nai Brith) as “the White man assaulting an Orthodox Jew.”

Ben Garrison

The real life Ben Garrison is often described as a libertarian political satirist. He is a prolific cartoonist whose cartoon and personal images lie at the center of an increasingly contentious media circus. Significantly Facebook figures centrally in the many-faceted narrative of Ben Garrison. Perhaps his Facebook connection is a major reason why B’nai Brith and related agencies chose Garrison’s Internet personae as poster boy for its hate speech campaign of fund raising and ritual defamation.

Holocaust Studies experts at Tel-Aviv University are among the most outspoken proponents of the view that Ben Garrison is indeed the kind of bigoted psychopath who would in real life utter provocations to the genocide of Jews. These Israeli academicians would probably argue it is entirely in character for Ben Garrison to have actually have declared with sincerity, “Kill All Jews.” The hypothesis that Ben Garrison’s racist screed should be taken at face value is implicit in the wording and headlines of the posts by B’nai Brith, Daniel Leons-Marder’s Everyday Antisemitism and the Coordination Forum for Countering Antisemitism.

The smear campaign’s architects and engineers are attempting a controlled demolition of my reputation in their quest to harness Facebook more fully to their own agendas. These architects and engineers count among their allies the creators and authors at Encyclopedia dramatica. Of Ben Garrison the encyclopedia’s drama experts report, “Scholars from Tel-Aviv University’s Center for Holocaust Studies have ominously described him [Ben Garrison] as the most racist man in the universe, and the biggest existential threat to the Jews since Hitler.”

This characterization runs counter to the dominant view that Garrison is “the Internet’s most trolled cartoonist.” According to a Breitbart article entitled “Ben Garrison: How the Internet Made a Fake White Supremacist

Montana-based artist Ben Garrison isn’t a violent Neo-Nazi, or even a white nationalist. He’s a polite, accomplished cartoonist, with no history of overt or covert racism. His true political leanings are libertarian, anti-elitist, and anti-globalist. Garrison is, in fact, the victim of one the most extraordinary and longest-running smear campaigns on the internet.

For a mixture of amusement and spite, in a trolling spree that has lasted over six years, thousands of online pranksters and real neo-Nazis have been remixing his cartoons into racist caricatures. Most Ben Garrison cartoons attack the government, corporations, and political movements.

However, almost immediately after one is published, it is remixed into a new version that attacks Jews, African-Americans, or other minorities. These are rapidly disseminated in troll communities and sometimes become more widely-shared than the originals.

If Breitbart has it right and Tel-Aviv’s Center for Holocaust Studies has it wrong, then the real Ben Garrison could not have written the disgusting text that goes along with the offensive image of the cartoonist putting his victim in a headlock. If Ben Garrison is not to be understood as the kind of person who could have come up with the wording replicated and publicized by Amanda Hohmann, Daniel Leons-Marder, and B’nai Brith’s CEO, Michael Mostyn, then these individuals are involved in a telling case of false flag deception.

Given the nature of their dubious employment in what Norman Finkelstein has labeled the “Holocaust Industry,” I find it difficult to believe that these individuals as well as their bosses, underlings and associates were not aware of the controversy swirling around Ben Garrison. After all, I was able to discovered the basic outlines of the Garrison controversy in a few google searches after viewing the posts featuring Mostyn’s, Hohmann’s and Leons-Marder’s comments. Is this group merely incompetent? Are are its members part of a concerted agenda to change the public policies of many agencies, including those of the Canadian government, Facebook and the University of Lethbridge, through calculated misrepresentations, frauds and incitements?

In an Internet post entitled “Ben Garrison on Trolls” the Montana cartoonist is said to speak for himself. Interestingly, Garrison’s observations begin with his reference to the very same Facebook reference to “community standards” that supposedly initiated the B’nai Brith’s slander of me.
“This page wasn’t removed. We reviewed the page you reported for harassment. Since it did not violate our community standards, we did not remove it. Thanks for your report.”

This is the message [writes Ben Garrison] I received after reporting a hate page on Facebook. Near the top of the hate page was a statement that encouraged the extermination of all Jews. Along with that statement was a photo of my face and the name Ben Garrison. Trolls had stolen my artwork and photos from my blog, my cartoon site as well as my fine art site and had concocted an entire page devoted to spewing libelous hate. The troll entity called the page ‘Ben Garrison Cartoons—the Official Site.’  The trolls had stamped the name ‘Ben Garrison’ onto as many hateful images as possible throughout the page. How does one stop such blatant libel? Where do these trolls come from? Is it even possible to track them down? Why do they do such terrible things? Why me?
As I found out, it’s not just me. Many others have suffered the same outrageous indignity. It appears that trolls are no longer content merely talk to each other on sordid sites such as ‘4chan’ or ‘Stormfront.’ They want to go mainstream.  Therefore, social media are a natural target for them. Do they really believe the vitriolic memes they are shoveling, or are they merely playing an elaborate prank? It doesn’t matter. Their memes of hate must not go mainstream. Facebook must wake up and block the hate before it gets established. Hate speech is not free speech. Hate speech is blind, one-dimensional blackness. It is not reasoned debate.  It loudly shouts for the murder of human beings and Facebook is providing them a megaphone for that purpose.

In my view the largest weight of available evidence points to the conclusion that Ben Garrison did not write the “Kill All Jews” commentary. If Ben Garrison did not write the planted text, then who did?

Could the B’nai Brith’s highlighted social media item have been produced by a Zionist group, agency or individual? Why might partisans of Israel do such a thing? Could it be to provide the ammunition for smear campaigns directed against individuals and groups that criticize Israel? Could it be to create incidents to justify appeals for money such as those accompanying the B’nai Brith’s slanderous posts aimed at damaging the reputation of the University of Lethbridge and my tenured academic role in it as a 26-year member of the Arts and Science Faculty?

Worse, much worse, can be envisaged. Could it be that the production and planting of the of the Ben Garrison post as well as others like it might be deployed to provide “evidence” in thought crime and speech crime litigation, the ultimate specialty and raison d’etre of the B’nai Brith? It is easy to imagine how such an outlandish and extravagant expression of hostility as that said to come from Garrison could be rendered useful to Crown prosecutors serving the Zionist masters.

Regardless of its source, there is no doubt that the Ben Garrison post could conceivably be exploited as a tailor made item to assist Crown prosecutors serving the agenda of B’nai Brith and related agencies. Such an item could definitely be deployed in a litigious assault on designated targets in order to establish webs of connection linking alleged hate speech with genocidal intent as well as the semantic nuke in the Zionist arsenal of weaponized words.

The conspiracy to advance the public perception that the engineered phrase, “holocaust denial,” has any internal and external coherence as an outlawed category of forbidden thought and speech runs absolutely contrary to the intellectual viability of the academy as well as the health of society more generally. The basic premise of the world’s most fraught term creates a false dichotomy that is coming to epitomize the decline of evidence-based rationality beneath the ascent of a new kind of orthodoxy combining both religious and secular elements.

Those that want to entrench and enforce an outlawed realm of forbidden thought and articulation brandish the weaponized term like an ideological sniper on steroids. They have no interest in providing definitions of where orthodoxy ends and where denial begins. As I am discovering by raising even a simple call for “open debate” on the main platform of Zionism’s unaccountable power, there are harsh new authoritarian forces that need to be called to account if we are even to slow down the police state incursions in our post-911 world.

The new configurations of authority are extending to important agencies like the Royal Canadian Legion, Jasper National Park, and the Alberta Society of Fiddlers. Those overseeing these important institutions are made to feel empowered to impose arbitrary sanctions and punishments against an individual who dared to question enshrined orthodoxy.

The message is made clear that the vibrance of art and culture, the wellbeing of veterans as well as the need to protect some of Alberta’s most majestic Alpine environments have become secondary commitments. The treatment in Jasper National Park of violinist Monika Schaefer signals the end of our free and democratic society. Our right and need to express independent thought, the starting point of collective self-determination, has has been sacrificed in order to enforce supine obedience to the sanctification of an historical interpretation that must not be held subjected to sceptical scrutiny and reconsideration.

How many are now being held, including some Canadians, in dark European dungeons for questioning any aspect of the unrelenting vilification of Germany as home of the most the most evil society of monsters ever to walk the face of the earth? Will we ever be able to liberate ourselves from the spell that is causing us to become so blind and unresponsive to the holocausts we ourselves are imposing on the natural world and also on the besieged worldwide community of our Muslim brothers and sisters?

What are the chances that the nuclear holocaust currently being promoted by our governors can be held back when those most intent on making war not peace are so firmly in charge? Is there a connection between the decline of the anti-war movement and the rise of the militarized police state currently deploying false flag-induced fears to constrain our ability to think, speak and act in conformity with the imperatives of survival? What we most require at this moment is simple affirmations of life’s beauty and integrity. Instead we are delivered coercive dictates demanding we deny what we our reason and research tells us to be true.

How did we the academics, but especially we the historians, allow it to happen that a whole category of the European past has been declared off bounds to unfettered discussion and critical investigative scholarship? By allowing this development to proceed, a very sweeping and consequential precedent is being set.

How did we the citizens allow the principle to develop that government can declare that whole subject areas of research and publication to have been so perfectly interpreted, so correctly dealt with in every detail, that no revision and modification of existing conclusions can be allowed. What is the role of the Anti-Defamation League of the B’nai B’rith in enforcing the ruthless bulldozing aside of the most basic foundations of freedom of thought, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and adherence to rigorous standards of scientific inquiry.

The B’nai Brith and Ben Garrison, the poster boy for the Zionist organization’s hate speech campaign, are exactly on the same page when it comes to Facebook. Both Ben Garrison and the B’nai Brith seek to constrain free speech on the Internet more tightly. Is this convergence of agendas a coincidence or are more calculated deceptions at play here? To publicize his desire that Facebook be more proactive in censoring the Internet, Garrison produced the following cartoon:

Facebook and Israel; Ben Garrison and the B’nai Brith

My FFWN co-host, Dr. Kevin Barrett, has evaluated the evidence surrounding the Garrison post and concluded it was “very likely produced by B’nai Brith itself, or other Zionist extremists of like mind, as a PR operation. No wonder they are “monitoring” the police to make sure they behave themselves.”

Presenting his own version of the B’nai Brith’s highlighted image, Dr. Barrett continues,

The absurd rant with its lurid references to “greedy hook-nosed kikes” and so on does not pass the smell test. Whoever created this image obviously did not do so with the intention of convincing the public to take action against Jews and/or Zionists. On the contrary, it appears to have been designed for the opposite purpose: To convince the public that crazed, foul-mouthed, murderous anti-Semites are a clear and present danger.

Virtually every time a swastika is spray painted on a synagogue, the culprit turns out to be a “self-hating” Jewish Zionist trying to conjure up the specter of an “anti-Semitic threat.” Would an investigation of the provenance of this image find something similar?

Dr. Barrett observes that “the manufactured incident smearing Tony Hall may be part of a coordinated program, orchestrated from Tel Aviv, to try to stop the rise of the ever-increasing virtual army of pro-Palestine social media users.

As highlighted in Telesur, the government of Israel and Facebook have been represented at the highest level in a series of meetings aimed at conspiring to hold back the growing flood of social media posts subjecting Israel’s maltreatment of the Palestinians to sceptical public scrutiny.

This recent development well demonstrates the specious nature of B’nai Brith’s characterization of Facebook as some kind of rogue agency unwilling to act immediately to pre-empt an existential threat emanating from Lethbridge. More likely the B’nai Brith’s alarmist posts in late August of 2016 were, in part at least, a ploy to divert attention from the reality that social media, but especially Facebook, is more and more being harnessed to Zionist goals and agendas.

Was the B’nai Brith’s deployment of the racist side of Ben Garrison’s dual public personae calculated to serve the double purpose of both smearing me and my school as well as leading interested parties to a surprising “libertarian” voice for the suppression of Internet freedom? What should be done about Internet trolls such as those at the B’nai Brith that have shown themselves to be unrelenting in planting lies and innuendo with the aim of silencing criticism of Israel?

—-

Jim Rizoli Interviews Monika Schaefer, Sept 2016

Screen Shot 2016-08-07 at 4.23.58 PM

Monika Schaefer – Truth Revealer and Social Activist

 

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

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

 

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

preludehdr1000

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Section 318 reads as follows:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

May Truth and Justice prevail.
_____

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

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

THANK YOU!

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

The “six-million killed” lie—the hoax of the twentieth century By Jonas E. Alexis & Monika Schaefer

vt-logo2015b

alexis

The “six-million killed” lie—the hoax of the twentieth century
September 3, 2016
Screen Shot 2016-09-06 at 8.38.42 PM

 “The six-million lie is pernicious because it is the foundational lie for the rogue state of Israel, and it is also the foundational lie for how the occupied state of Germany is currently structured.”

~Monika Schaefer

…by Jonas E. Alexis & Monika Schaefer

Monika Schaefer started to play the violin at age 7, under the tutelage of Alexander Nicol, former concert master of the Edmonton Symphony Orchestra. Later she studied with Norman Nelson, co-founder of the renowned chamber group Academy of St. Martin in the Fields. While studying sciences at the University of Alberta, Monika played in the St. Cecilia Orchestra. All her life, she has played with various combinations of people and instruments, wherever she was living and working.

In 1982, Monika moved to Jasper, Alberta, to work for Parks Canada. While classical music remains the cornerstone of her musical endeavors, Monika has broadened her horizons in recent years, delving into old-time fiddle, bluegrass, swing, improvisation and “jamming” with all who like to play. Lately she has discovered the joy of composing and has a few tunes to her name. Schaefer has recently discovered that she has been lied to about the so-called Holocaust. Here we will discuss her story.

Alexis: You say that the so-called holocaust, “the six-million lie,” is “the biggest and most pernicious and persistent lie in all of history.” That indeed is an extraordinary statement which demands extraordinary backbone. Expand on that statement for us. Tell us how you came to the conclusion that it is indeed the most pernicious lie in all of history.

Schaefer: I will give a very brief answer to this right now. The six-million lie is pernicious because it is the foundational lie for the rogue state of Israel, and it is also the foundational lie for how the occupied state of Germany is currently structured. Because of the myth of the holocaust, Israel can do anything. The lies continue, in the form of false-flag terror attacks, and these give justification to the fraudulent War on Terror. The Islamic world and the Christian world are being set up to fight each other, the beneficiary being Israel.

Alexis: Great point. Israeli embassy spokeswoman Adi Farjon declared that the Israeli regime wants to maintain “German guilt about the Holocaust” because it “helps Israel.”[1] In other words, she was basically saying that the so-called Holocaust is as sacrosanct as the state of Israel itself. Let’s get to the heart of the issue. Tell us your story and how you have delved into the history of this critically important issue.

Schaefer: Let me begin by giving you a brief description of the video which we released just over 2 months ago on June 17th, 2016. I make an apology to my parents, my mother in particular for having berated her long ago for having “let all those bad things happen in WW2, like Hitler and the death camps.” This apology was in essence to their spirit, because my parents are deceased.

I believe my reproach dates all the way back to my teenage years. Of course I believed all the stories we were taught in school, why would I not believe them? It never occurred to me at that tender young age that teachers would lie to us, let alone anybody else. We were taught to tell the truth, and telling the truth is a natural thing to do. Lying is something that has to be learned. Truth-telling, in my opinion, is the natural instinct.

When I reproached my mother, I don’t think that I really believed that she personally was at fault. I think I was just so indignant about all the injustice that I needed to let out my feelings, and it is easiest and safest to blame those close to you. So that is what I did all those years ago, I held my mother to account for the horrors of WW2!

So now, in 2016, when I know better, and understand that the history we have been taught is wrong, I started feeling really badly about that reproach years ago. I mentioned that to my brother Alfred once, just in passing – I said I wish I could apologize to our parents for what I said all those years ago. He immediately recognized the significance of that story, and suggested we do something with that.

You see, we don’t think we are alone in those sentiments that I had then, and now. There is a whole generation or two of German people who felt this disdain, disgust, shame, all these negative emotions about their grandparents and parents. This constitutes psychological trauma, it causes a generation gap, it causes shame of one’s own heritage and culture.

Back to the short video, I thought it would be good to give it a tone of happiness because for me, waking up to the truth is a liberating experience. I am so glad to know the truth. So, I played a cheerful little tune on the violin, and that is how the video begins and ends. It sets a tone which reflects that truth is light.

I would like to add something here that I did not include in the video but would like to make it perfectly clear, that I never said No Jews Died. Many Jews died in the camps. And yes they were in the camps against their will. Most of the deaths occurred in the last months of the war. Disease and starvation took their toll, as Germany was being bombed by Allied Forces and food was not reaching the typhus-infested camps. And no doubt there were also brutalities.

We know through Ursula Haverbeck’s research that at least 2, if not more, SS officers were themselves executed for brutalizing prisoners. So that means that there were rules against abusing prisoners.

I started down this journey of my awakening in about 2011, 10 years post 9/11. 9/11 is the port-hole through which I began to understand the matrix of deception and illusions that we live in. It was actually a number of years earlier that I was visiting friends on an acreage in central Alberta, and this fellow told me there was this 9/11 truther movement.

I was very curious and interested, because I had this sense right from Day 1 that something was wrong with this picture the way the American government responded to 9/11 by making war in several countries, which made no sense to me. I kept saying to my friends, wow, it sure looks like someone handed that to them on a silver platter because look at the aftermath….look what they are doing with it.

So I listened carefully to this friend, and I wanted to know more. I didn’t say much, and I was pretty wide-eyed. At the end of the day, I went home, and life was busy for me. I didn’t even have a computer at home yet. Even though I was curious, the days and months and years slipped by and I didn’t do any research on the 9/11 question. But I never forgot that encounter. I wondered about it a lot.

So…. when in 2011, my brother Alfred, who lives in Germany, started sending stuff to our family members about 9/11, I immediately jumped on this – and by that time I did have a computer at home and was connected to the internet -I would fire back right away, how do you know this and that and where are you learning this from?

This curiosity about what that man had told me years earlier had been simmering in the back of my mind all along, and when I finally had some concrete information coming my way about this subject, the seeds that had been planted started to grow.

I was insatiable for more knowledge about what really happened on 9-11. I checked everything Alfred was telling us, especially when he was implicating Israel. There was a taboo about implicating Israel. I said, how do you know?

Anyway, I started learning everything I could. I checked sources, I dug into this, and I read, and I looked at videos and I maintained a healthy dose of skepticism, because I was going to make sure that I wasn’t just “falling” for something just because my brother said something. The rest of the family didn’t show much interest, and that is actually the way it has remained to this day.

Fast forward to late 2013, early 2014. At that point I was confronted with some statements about the holocaust not being true. I had heard about “holocaust deniers” before, every once in a while there would be a name in the news, like Ernst Zundel, Jim Keegstra, and I remember thinking, wow, that’s really weird.

Why would someone deny the holocaust? Really? Everyone knows the holocaust happened. It seemed as solid as the grass is green the sky is blue and I have a nose on my face. I mean, there was simply no questioning it. If someone says outright, that didn’t happen, well, maybe they are a bit crazy.  But I have to say, I never thought to myself that those people are hateful people, no-no, it just puzzled me.

So when I was being confronted with this, I resisted at first. I said, don’t be mixing this up with 9/11, you’re just going to undermine the 9/11 truth movement!

But okay, the questions started to pry their way into my brain. There were enough little doubts, and those little seeds began to grow. Finally, I dared to look. I remember opening the website holocaustdeprogrammingcourse. That opened my eyes! I saw immediately that there was a TON of material on there – you know that little scroll bar on the side – it was tiny.

I pulled on that scroll bar, and there was endless material – articles, videos, survivor stories (other kind of survivor stories). I only spent a few minutes the first time I dared go there, but it was like a lightning bolt for me, just to see that there existed so much material that was contrary to what we had been told all our lives.

Soon after that, I watched the 90 minute video about Ernst Zundel called “Off Your Knees, Germany!” That was huge for me. … My eyes were being opened. There wasn’t any going back. I looked at lots more material after that, but really, when I think about it, the Ernst Zundel case was and still is ground-breaking.

In those Toronto trials in 1985 and 1988 – evidence was brought into the courts! Actual forensic evidence. (Leuchter Report, Robert Faurisson was there, coaching Lawyer Doug Christie on cross-examination,…) This is not done anymore. Holocaust trials with evidence are avoided nowadays.

The process of awakening did not happen without discomfort. When I started learning about the false-flag nature of 9/11, I recall feeling semi-nauseous for days and weeks maybe even months at a time. There was that feeling that not all is well in the gut. That went on for a while.

Learning about the holocaust did not give me that same nauseous feeling, even though it is a deception on a much larger scale. In retrospect I think comprehending 9/11 is easy compared to the holocaust. And yet, when I think back on it, that nauseous feeling occurred primarily when I was discovering that “easier” deception.

I think that once a person has made that first step and understands that our governments, our institutions such as the media, the justice system, etc, are not acting in our best interest, and in fact are beholden to a hidden hand of power, it is then easier to understand the bigger deceptions.

Going through the first door is the hardest. The next door, even if it is a much more difficult subject, and much more deeply ingrained in our brain, and much older, that door is easier to go through.

So, what exactly is Our Problem?

We seem to be living in a Matrix of Deception. And the foundational Lie is the one that I apologize to my mother for having reproached her for. The singular so-called Holocaust. The Holohoax. The 6 Million Lie. Foundational, because the state of Israel is based on the fictional holocaust. Foundational, because Germany as it exists today (and it is not a sovereign country, it is an occupied country!), Germany in its current form is structured on this lie.

The Times of Israel quoted Angela Merkel in an August 9th, 2013 article:

“The heinous crime committed by Germany against the Jews, the betrayal of all civilized values that was the Shoah, will always be present and we can shape the future of the resulting special relationship between Germany and Israel in awareness of that.

“That means that we’ll never be neutral and that Israel can be sure of our support when it comes to ensuring its security. That’s why I also said that Germany’s support for Israel’s security is part of our national ethos, our raison d’être.”[2]

Angela Merkel had said much the same thing when she addressed the Knesset, the legislature of the Jewish state of Israel, on March 18th of 2008. How are these deceptions kept up? Much of it is through psychological warfare, together with endless false-flag events which are coming at an ever-increasing rate.

It seems to me that the primary tool in psychological warfare is the weaponization of language. This, coupled with the indoctrination of young minds through the school education system, through the film and television industries, through the incessant repetition of the lies in the mainstream media.

Weaponized language is designed to prevent us from looking. Certain control words put gates into our brains, and our brains become fragmented. Barriers have been engineered into our brains by the lies and indoctrination.

So what are some of those control words and expressions that cause these brain barriers, and stop us from thinking clearly?

Well, I think we are all familiar with the long-standing weaponized terms like Nazi, neo-Nazi, holocaust, holocaust denier, anti-Semite, or the name Hitler – if someone gets compared to Hitler, that is the worst you can say about them.

Other terms are 9/11 Truther, and Conspiracy theory. I am sure you can add to the list. Nowadays, there is this package of 4. If you are one, you are all 4:

•9-11 truther

•Anti-Semite

•Conspiracy theorist

•Holocaust denier

When I began my awakening to the 9/11 story, I was called an anti-Semite by a former friend before I even brought Israel into the conversation. I had only presented him with Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth materials, and they only deal with physical evidence, not with the “who did it?”

This friend also said – next thing, you’ll become a holocaust denier. At the time I retorted angrily – what are you talking about, no I am not, it is totally unrelated. … Little did I know. I should write to him and tell him thank you, you were right!

Alexis: Good start. We will pick up on that theme later this month.

_______

[1] “Israeli Diplomat in Berlin: Maintaining German Guilt About the Holocaust Helps Israel,” Haaretz, June 25, 2015.

[2] “Merkel: Germany can never be neutral on Israel,” Times of Israel, August 9, 2013.

The New Constitution Party of Canada hosts Monika Schaefer, Canada’s most notorious Holohoax skeptic

MonikaS

Monika Schaefer

Published on Aug 27, 2016
C.A.F.E. (The Canadian Association For Free Expression) proudly presents Canada’s most notorious (and loveliest) Holohoax skeptic, Monika Schaefer. Using wit and charm, Monika captivates her audience with the story of how she awakened to the Jewish Holohoax lie, and how her open-mindedness arose out of the 9-11 truth movement. She talks about how Jasper resident, Ken Kuzminski, filed formal complaints against her with the Alberta Human Rights Commission, the Canadian Human Rights Commission, and the RCMP. Monika also touches on her political activism as a candidate for the Green Party of Canada. We are confident that anyone who views this video will hang on her every word.

The New Constitution Party of Canada (Canada’s largest National Socialist party) and Your Ward News (The World’s largest anti-Marxist publication) hosted Monika’s speech at their offices at 163 Main Street, Toronto. Thanks to the dozens of curious neighbours who attended the event, many of which donated to Monika’s defence fund. Thanks to Monika Schaefer for flying in from her home in Jasper, B.C., for the sole purpose of speaking at the event. And a special thanks to http://www.DailyStormer.com the world’s most visited Alt-Right web site, for advertising the event.

DVD’s of the event are available from Paul Fromm through C.A.F.E.

The controversial video that Monika Schaefer posted on YouTube which questioned the Jewish Holohoax and resulted in Ken Kuzminski filing criminal complaints against her, can be found here:   https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=E0_BZphQ7Qo&feature=youtu.be

http://www.NCparty.ca
http://www.YourWardNews.ca
http://CAFE.nfshost.com

German Thought Police Raid Dissident Videographer Alfred Schaefer and Steal His Computers By Paul Fromm

HitlerDartboard

German Thought Police Raid Dissident Videographer Alfred Schaefer and Steal His Computers

By Paul Fromm

PATHETIC! Once again, old communist Angela Merkel’s thought control goon squad has swept down on a dissident, raided and ransacked his home and stolen his computers. News just in: ” “Finally, the police raided today the home in Bavaria on Lake Starnberg of Alfred Schaefer, the German + Canadian retired IBM executive whose amazing videos (with those of his sister Monika) on the so-called holocaust stories and 9/11 have terrified the authorities.”

Screen Shot 2016-08-19 at 10.31.32 AM

9/11 Brainwashing part 1
9/11 Brainwashing part 2

Alfred Schaefer, who made the “Sorry Mom . . .” video —> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0_BZphQ7Qo , (89K views)
has had his house raided by police in Bavaria. All his computers were taken.

MonikaSchaeferPhoto

Ironically, the Basic German Law of 1949 brought in during the Allied occupation guarantees freedom of speech. However, just as with notions of “liberte” or the “freedom of thought, freedom of belief, freedom of speech and freedom of the press” guaranteed by Mao-lover Trudeau I’s mendacious and weasely Charter of Rights and Freedoms, no one in the increasingly repressive West takes these promises seriously.

The New Unhappy Lords eager to flood the White world with the Third World and replace us with their grim New World Order are in a panic that more and more once complacent people are on to their game and to the phony New Religion of Holocaust designed to keep the masses ashamed, guilty and accepting of imposed “diversity.”

As a German Canadian, I am outraged that my father’s and mother’s generation sacrificed part of their youth and many sacrificed their health or their lives in a fratricidal war against fellow Europeans. Idealistically, they THOUGHT they were fighting for “King and country and democracy.” That, of course, was not the real agenda, but they were well intentioned and brave and that is what they imagined they were fighting for. What a sham, what a waste, what a shame to see the leaden hand of thought dictatorship smashing down doors and seizing computers all for the non-violent expression of a person’s opinion. That’s the very thing my parents’ generation thought they were fighting against.

Paul Fromm
Director
CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION


Additional commentary by Katana 

Alfred Schaefer needs to be commended for his willingness to stand up for the truth about the diabolical lies that make up the so-called “Holocaust”.

Over several years he, like many reading this, has undergone a fundamental change in ones worldview.

An extreme example of this change in world view, is coming to terms with the realization that the so-called “Holocaust” is, in fact, a diabolical hoax against the German people and Whites in general. That the “Nazis” were in fact the “good guys”, while the peoples of the Allied forces were dupes of organized jewry. That organized jewry was the behind the scenes instigator, architect, of WW II (among other major wars).

And, I might add, the true horror of the “Holocaust” is not that it allegedly occurred, but rather, in knowing that it did NOT in fact occur, at all!

And, I might add, the true horror of the “Holocaust” is not that it allegedly occurred, but rather, in knowing that it did NOT in fact occur, at all!

Let that idea sink in.

Because, then one must realize that the fraudsters and promoters of the “Holocaust” lie are in fact, in full control of our societies, now, today!

This is the reason why nearly all people think it is inconceivable that the “Holocaust” did not happen, because instinctively they realize that would mean that “our” governments are the perpetrators, or at least, consenters to a diabolical and continuing fraud. That “our” governments are in fact the enemy of their own people.

Unfortunately that is the case, despite their best efforts to disguise it.

Alfred Schaefer and his sister, Monika, need to be fully supported in whatever way possible, not only for their own sakes but for a future in which truth is valued above carefully crafted deceit.

Thanks,

katana

Monika Schaefer busking permit still declined by tyrannical authorities Open Letter by Monika Schaefer

Monika Schaefer busking permit still declined by tyrannical authorities

Open Letter by Monika Schaefer

Monika&Buskers copy

 “Who is this Dave Baker to possess such power over a gentle, law-abiding individual, whom he EXCLUDES from normal opportunity on the basis of some Communist-inspired crackpot theory of INCLUSIVENESS?”

~ Robert Klinck

From

Monika Schaefer <monika_schaefer@hotmail.com>
To
dave baker <betabake@hotmail.com>, Richard Ireland <rireland@town.jasper.ab.ca>, gwall <gwall@town.jasper.ab.ca>, varsenault <varsenault@town.jasper.ab.ca>, rdamota <rdamota@town.jasper.ab.ca>, hkempey <hkempey@town.jasper.ab.ca>, bnesbitt <bnesbitt@town.jasper.ab.ca>, dwacko <dwacko@town.jasper.ab.ca>
Cc
jim.eglinski <jim.eglinski@parl.gc.ca>, justin.trudeau <justin.trudeau@parl.gc.ca>, thomas.mulcair <thomas.mulcair@parl.gc.ca>, rona.ambrose <rona.ambrose@parl.gc.ca>, Elizabeth May <elizabeth.may@parl.gc.ca>

Sent
Friday, August 5, 2016 at 4:23 PM

Dave Baker
Habitat for the Arts

5 August 2016

Dear Dave,

Thank you very much for showing me yesterday exactly where you stand on the issue of my busking permit. Before having finally seen you face-to-face for the first time this summer, I had given you the benefit of the doubt. I believed that surely someone else is whispering in your ear, giving you direction. I believed that, because I did not recognize the Dave Baker that I have known since many years, in the curt email which you sent on 23rd July 2016, quoted here:

“We have considered your application for a busking permit in Jasper. In light of your recently publicly proclaimed non-inclusive beliefs we have decided to decline a permit to you at this time….Please see the attached Values and Principles statement.” 

The hostility with which you treated me yesterday, at the “soft opening” of the new library-and-arts facility, gave me quite a clear picture. It became much more obvious to me that it must indeed be you who has made the decision to arbitrarily deny me a busking permit. Your attitude was belligerent and quite frankly, cowardly.

 “You – already – have – the – only – answer – that – you – will – get.” 

Screen Shot 2016-08-07 at 3.31.00 PM

You and I have been generous with each other and with the community in the countless endeavours that we have participated in and shared over the years. Is that all forgotten? It seems you have left your humanity behind.

You have designated yourself judge, jury, prosecutor, and enforcer all at once, on a spurious assumption that I am guilty of a crime, when in fact I am acting in good conscience to rectify past wrongs. My actions are based on my new understanding that the Hollywood version of history we have been taught is indeed full of factual errors.

You made it perfectly clear that answers are not forthcoming to my two questions which I asked in my email of August 1st quoted here:

“There has been a stunning silence from you since the cursory email you sent me on July 23rd, 2016 … I am wondering who you are accountable to, and who the “we” refers to in your (original) message to me. These are two very important questions and I expect that you will be forthcoming with an answer to these…. Monika”

I asked those questions again yesterday, peacefully and in person, and you repeatedly told me “I will not discuss this here, I will not discuss this now. This is a sacred place.” So I asked when and where? When would the answers be coming? Could we set up a meeting please? You then told me point blank “You – already – have – the – only – answer – that – you – will – get.” 

I see… final judgement has been made, and the proverbial jail key has been tossed out.

My first question was about accountability. I received a partial answer from the cover of this week’s Fitzhugh newspaper. The caption under the front-page picture of happy buskers says “Music in the Streets… thanks to a new pilot-project between the municipality and Habitat for the Arts.” For that reason I am sending this to all the town councillors and mayor, as they have a role to play in this. Are they also playing the role of thought police?

The Habitat “Values and Principles” statement is very good. The second paragraph follows (emphases mine), to show the absurdity of your accusation of “non-inclusive beliefs” against me. I contend it is you who is being non-inclusive.

We believe that learning never stops
We know it enhances social inclusion, active citizenship and personal development. 
We embrace new challenges and ideas.
We welcome new methods and change. 
We help each other grow through knowledge exchange and support.

Dave Baker, since you do not want to talk with me, then you simply become part of the wider story. My ‘bcc’ list is growing ever larger, as more and more people from around the world are taking an interest in this story. It is beginning to look like this pretty little town in a National Park and a World Heritage Site is becoming a leader in the totalitarian anti-free-speech direction that Canada is taking.

 

Sincerely,
Monika Schaefer


Cogent Commentary on Dave Baker’s Actions Against Monika Schaefer

by Robert Klinck

Incredibly in this age of unprecedented material abundance, access to the necessities of survival is still conditional on meeting criteria laid down by domineering, puritanical financiers and their political minions.  They can destroy anyone by restricting their ability to secure income.  Who is this Dave Baker to possess such power over a gentle, law-abiding individual, whom he EXCLUDES from normal opportunity on the basis of some Communist-inspired crackpot theory of  INCLUSIVENESS?  I know about this occult power inherent in the employment system from personal experience, having had the administration of the House of Commons deny the existence of my degrees from the University of Alberta for the past 28 years.  Get that – blatant, unrelenting lying on the part of the federal parliament (successive Speakers included), which promulgates laws and regulations to which it says I must conform!  Unseen by the public, bureaucratic animus is given free rein, and protection absolute, against targeted individuals in the corridors of power.  Let’s call this ability on the part of an elect arbitrarily to close avenues of survival, and punish selectively through misuse of the institutions of government, by its proper name:  terrorism.  This immediate, pervasive form is the one the police and judicial authorities should be most assiduously working to eradicate.  But they are blind to it.